THE ROLE OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER IN THE SMALL LIBERAL ARTS COLLEGE Thesis for the Degree of Ed. D, MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY WILLIAM McCLELLAN REYNOLDS i ‘ 1961 .‘\:' k“. T423113 TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTZTTLTTTTT 3 1293 104 This is to certify that the thesis entitled THE ROLE OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER IN THE SMALL LIBERAL ARTS COLLEGE presented by WILLIAM MCCLEIIAN REYNOLDS has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Edon. degree in Education 9% 59%“ Major pré/ssor Date May 10, I96] 0-169 LIBRARY Michigan State University T g BINEmc BY I”; ; HDAG 3 sons T T usenxamomvmc. T ’X, LIBRARY BINDERS ‘ e; e w-fingg” ITTITTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT ‘1 This is to certifg that the thesis entitled THE ROLE OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER IN THE SMALL LIBERAL ARTS COLLEGE Na“, presented by WILLIAM HOCLELLAN REYNOIDS has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Edon. degree in Education WxMM Major pré‘lgssor Date May IO, I96] LIBRARY Michigan State University fJ' A. ' " AVA! l um,- “ ‘1‘ ’ ‘ ’ ax flfllf awn THE ROLE OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER IN THE SMALL LIBERAL ARTS COLLEGE By William McClellan Reynolds A THESIS Submitted to the School for Advanced Graduate Studies of Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION College of Education 1961 81 p 00.5 ”Lo 9 -0 T ulon| :uqngh‘ a I...‘ hiv— ‘ n V. 01.. n “J Ahv I..nu ufiU 1?“ "Ia . TO' 2 01. r“ .l 0‘. s H. r. .4 t . .x. ECO 637' P ’ , P .. CO. L ,. T“ ll-‘ . ‘o “.58 m ' Q h «\- I I 4: \ ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author of this study wishes to eXpress his deep appreciation to the students and his colleagues at his own institution for their help, encouragement, and forbearance during the investigation and writing of the thesis. Appreciation is also eXpressed to the author's guidance committee and especially to the chairman, Dr. Walter F. Johnson for the help given during the study. The author owes a debt of gratitude to the chief student personnel officers who completed the questionnaire and to the eXperts in the field who critized so ably the initial draft. Dr. Glen T. Nygreen and.Dr. David Robinson deserve special notice for their helpful suggestions for revision of the questionnaire. Finally, the author expresses his deep appreciation to his parents without whose constant help and encouragement the study would not have been made. ***%****§* E C u. . .m. v. .. “d. m... .«u r. i Q nu a a 7 . I . .L D. L .. o i 2... .8 Z 8 8 Cu P P 1 .3. P «w a .3 in O O a: u 9 4 u r . +9 OI 4,-9 h“ c r and a n5 0 a .1. s; .1. I ha v.“ V... .5. 3 EV Pd «0|. .0 e “The O 3 w“ a: O. . 0.‘ . ‘¢ .9“ “\w ac . afiv N... .2 2.. .2”... L. a William McClellan Reynolds Candidate for the degree of Doctor of Education Date of Examination: May 10, 1961, 9:00 A. M., Room 13h College of Education Thesis: The Role of the Chief Student Personnel Officer in the Small Liberal Arts College Outline of Studies: Major area - Administrative and Educational Services: Student Personnel Work. Minor area - Economics Biographical Items: Birthdate - April 20, 1661, Lynn, Indiana Undergraduate Studies - Indiana University, A. B., Bloomington, 1950 Graduate Studies - Indiana University, M. A., Bloomington, 1951 Michigan State University Membership held in.American Personnel and Guidance Association; American College Personnel Association; American Economic Association; American Association of University Professors; National Education Association. ’\" 4__- “SEER ‘F n. ‘4‘ A v Q» asi‘ +U \la. n .s U 01% LUL NJ Qty THE ROLE OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER IN THE SMALL LIBERAL ARTS COLLEGE BY William McClellan Reynolds AN ABSTRACT Submitted to the School for Advanced Graduate Studies of Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION College of Education 1961 ABSTRACT This was a study to survey the current practices of the chief student personnel officer and ascertain his relationship to selected student personnel functions and the extent to which this relationship is considered appropriate by incumbent officers. A description of the development and extent of the personnel office and the title and place in the organizational hierarchy of the chief student personnel officer were included. Personal characteristics of the chief student personnel officer and institutional charac- teristics of the colleges represented in the criterion group were considered. The relationship of the chief student personnel officers to 19 student personnel functions was investigated. Relationships considered were the degree of performance, supervision, policy formulation, chairmanship of policy committees, and arrangements for final administrative Imsponsibility. The degree to which incumbent officers considered these relationships appropriate was investigated. A questionnaire was sent to all coeducational liberal arts colleges in the United States offering only the TbGChelor's and/or first professional degree, with under 2000 enrollment, having a chief student personnel officer as 118‘bed in Education Directo , Part 2, 1952-60. Completed I .. . . . I Vr~ C. \PL C» A.\ r.» O a Is. gr. {. r¢ %\ _. 0L Ow‘ ‘ C 8 C .1 a; an E .2 t P. P P T u S be 5 e 9 e 0 LL 0 n r L c C 0 e e O L t y u.“ S a... F. r. .r“ e A; v . up“ a A» Cu f p p as S «C O n n. .m .. . t .C 8 I 9 t t . W e O .Q . P .1 C O 9 . a e m. S A a O .n a C S . a. Mic . .1 . "I I. I. n S h P .1 O 8 l. L L... t a .1. e D. ._ . e y Lu w . T . a a: S V.“ M“ Av n E +v U I 3 «Ti by S r O .5 8 .il .1 vi .1 «I e d a . -... .1 .i at 4 a. .. . a. «Ti 8 em a. 0 d e O r. M! a: hm m. .n. a L. be he 4‘ n; flu . . a. . 2 . ac .. n. a . .1: . u 9‘. h . 0.. . o . . .01 A: 0: A v at: n\ 3” A .bfiu MN « a» C... . . . . .: :.. n... . v. . . . w I h . a . a: L. «.1 Si Li W Ni? non Mus. “n W us toll“ a" u Hr: ”ON ”3“ “In IIJHQ. h .- “hau It!“ In hr O». All. ‘1 a .I‘ s l: 29 it“ At. 0-. a." \r ‘ 8 O a P 1 \. \ a! Ml. <1 14- returns were obtained from sixty percent of the colleges. .Another thirteen percent acknowledged the receipt of the questionnaire but could not answer for various reasons. In the size and type group of institutions studied, there has been a steady growth in the establishment of offices headed by chief student personnel officers since World War II. There has been some tendency for the establishment of these offices to be associated with size., Most of the respondents are male and married. They have a median of twenty semester hours of graduate student personnel work. The median of the reported amount of time devoted to student personnel work is seventy five percent. Most of the chief student personnel officers report to the president of the institution. Each of the nineteen student personnel functions studied is performed by some of the respondents. Functions most often performed are personal counseling, discipline, student personnel records. The student recruiting function is the only one not 8Upervised by some of the respondents. The respondents generally consider most appropriate their relationship to the functions to the degree that they perform or supervise the functions . Policy relationship to student personnel functions as Well as final administrative authority for functions .. closely °. zef’: 8‘. Ur a..i s I» ~53 371921: p9 rs .: u 512nm 1:9 9:5 T‘I‘iAECO Stu‘or‘ “V. 15-..ed :0 8:.4‘ .. V “‘5‘: “ H I c-uU—3..snlns : H! ‘35 63:: ‘ h {SM-... “51 On "a... o {I 'l‘ D“ k“ c. ext frCN Jen "“8 to have ‘ u“ '7‘;an I... . o‘v;‘ce “f: *‘K‘ ‘3 TI follow closely the pattern of performance and supervision. Personal and institutional characteristics studied seemed to be somewhat related to the degree of performance, supervision and policy relationships of the respondents to the student personnel functions. More study of individual functions needs to be done in this area. The amount of graduate student personnel work and the amount of time devoted to student personnel work by the respondents seem to be related to the degree to which they consider their Itlationships to functions appropriate. The eXpectation that the role of the chief student , Personnel officer in the size group studied would be different from that of such officers in larger institutions seems to have been justified. It would seem important to be concerned with experience and training for such officers in the student Personnel areas where they personally perform or supervise to a high degree. "5‘ 4 ‘o ... . . .... r3 . v m. .. "N. no r. 3 1 C A V on 3.. m.|. .4 n . . Q. r. W n t. ,II. «S - o . V A U u’ 0 "V H 19.. ... HEN: 9- TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I. II. III . INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Statement of the problem . . . . . . . Importance of the study . . . . . . . . Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The criterion group . . . . . . . . . . Representativeness of answers . . . . . Scepe and limitations of the study . . Plan of the study . . . . . . . . . . . REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ... . . . . . . Literature on the history of student personnel services . . . . . . . . . Literature on the deve10pment of the office of the chief student personnel officer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Literature on student personnel philOSOphy o o o o o o 0 era 0 o o 0 Literature on the chief student personnel officer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Literature on student personnel organization 0 o o o o o o o o o o 0 SUMMARY OF THE PERSONAL AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS AND INSTITUTIONS STUDIED . . . . Personal data of respondents . . . . . Title of the chief student personnel Officer 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 Organizational position of the chief student personnel officer . . . . . . PAGE G) ‘3 (b U1 ¥r \p 10 12 12 18 20 25 31 31 37 NO «4 ‘3 \7 A ‘- w‘p An A -\ J- CHAPTER PAGE Institutional data . . . . . . . . . . . . Ah Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Eu Source of control . . . . . . . . . . . . . N5 Geographical location . . . . . . . . . . . N9 Growth of the chief student personnel Office 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 50 IV. AN ANALYSIS OF THE TOTAL RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS CONCERNING SPECIFIC STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA Total reaponses to questions concerning specific student personnel functions . . 5h Staff relationships to selected student personnel functions . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Remarks concerning student personnel functions 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 70 Summary of Chapter four . . . . . . . . . . 80 ‘V. AN ANALYSIS OF THE RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS CONCERNING SPECIFIC STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY SELECTED INSTITUTIONAL FAG TORS . . . . C O O . . C C C . C O O . . . 8"" Size of the institution . . . . . . . . . . 8h Source of control of the institution . . . 95 Geographical location of the institution . 107 Summary Of Chapter five 0 o o o o o o o o o 116 VI«- AN ANALYSIS OF THE RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS CONCERNING SPECIFIC STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY SELECTED PERSONAL FACTORS . . . 4 122 Age of the chief student personnel Officer 0 O O O O O I 0 O O O O O 0 O O O 122 Sex of the chief student personnel officer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 CHAPTER PAGE Marital status of the chief student personnel Officer 0 o o o o o o o o o o 0 114.0 Graduate student personnel work of the chief student personnel officer . . . . . 151 The percentage of time the chief student personnel officer devotes to student personnel work . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 The title of the chief student personnel officer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173 Summary of Chapter six . . . . . . . . . . 180 VII. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . 186 The problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186 Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 Recommendations for more study . . . . . . 196 BIBLIOGRAPHY.................... 2OO APPENDIXA..................... 207 APPENDIXB....................-. 228 APPENDIX C . O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O (232 ‘II’T oh-J uh! \11 o H‘ . .29 Par ;. \ S. 1 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1. The Participation of Colleges Selected for Study by Size, Control, Region, and Type of Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2. Professional Positions of Respondents Held Prior to Becoming Chief Student Personnel Officer in Order of Frequency . . . . . . 3A 3. Professional Positions Held by Respondents at Present Institution Prior to Becoming Chief Student Personnel Officer . . . . . 35 A. Professional Titles of Respondents Held Concurrently with that of Chief Student PerSOIlnel Officer 0 o o o o o o o o o o o 36 5. Titles of Chief Student Personnel Officers as Reported in Education Directory, Part 2, l9E9, and as Reported by Respondents to the Questionnaire . . . . . 38 6. Staff and Agencies Reporting to the Chief Student Personnel Officer in Order of Frequency................ “-3 7. A Comparison of Institutions with and with- out Chief Student Personnel Officers Listed in Education Directory, Part 2, l9§................... 14,6 53. A Comparison of Church.Affiliation or Responses and Non-responses in Colleges Selected for Study . . . . . . . . . . . . u8 §?. Growth of the Chief Student Personnel Office for Selected Years l9u7-6O in Colleges Selected for Study . . . . . . . 52 10. Total Responses to Questions Concerning Relationship of the Chief Student Personnel Officer to Selected Student Personnel Functions . . . . . . . . . . . 55 "a >4 Ho f-b TABLE PAGE 11. Percentage Responses to Questions Concerning Relationship of the Chief Student Personnel Officer to Selected Student Personnel FunCtionS o o o o o o o o o o o o 56 12. Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers Performing Selected Student Personnel Functions, by Size of Institution . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 13. Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers Supervising or Directing Selected Student Personnel Functions, by Size of Institution . . . . . 87 lhe Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider their Relationship to the Performance and Supervision of Student Personnel Functions Appropriate, by Size or Institution 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 89 15. Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers Formulating Policy for Selected Student Personnel Functions, by Size of Institution . . . . . 9O 16». Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers who are Chairmen of a Policy Committee for Selected Student Personnel Functions by Size of Institution . 92 17-. Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider Their Policy Relationship to Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by Size or InStitution o o o o o o o o o o o 93 18«- Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider the Arrangement for Final Administrative Authority for Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by Size of IHStItUtion o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 9k 159. Number and.Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers Performing Selected Student Personnel Functions by Source of contrOl Of InStitUtion o o o o o o o o o o o 97 I l \_., x D TABLE PAGE 20. Number and Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers Supervising or Directing Selected Student Personnel Functions by Source of Control of InStj-tution O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 98 21. Number and Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider their Relationship to the Performance and Supervision of Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by Source of Control Of InStitUtion o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 100 22. Number and Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers Formulating Policy for Selected Student Personnel Functions by Source of Control of Institution . . . . . . 102 23. Number and Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who are Chairmen of a Policy Committee for Selected Student Personnel Functions by Source of Control ofInstitution............... 101i 2LL. Number and Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider their Policy Relationship to Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by Source of Control of Institution . . . . . . . . . 105 25- Number and Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider the Arrangement for Final Administrative Authority for Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by Source of Control Of IDStitUtion o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 106 26.. Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers Performing Selected Student Personnel Functions by Region of InStitUtion o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 109 27- Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers Supervising or Directing Selected Student Personnel Functions by Region of InStitUtion o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 111 “ercenff & “a ,‘ iv. 1!. Ice 1 . I V .V . “\V y ‘ 1 AC ¢ P\ 1. \ IQI 4‘ 4 ‘n r} 41. 4 1 IQ. . (es ‘5 I n u. V “U L U .& .v 0‘... 1H. 0‘” ”H.“ CV W‘ V“ Lu ol‘ fl V «a a» n~v QM h“ C» Fwy A ,.t “\k ht V“ .1. Pa AW Mb CV. a g V... 1 ‘ to e 0‘: “Q “A cw 0‘ Q. “U‘ “s nu ‘Ww‘x he ”Q h b. (MW MI. ‘Cv. \. . AV 0 . 6““ Cb “vs C . DA Qt. \vk hhb on . “MM“ DANAV MA» I» . nwu My w« a; P C. Du A: T. Mo. 0 P Q» In Si C P . c. 6 ed AMI. P P P P . . .1 iv . .M ”on n» NA .uq . u r 0 C Q Q A C ' N A - N . t N \- N I ~ . . . s o n A O A A I e a 1 a n e a. a 9 s .1 n n . a u a a .. u . I a s r o e . A a TABLE PAGE 28. Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider their Relationship to the Performance and Supervision of Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by Region of Institution . . . . 112 29. Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers Formulating Policy for Selected Student Personnel Functions by Region of Institution . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . 11A 30. Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who are Chairmen of a Policy Committee for Selected Student Personnel Functions by Region of Institution . . . . . 115 31. Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider their Policy Relationship to Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by Region of InStitUtiOn o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 117 32. Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider the.Arrangement for Final Administrative Authority for Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by Region of Institution . . . . 118 .323. Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers Performing Selected Student Personnel FunCtionS by Age 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 12h 31+«. Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers Supervising or Directing Selected Student Personnel Functions by Age . . . . . . . . . 125 35;- Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider their Relationship to the Performance and Direction or Supervision of Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by A86 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o 12? XV TABLE PAGE 36. Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers Formulating Policy for Selected Student Personnel Functions by Age . . . . . . . . . 128 37. Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers who are Chairmen of a Policy Committee for Selected Student Personnel Functions by Age . . . . . 129 38. Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider their Policy Relationship to Selected Student Personnel Functions ApprOpriate by Age 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o 131 39. Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider the Arrangement for Final Administrative Authority Appropriate by Age 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 132 HI). Number and Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers Performing Selected Student Personnel Functions by Sex . . . . . 13h 43.. Number and Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers Supervising or Directing Selected Student Personnel FunCtionS by sex a o o o o o o o o o o o o o 135 QE3. Number and Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider their Relationship to the Performance and Direction or Supervision of Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by sex 0 O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O 137 1+3 - Number and Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers Formulating Policy for Selected Student Personnel Functions by sex 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 138 ALL. NUmber and Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who are Chairmen of a Policy Committee for Selected Student Personnel Functions by Sex . . . . . . . . . 139 xvi TABLE PAGE AS. Number and Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider their Policy Relationship to Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by Sex . . . lhl M6. Number and Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider the Arrangement for Final Administrative Authority Appropriate by Sex . . . . . . . . 1&2 A]. Number and Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers Performing Selected Student Personnel Functions by Marital Status 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0-. o o luu M #8. Number and Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers Supervising or Directing Selected Student Personnel Functions by Marital Status . . . . . . . . th 1H9. Number and Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider their Relationship to the Performance and Direction or Supervision of Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by Marital Status 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o 1&7 EC). Number and Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers Formulating Policy for Selected Student Personnel Functions by Marital Status 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o 1h8 51 - Number and Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who are Chairmen of a Policy Committee for Selected Student Personnel Functions by Marital Status . . . 1&9 53- Number and Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider their Policy Relationship to Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by Marital Status 0 o o o o o O o o o o o o o o 150 53- Number and Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider the Arrangement for Final Administrative Authority Appropriate by Marital Status . . 152 . . ~ 0 ~ . . - . . . . v o . . . e 1 ~ n n n a A c g 9 u n . g e . ._ . u ‘. ~ g o n 3 ~ . a ~ ~ b o - - ‘ . ~ . — .- o I ~ . Q 0 ‘ ‘ ‘ O . - o . . , . . ~ . . . . n . . O TABLE PAGE Sh. Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers Performing Selected Student Personnel Functions by Semester Hours of Graduate Study 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O 0 15“- 55. Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers Supervising or Directing Selected Student Personnel Functions by Semester Hours of Graduate StUdYooooooooooooooooooo 155 56. Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider their Relationship to the Performance and Supervision or Direction of Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by Semester Hours of Graduate Study 0 O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O 156 £?7. -Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers Formulating Policy for Selected Student Personnel Functions by Semester Hours of GraduateStUdYQOOOQoooooooooo 157 58. Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers who are Chairmen of a Policy Committee for Selected Student Personnel Functions by Semester Hours of Graduate Study . . . . . . 159 .59’. Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider their Policy Relationship to Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by Semester Hours of Graduate Study 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 160 6C)o Percentage Distribution by Quartiles of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider the Arrangement for Final Administrative Authority Appropriate by Semester Hours OfGraduateStudy 0000000000000 162 TABLE PAGE 61. Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers Performing Selected Student Personnel Functions by Percentage of Time Devoted to Student Personnel Work . . . l6u 62. Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers Supervising or Directing Selected Student Personnel Functions by Percentage of Time Devoted to Student Persormelworkooooeooooooeoee 165 63. Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider their Relationship to the Performance and Direction or Supervision of Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by Percentage of Time Devoted to Student Personnel Work . . . 167 5i;. Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers Formulating Policy for Selected Student Personnel Functions by Percentage of Time Devoted to Student Personnel work 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O 168 6&5. Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who are Chairmen of a Policy Committee for Selected Student Personnel Functions by Percentage of Time Devoted to Student Personnel Work . . . . . . . . . 170 66. Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider their Policy Relationship to Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by Percentage of Time Devoted to Student Personnelworkeooooeeeococo-o 171 6V7. Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider the Arrangement for Final Administrative Authority for Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by Percentage of Time Devoted to Stlldent Personnel Work 0 o o o o o o o 0 172 68 . Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers Performing Selected Student Personnel Functions by Title . . . . o . . . 17h E. Percenta Office to tne Supezv Fur #: “A u_ ... Perceh‘g CaP*ca Stuie: 2' Percenta Office Corr’t WW“ I . «‘ctl "' Percent: a 0«fice Relati Funct: '71. ".60 TABLE PAGE 69. Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers Supervising or Directing Selected Student Personnel Functions byTitleoe0000000000000... 176 70. Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider their Relationship to the Performance and Direction or Supervision of Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by Title . . . . . . . 177 71. Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers Formulating Policy for Selected Student Personnel Functions by Title . . . . 178 72. Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who are Chairmen of a Policy Committee for Selected Student Personnel FunCtionSbyTitleoooeo0.00.coo 179 73. Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider their Policy Relationship to Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by Title . . . . . . . 181 l7hu Percentage of Chief Student Personnel Officers who Consider the Arrangement for Final Administrative Authority for Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriate by Title . . . . . . . . . . . . 182 CHAPTER I IN TRODUC TI ON There has been a trend in recent years, especially since World War II, to center responsibility for diverse student personnel functions in a single chief personnel Officer in colleges and universities. A description of this trend is in Chapter III. These officers have been drawn from the ranks of the teaching faculty, ministers, other administrative offices on and off the campus, and only in very recent years from specially trained graduates of Personnel training programs. Thus, they have brought to the Student personnel offices a diversity of educational and experiential backgrounds. These diverse backgrounds, the lack of a previous chief personnel officer on many campuses, the oPI-"cmition of persons with vested interests in offices eliminated or subordinated by the establishment of a central a’Gudent personnel office, and the opposition of persons who see no need for the office or many of its functions, have reduced the effectiveness of many chief student personnel orI‘icers. There have been many studies of the various personnel functions, their relation to one another, and their contribu- tion to the total college experience of the student. There have been studies of total student personnel programs. There has been much written concerning the philosophy of student personnel work. There have been books written concerning the organization and administration of student personnel services in large institutions. The administrative heads of these programs in large institutions and their functions and relationship to other administrative officers have received some attention. However, there has been little written concerning the chief student personnel officer in the smaller institutions. In the smaller institution he may perform many of the student Personnel functions himself, and personally direct or Stipervise most or all of the others. He may teach some courses or have other administrative responsibilities. Because the chief student personnel officer in the Smaller institution has peculiar problems, and because of the diverse nature of the institutional arrangements and Personal backgrounds of incumbent officers, it is appropriate to study the present officers and their problems, This will contribute some information necessary for the c=Ontinuing development of the office and a better under- 8handing of the role of these chief student personnel Officers. This 11 :he chief stu: relationship ‘ extent to whie bytnctmbent : ,aa: ..;ters': (i STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM This is a study to: (1) survey current practices of the chief student personnel officer; (2) ascertain his relationship to selected student personnel functions and the OXtent to which this relationship is considered appropriate by'incumbent officers. The degree of the student personnel Officers': (1) performance, (2) supervision or direction, £3) formulation of policy: (h) chairmanship of policy committees, (5) final administrative authority for the various student personnel functions is considered with concern for various institutional and personal factors as Well as cross-relationships of the above factors. The institutional factors selected as important to the investigation are: 1. size of the institution 2. geographical location of the institution 3. source of support of the institution The personal factors selected are: 1. age of the chief student personnel officer 2. sex of the chief student personnel officer 3. marital status of the chief student personnel officer h. the amount of graduate student personnel work of the chief student personnel officer 5. the percentage of time the chief student personnel officer devotes to student personnel work 6. the title of the chief student personnel officer A summary of the relationship of other administrative officers to the various student personnel functions when the :bief student afficer is 11’. path and ex. This s mien: perso shaking what to what they sttient Perso and Pel‘sonal ’we institutic 1201131},th 8 t1 Tiling Chief Study “Seful m3 Stud y s} I) ' . Ruling Stu: u . its study w: subjeCt of f1 chief student personnel officer is not the responsible officer is included as well as a brief investigation of the growth and extent of the chief student personnel office. IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY This study should help clarify the role of the chief student personnel officer in the small college. The data Showing what these officers are now doing, their reactions to what they are now doing, the relationship of the chief student personnel officer to the various student personnel functions, and the affect of the selected institutional and personal variables on the responses, should be of help to institutions in evaluating the effectiveness of the incumbent student personnel officer. Institutions not now having chief student personnel officers will find this Study useful in planning their student personnel programs. This study should be helpful to those planning to become chief student personnel officers and to institutions training students for personnel positions. It is heped that this study will raise additional questions that will be the 8abject of future research. The de T‘se items on inestigator I siestigstor' :3: principle Here i’renn (L 3‘ 1953 (15). Wed to six 32953 Persons METHODOLOGY The data were collected by means of a questionnaire. The items on the questionnaire were selected by the investigator after a review of the literature, and from the investigator's background of training and experience. The two principle sources influencing the selection of items were Wrenn (I13) and the American Council on Education study of 1958 (15). The questionnaire was duplicated and sub- mitted to six persons in the field for evaluation. Five of these persons are chief student personnel officers in institutions outside of the group being investigated and one is an associate chief student personnel officer. The Questionnaire was then revised on the basis of the sugges- tions made by these men and the revised copy discussed with the investigator's guidance committee. It was revised again, printed by the offset method with a cover letter duplicated by flexowriter and sent out to the selected group. One month after the questionnaire was mailed another letter was mailed to all members of the group who had not yet returned the questionnaire. Copies of the questionnaire and the two letters are in Appendix A. Data are reported 111 terms of percentages of the responding group and sub- 8Zt‘oups. Where the categories do not have discrete divisions, data are reported by percentages within , quartiles. No attempt is made to attach statistical significance to the data. THE CRITERION GROUP The investigator's area of primary interest is the small coeducational liberal arts college. Therefore, the Questionnaire was sent to all coeducational liberal arts colleges, with a full-time student enrollment of under 2,000, that list a chief student personnel officer as part or their administrative staff. The basis for selection was those institutions listed in Education Directo , 1252-60 Part 3, U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, office of Education (35), under II by highest level of training (only the bachelor's and/or first professional degree), and the following classifications by type of Program: (b) liberal arts and general; (c) liberal arts and general and terminal-occupational; (e) liberal arts and general and teacher preparatory; (f) liberal arts and general, teacher preparatory, and terminal-occupational. The size limitation is arbitrary. It is believed that chief student personnel officers in this size group do InOre performing and personal directing and supervising than 111 larger institutions. It is further believed that this personal involvement in student personnel functions creates a different role for the chief student personnel officer in the small college than that of his counterpart who is primarily an administrator in larger collegesand univer- sities. The classification by highest level of learning and by types of program chosen in the attempt to get relatively homogeneous institutions with.1ibera1 arts emphases. The study is limited to coeducational institutions in the belief that the job of chief student personnel officer is enough different in these institutions from non-coeduca- tional institutions to make them worth separate study. REPRESENTATIVENESS OF ANSWERS The questionnaire was sent to 118 persons. These were all the persons listed in Educational Directo , 1252-60, Part 3 (35) in the institutional category by size and type as chief student personnel officers. Of these 118, 70 were completed and returned in time for tabulation. This return represents approximately 60% of the population. In addition to these, there were seven returned too late t0 iiaclude in the tabulation, one reported as deceased and not replaced, four reported that their answers would be 11mPPI'Opriate because they were not in fact chief student personnel officers. Three reported that the questionnaires could not be completed because of extended illness of the chief student personnel officer, one reported as resigned and no replacement, and one was reported as misplaced, too late to send another in time for tabulation. Adding these 17 to those completed makes a total of 87, or approximately 73% of the population ”accounted for." See Table 1 for the distribution of responses, non-responses, and acknowledged returns. SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY Institutions that would be in the size category were not investigated if they were primarily teacher-preparatory, technical or professional, or offered graduate degrees or more than one professional degree. ‘Within the category selected the type of program of the institutions was not considered in analysing the responses. Non-coeducational institutions were not considered. Racially segregated institutions were not identified. The responses of different kinds of churchprelated institutions were not compared. Junior colleges were not investigated. . With the exception of the follow-up letter, no attempt was made to elicit additional responses, nor was there an effort made to assess reasons for non-answerers. In the first cover letter and in the follow-up letter the THE PARTICIPATION OF COLLEGES SELECTED FOR STUDY BY SIZE, TABLE 1 CONTROL, REGION, AND TYPE OF PROGRAM * .................................................................... :==: Size Responses Non-Responses Acknowledged Under 500 22 8 6 501-1000 29 16 6 1001-1500 15 L1. 2 1501-2000 A _3 J Total 70 31 17 Source of Control Church 1+6 18 12 Private 15 5 2 State _9_ _8_ _3 Total 70 31 17 Accrediting Region North Central 30 16 1O Southem 26 9 L1. Western 1 1 1 New England 1 2 0 North West 4 2 0 Middle States .§ .1 .2. Total 70 31 17 Type of Program (b) Liberal arts and general 3 1 2 (c) Liberal arts and general 2 1 O and terminal preparatory (e) Liberal arts and general 118 21 8 and teacher preparatory (f) Liberal arts and general, 17 8 7 teacher preparatory and tenninal occupational __ _ _ Total 70 31 17 I"Source: Educati n Directo of Education. Part 3. 1959-60. Higher Education, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office 1O request was made to send back the questionnaire whether or not it was filled out. Seventeen were received unanswered for the reasons cited above. None were returned with no explanation. The nature of the questionnaire and the method of analysis do not allow for strict statistical interpreta- tions of the responses. The sole use of the Education Directory for determining the presence of a chief student personnel officer may have had the result of passing over some officers. PLAN OF THE STUDY The first chapter contains the introduction, the statement of the problem, the importance cf the study, the method of the study, a description of the criterion group, an analysis of the representativeness of the answers, limitations of the study and the plan of the study. The second chapter consists of a review of the literature pertinent to the study. A The third chapter contains a summary of the personal and institutional data requested in the questionnaire and a description of the growth of the chief student personnel office. The fourth.chapter contains an analysis of the total 11 responses to the questions concerning the relationship of the chief student personnel officer to specific student personnel functions. It also contains a summary of the responsible officers for the specific functions when the chief student personnel officer is not responsible for the function. Also in the fourth chapter is a summary of the answers to the open-ended questions in elaboration of specific relationships to the various student personnel functions. The fifth chapter contains analysis of the data according to institutional factors. The sixth chapter is an analysis of the data according to personal factors In the seventh chapter is a summary of the findings and the conclusions and recommendations of the investigator based on the study. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE In this chapter a brief summary will be given of the literature concerned with the history or student personnel services, the development of the office of the chief student personnel officer, and the development of student personnel philosophy. This is the literature usually quoted and needs little more elaboration here. Somewhat more time will be spent with reference to literature concerned primarily with the chief student personnel officer and with organization of the services in coordinated programs. LITERATURE ON THE HISTORY OF STUDENT PERSONNEL SERVICES Cowley (12) describes the period prior to 1870 as one in which the religious emphasis of higher education led to the presence of officers who were concerned with the out~ of-class activities of the students. This concern evidenced itself principally in the control of conduct and the develop- ment of the spiritual life of the student. Cowley refers 12 13 to the period from about 1870 to 1920 as one in which intellectualization flourished and little attention was given to students' activities ourside of the classroom. The sterility of the 1870-1920 period is disputed by Wrenn (hl:32) who refers to the work of Eliot of Harvard, Barnard of Columbia, and Harper of Chicago. wrenn indicates that the growth of the elective system and the increased presence of women on the campus gave rise to the development of many student personnel functions during this period. Lloyd-Jones (20) quotes at length from a statement by William Rainey Harper in 1905 in which he describes the necessity for ”diagnosis” as a regular function of the college. Such diagnosis would be made according to Harper: 1. With.special reference to his character, 2. with.special reference, likewise to his intellectual capacity, 3. with reference to his special intellectual charac- teristics, h. with reference to his special capacities and tastes, 5. with reference to the social side of his nature... Such a diagnosis, when made, would serve as the basis for the selection of studies...This material likewise will determine largely the career of the student...This feature of twentieth-century college education will come to be regarded as of greatest importance, and fifty years hence will prevail as widely as it is now lacking. (20:11) Blaesser (5:2) attributes the reawakened interest in student personnel services after 1920 to four groups. These were: (1) the humanitarians who tried to promote mental 14 hygiene, vocational counseling, and other individual services; (2) administrators such as Gilman of Johns Hopkins with his system of faculty advising, and Harper of Chicago who emphasized residential housing; (3) the applied.psychol- ogists who began to identify and measure individual differences; (h) the students themselves who began to build an extensive extra-curriculum. LITERATURE ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER The development of an office to perform, direct, or coordinate student personnel services headed by a chief student personnel officer is essentially a postéWorld‘War II phenomenon. Long has this to say about an investigation in 19hha ”From the information assembled in a survey conducted for the National.Association of Deans and.Advisers of Men in.March l9hh, it is evident that the dean of students is emerging as a major administrative officer charged with.the responsibility of coordinating all personnel services on the campus.” (212383) It was not until the 1955 revision of the Dictionary of Occupational Titles that the personnel dean was differ- entiated from the academic dean. Here the title was listed as dean of men with dean, dean of students, and director of 15 student personnel as alternate titles. The text of the job description under these titles follows: Directs and coordinates nonacademic student personnel program: .Assists in formulating student personnel policies and advises on problems related to policy, program, and administration. Supervises and assists in planning university social, recreational, and cultural programs. Assists in preadmission evaluation of students' qualifications and in curriculum planning. Renders individual or group guidance relative to personal problems, educational and vocational objec- tives, social and recreational activities, loans, and scholarships. Interviews students violating university rules and takes necessary disciplinary or remedial action. Sponsors and advises student organizations. Prepares budget and administers appropriations of department. May teach formal courses. May supervise student cafeteria, dormitory, publications, and related activities. (30:hl) ' A development of post war student personnel adminis- tration can be traced in successive statements in the American Council on Education Studies in student personnel work. In 19h5 this statement occurs: Some colleges have adopted a highly centralized system in which a dean of students or director of personnel and a small specialized staff perform all student personnel functions. Other institutions have appointed a dean or director with administrative control over some personnel functions and departments performing additional personnel functions. In the small liberal arts college, the academic dean is frequently given the additional responsibility for the student personnel functions...By far the majority of institutions have failed to provide any administrative or co-ordinating direction for their various student personnel depart- ments. (5:85) The ACE report in 19h9 shows a shift of emphasis in this way: As volume of services and size of staff increase, the 16 necessity for centralization of administrative respon- sibility of an over-all nature becomes more readily apparent. The experience ofthe past decade indicates the desirability of assigning responsibility for personnel work to an administrator. The generalization follows the pattern clearly established historically of designating instructional responsibility in the dean of a faculty or in the president in a small institution. (h0:15) The report of a series of consultations with 82 colleges and universities between l9h6 and 1950 was the basis for the 1952 ACE studies. Excerpts from this report follows: The larger the institution visited, the greater the probability that the consultant would find a centralized personnel program. In the smaller colleges, the extent of centralization, as reported by the consultants, was;// dependent upon the personality and desires of the president. In colleges where the president maintained institutional control tightly in his own hands, the personnel organizations tended to be diffused and disorganized. On the other hand, in those colleges where the president allocated responsibilities and made use of his vice-presidents, administrative assistants, or deans, personnel programs seemed to be more highly organized and to Operate with a better degree of cooperation. A minority of the schools had an offical designated as the chief personnel officer. Only a few of these schools had deans of students, directors of personnel or People with similar titles. Most schools maintained Peeple on their staffs with the titles of dean of men and.dean of women. Often the functions of these deans Of men or deans of women have come to be closely similar to the functions of a dean of students... The reports of the consultants convey the impression that, in general, personnel organizations in the college: visited were somewhat chaotic. Neither students nor faculty members knew who was responsible for the direc- tion of the personnel programs in most cases, and frequently the president of the college, even though well aware that this confusion existed, according to the consultants' reports, was reluctant to designate anyone 17 on the staff as the responsibile personnel adminis- trator. (8: 13) In the final publication by ACE on student personnel work, published in 1958, the following summary of the current situation is given: Organizational structure and proper staffing are the basis for accomplishing the objectives and functions of student personnel services. During the development period of these services, related functions frequently Operated in isolation...0bjectives and functions were clouded and confused. Positions such as those of dean of men and dean of women have existed for many years. Responsibilities inherent in these positions have varied among institutions and the positions often have had no consistent relationship to administrative struc- ture. This lack of coordination, or of structured administrative plan, has been characteristic of the growing-up period of student personnel services. It has never been corrected completely in many institutions, despite their acceptance of the specific contributions of these services as essential to the educational process. (15:32) ‘With.the development of centralized organization of student personnel services, confusion has arisen concerning titles for those holding administrative responsibility...The usage of the title Dean of Students to designate a chief administrative officer in a coordinate student personnel service program has become very common. In many institutions the title carries with it essential responsibility for staff coordination and supervision. To the student clientele, however, the title carries an implication of direct contact and service. Since such student contact is often difficult because of administrative load, the title of vice- president has been adopted in many institutions have coordinated programs. The administrative officer who works closely with other administrative officers and directly with a staff serves a function quite different from that of the dean whose major time and effort is spent in direct contact with students. The character- istics of the person employed for a position are, therefore, to be considered along with.his trainin and the definition of the job he is expected to do. (15:38) .- 1"“: .Ma u Ca“! M; a 1 Au :33 a... ‘M u 1' AA“ 'VOC 18 LITERATURE ON STUDENT PERSONNEL PHILOSOPHY A Complete statement of the ”student personnel point of view” was published in 1937 by the.American Council on Education (12). A revised statement concerning the philos- ophy and rationale for student personnel work in higher education was developed by a committee under the chairman- ship of‘Williamson and published by ACE in l9h9. (ho) Wrenn (RB), and Lloyd-Jones and Smith (19) have well- developed statements on this subject. Of more immediate concern to the subject of this paper is the literature dealing with the philosophy of the office and the incumbent administrator. .Arbuckle and Kauffman point out the need for study in this area: It is the Opinion of the writers that no type of institution of higher learning in our society has a greater need or is better suited for the fullest student personnel program than the liberal arts college...A survey of the student personnel literature indicates that very little research, comment, or reporting on student personnel work emanates from the traditional liberal arts colleges. Most of the persons writing in this field seem to be affiliated primarily with.either teacher-training institutions or departments of educa~ tion and psychology in large universities. (2:296) Williamson and.Darley point up one of the key philosophical problems in this statement: ”Implicit in our introductory remarks is the assumption that the internal order of the office of the dean of students, and conse- quently the major problems of policy arising therein, are 19 neither self-generative nor autonomous but are derived from, and dependent on, the philosophy of the institution.” (h1:6) In a challenging charge to deans of students to develop a philosophy for his life and work, Lowrey says: A dean of students must make the attempt to make all knowledge his province. He is a constant adviser to adolescent rebellion. Sometimes this rebellion is merely an aspect of growth-—sometimes it is an expres- sion of insecurity and fear as new knowledge or new views in the fields of psychology, history, biology, physics or religion alter the shape of old beliefs... The dean of students, if he is to meet these young minds on their own grounds, needs to read in all fields. Out of his reading and thinking must come a philosophy by which.he can live and teach. (2h:356) Shoben, in a searching analysis of current student personnel philosophy, suggests that broad social changes since the first WOrld War have placed more of the responsi- bilities for the development of social values in the hands Of college student personnel workers. He says: Personnel workers share with their instructional colleagues the occupational responsibility for being themselves educated persons and for devoting a proper portion of their time to contributing to the totality and contours of available knowledge through research and scholarly activity...Student personnel workers will most probably make their finest contributions by articu- lating themselves more explicitly with the rest of the educational enterprise, by finding greater common- alities with instructors and investigators, and by broadening both.their professional horizons and their basic knowledge...Student personnel work must give thought to professional standards, increasing the effectiveness and depth of relevant training, and the selection on an informed basis of those people who can best represent these ideals in their professional service and relationships. (28:11) 20 Nygreen (26:h7) identifies philosophical problems that may arise out of differences in background, discipline, or position. These include the problem of respect for training, referring to an understanding of the background of those in the various disciplines as well as an under- standing of one's own limitations in training. Other problems are: the problem of being willing to consult; the problem of conflict of mores and values; using the form of consultation to dominate; tendency of older administrators to lag behind the younger worker in training and outlook; the problem of combining a respect for the integrity of the individual with the process of separating advising from decision making. Vogel critizes the failure of philosophy and practice to agree: The responsibilities allocated by institutional administrators to the student personnel area, the accepting of these responsibilities, and the practices employed by the student personnel administrators in eXpediting them indicate a breach between awareness and application of the philosophy of the student personnel point of view. (31-1706) LITERATURE ON THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER In 1925, Bennett (h) studied the prevalence of the office of the dean of men. His study was an attempt to discover existing personnel titles and the number of student 21 personnel offices in operation at that time. Of 356 institutions queried, 101 reported having male personnel deans, 66 recognized the need for such an office but had added the dean's duties to another office already estab- lished, and 119 institutions seemed to have made no attempt to assign personnel work to any person or office. A little later (1932), Lubbers (25) attempted to discover who were the individuals that determine and execute the policies in 180 colleges. Results showed that 37% of the total number of men's and co-ed institutions had the office of the dean of men and only 18% of the men's colleges had a dean of men. Forty percent of the caued institutions studied had the office of dean of men. Lubbers found that the officers for personal advisement in the order of greatest frequency were dean of women, dean of the college, and dean of men. Summing up the experience of the two decades between the mid-thirties and the mid-fifties, Arbuckle has this to say: In some cases the organization and administration of these services became the Job of an officer who was already loaded down with other tasks and who quite frequently had little understanding of, or sympathy with, the student personnel point of view; or it became the added responsibility of one who was imbued with the academic tradition, and who naturally enough would think of such services as secondary; or it became the responsibility of an autocratic administrator who would daily send forth his orders of the day; or, finally, it became the task of someone who was a fine person, but C O r V .— O p r C V -—~. 7 , \ y ' r \ ~ . C F- 4 F I: P, D , r ' ~— ' , f— i 9 p I ’ 22 who lacked the knowledge, understanding, and skill that were essential if the task was to be well done. There is no doubt that in the past twenty years the adminism trators of personnel programs in some colleges have been individuals of such caliber. Under such circumstances it would be unlikely that the personnel program would function effectively. (1:25) Bradley (6) made a study of duties performed by the chief student personnel officer in a sample of 50 south- eastern institutions. These were male and co-educational institutions offering at least the bachelor's degree. The sample was stratified by state, control, and size in order to represent fair1y all institutions in the area. Forty three of the institutions had a designated chief student personnel officer. Complete personal and institutional data was obtained but only total information was considered. There was no attempt to assess answers according to any of V”'F the personal and institutional variables. Bradley found the average age of the deans to A6, 93% were married; all had at least the bachelor's degree, 95% had a master's degree, and 32% a doctor's degree. Eighty eight per cent of the deans had been former faculty members; 53% had taught in high school; 23% had been high-school administrators. Sixty three per cent were still teaching with a mean load of six hours. English, history and psychology were the most prevalent teaching fields, in that order. The mean numbers of offices and departments under the direction of the personnel deans was 7.7. Eighty five per cent of the 23 personnel dean reported directly to the president. Of 19 principal duties isolated, Bradley found that the most prevalent in descending order of frequency were: personal counseling, freshman orientation, visit hospitals and the sick, refer health problems, extra-curricular activities and discipline. Cauffiel (9) lists two kinds of chief student personnel officers, those who are administrative student personnel officers, and those charged with.personnel functions in addition to the administration of their program. Of this latter group, he found the following duties (in order of frequency of their performance): Con- sultation with parents of students, referral functions; conferences with prospective students, their parents and teachers; recommendations concerning loans, scholarships and fellowships; advising student government; enforcement of rules and regulations; interpretation and application of university requirements; formulating rules and regulations; handling disciplinary matters; directing student organiza- tions; supervision of residences; direction of fraternity and sorority activities; advisement of students concerning academic difficulties; selection of psychological tests to be used in test batteries; keep records of personal history; approve applications for loans; and supervision of the dormitory counseling program. r ,1 a H ‘ ' r‘ —. xl 2h Lloyd-Jones makes an early distinction between personnel work and personnel administration. She says that ”personnel administration is the coordination and concen- tration of all the resources of the institution together with the information afforded by scientific investigation for the purpose of furthering the best interests of each individual in all his aspects.” (18:11.1) She defines three aspects of administration: instructional, Operational and student personnel-these arise because of inability either through lack of time, or ability for the president to accomplish the duties. Lloyd-Jones details the requirements for a student personnel administrator in this fashion: The director of student personnel administration must be adaptable enough, intelligent enough, and well enough trained to be able to supplement the services of those few experts in personnel work who may be avail» able. It will be well for everyone entering the field of student personnel administration, in addition to having thorough preparation in the field of education and administration, to know something about organizing a testing program, about administering a social program, and about the principles of counseling, of making a case study, of vocational guidance, of statistics, and of record keeping. (18:1h6) Strozier (29) relates confusion about the aim and purpose of the personnel office to general institutional problems. He says that in many cases the office of the dean of students is frequently seen as a catch all for all the miscellaneous functions not taken care of elsewhere; as a J. 25 special services office for certain services that must be rendered, but that must be separated from the regular academic offerings; or as a morale office to keep the students, and the institution out of trouble. Strozier has this to say about the problem: The fundamental--the real problem as I see it, is that of determining, with imaginative precision and perceptive administrative logic, the role of the office of the dean of students within the total life and organization of the university. (29:50) Summing up his research on the office of the dean of students, Bradley says: It is manifestly impossible to discover all the duties performed by the chief student personnel deans. So diversified are the duties of a dean that one may personally be assigning students in and out of a dormitory where the dean lives while another in a different institution is appointing to the faculty a scholar of note as head of a new department. (6:55) LITERATURE ON STUDENT PERSONNEL ORGANIZATION In one of the first references to a coordinated student personnel program, Zook in 1932 said that if a college was small enough the dean should be responsible for student personnel work by co-ordinating the various services. For larger institutions, he said: "The president should select a dean of students for the entire institution who should be charged with the responsibility for all student welfare and personnel work." (hh:50) . an 26 Cowley believes that student personnel work should be ”synchronized." He gives these reasons: ”Overlapping and gaps cannot be eliminated unless someone has the authority to eliminate them. The personnel program needs to be recognized by the president as a formidable and solid unit; it needs frequent presentation as a unit. Personnel work must have a major administrative officer who ranks in authority with the business manager and academic dean.” (13:1h8) In another article Cowley explains three types of coordination needed by the student personnel program. He says that these three consist of coordination of the student personnel services within an institution. This can be done by a person or a committee. He recommends a single person as being the more appropriate. He goes on to recom- mend the necessity for coordination of the student personnel services with instruction and coordination of national societies dealing with student personnel services. (lh:725) Hilliamson, speaking almost entirely of the large university, recommends a coordinated program rather than a centralized, departmental one. He says: The distinction is broadly this: in a centralized, departmental organization, the individual student has his personnel problems treated as a separate phase of his educational career, in separate physical surround- ings, and by separate individuals. In a coordinated personnel program, the student, as he moves through his educational experiences, is the focal point for 27 specialized personnel services which.aim at integrating his educational adjustments with his total life adjust- ments. (h1379) In describing the development of a coordinated student personnel program in the California State Colleges, Chandler, speaking first of the l9h6 reorganization and then of the 1950 changes, says: This organizational structure provided a framework from which to build a completely integrated functional student personnel program. In this organization, student personnel work was recognized and some of its major functions were placed under a dean Who was co- equal with the academic deans in the administrative hierarchy of the colleges. The principal changes made in 1950 were: to further consolidate the personnel work of the college under the dean of students; to make clear the lines of authority and responsibility; and to group like functions together under responsible administrative and technical positions. (10:77) Coleman (11) recommends administrative centralization, but suggests ways in which informal coordination may be achieved when such administrative centralization is not possible in a particular institutional setting. Reporting the proceedings of a national conference, Love records the following observation. ”Organization of an institution into three coordinate divisions--academic, student personnel, and business-~might be one way in which to help build faculty understanding of an participation in the student personnel program as well as to bring about the acceptance of the premise that the 'whole man' must be educated.” (23:170) 28 As a member of the consulting group from which the 1952 ACE report came, wrenn made these comments for different institutions: The basic need is for the coordination of the present scattered personnel services under a Dean of Students or a Dean of Student Personnel. This office should be parallel in position responsibility to the Dean of Faculties, who coordinates the instructional program of the various colleges and other instructional units such as Library, Extension Department, etc., and the Comp- troller or Business Manager who coordinates all physical functions and the maintenance of the physical plant. To the president of another institution: I sincerely believe that there is urgent need of coordination at the top level. Such facilities as the health services, the deans of men and women with their dormitory work, the supervision of student activities, placement, orientation, testing and counseling-all of these need to coordinated under a director of personnel. In still another case: Perhaps the work of the Dean of Students as coordi- nator of all student personnel services could be strenghtened by more frequent direct contact between him and the President and by greater use of the office of the Dean of Students as a position coordinate with but not subordinate to the office of the Dean of the College. (h3:568) Arbuckle is critical of the history of student personnel administration and suggests that the primary job of the personnel administrator may be to coordinate existing services. He says: The history of personnel administration in colleges and universities shows that it has often been a chaotic and.poorly integrated procedure. It has ranged from complete decentralization, with no coordination or understanding among various personnel workers, to completely dominated and controlled by one figure. It 29 has often been carried out by individuals who have had no training in the field, by those who are overloaded with.other tasks, or by those who were chosen for the position solely because of the people they knew... Thus the job of the personnel administrator is not necessarily to develop a program of personnel services. it may be to pull together a series of disjointed and disorganized services into a coordinated program. It is also quite frequently a task of drawing together for a common purpose a group of workers who have been concerned only with their specific activity and who have had little feeling of belonging to the larger all- university program. (1:26) ‘Writing in an academic journal, Williams criticizes on the one hand the lack of clearly defined functions for administrators, and on the other hand the entire student personnel program. Few features of Cherokee College (a pseudonymn) are more striking than the absence of the defined functions for the numerous administrative officers. There are no clear directives, written or verbal, defining the functions of any of these officers. The result is a state of administrative confusion. No one, student or faculty or junior administrator, knows for sure to whom to go for information, instruction, or definitive answers... The dean of students, the dean of men, and the dean of women work in a sort of collective endeavor to house, feed, nurture, and counsel the students of Cherokee College. This paternalistic program enjoys the sanction and encouragement of the administration; but the more thoughtful members of the faculty note its increasing tendency to attract an uncritical type of student, lacking in initiative and imagination...without any doubt, the personnel deans consider their counseling to be conducted in the most scientific spirit; some of the academic staff consider their efforts coddling. (38:618) In a recent study of personnel services in small - liberal arts colleges, Scott finds the academic dean functioning in most cases as the chief student personnel officer in addition to his other duties and not only a lack of coordination of personnel services, but a lack of the recognition of the need for such coordination. (27:21) CHAPTER III SUMMARY OF THE PERSONAL AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS AND INSTITUTIONS STUDIED In this chapter the personal and institutional data gathered from the questionnaire are summarized. There is also a description of the growth of the chief student personnel office in the size and type group of colleges studied. The first section is concerned with the personal data, title, and organizational position of the chief student personnel officers who responded to the questionnaire. The second section deals with institutional data from the colleges represented by the responding chief student personnel officers. The third section traces briefly the growth of the chief student personnel office in the insti- tutions studied. PERSONAL DATA OF RESPONDENTS Age, SexI and Marital Status Of the 69 respondents reporting their age, the range was from 28 to 6k with a median age for the group of Ml. 31 32 Of the chief student personnel officers reporting, 6h were male and six female. There were a total of 59 married and 11 single. Of the males, 58 were married and six single; of the females one was married and five single. Graduate Student Personnel Work Graduate student personnel work was reported in years, degrees, semester hours and quarter hours. These were arbitrarily reduced to semester hours by reducing quarter hours by one third, by allowing 20 hours per year reported, and by allowing 20 hours for a master's degree reported and 60 hours for a doctor's degree reported. Twenty hours for the master's degree and 60 hours for the doctorate were selected as estimates of the amount of student personnel course work included in all of the work taken for these degrees. The range of graduate work reported, using this system, was from O to 65 semester hours, with a median of 20 hours. Professional_Positions Held Prior to Becoming a Chief Student Personnel Officer The prior professional positions reported were gathered into 27 categories by gathering miscellaneous college administrative positions such as registrar, admis- sions officer, public relations officer, division chairman, etc., into one category under I'college administration;” by putting service chaplains and institutional chaplains in the 33 ”minister" category; and by including high school principals and other administrative officers under the one title, "high school administration.” The high school teacher category is the largest among professional positions previously held, with high school administration and college administration following in order of size. Many of the respondents showed several previous positions, while of course, some reported none. .A complete listing of the positions is shown in Table 2. Prior Positions Held at Present Institution The positions reported as being previously held at the present institution are headed by the dean of men category, with professor of history and professor of educa- tion sharing the second place. A complete listing of positions previously held at the present institution is shown in Table 3. Prefessional Titles Held with that of Chief Student Personnel Officer The title of professor of education was the one most commonly held concurrently with that of chief student personnel officer. Professor of psychology and professor of religion were next in order of frequency. A complete listing of the titles held concurrently with chief student personnel officer is shown in Table h. TABLE 2 PROFESSIONAL POSITIONS OF RESPONDENTS HELD PRIOR TO BECOMING CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL. OFFICER IN ORDER OF FREQUENCY Position Number High School Teacher High School Administrator College Administrator Dean of Men Minister Professor of Education Counselor Director, Residence Halls Professor of Religion Coach Professor of Histry Professor of Psychology Elementary Teacher Dean of Women Professor of Sociology Professor of Business Administration Church Youth Director Professor of Economics Professor of Mathematics Professor of Military Science Professor of French Officer, Navy Personnel Staff Associate, Science Research Associates Professor of Political Science Professor of Physical Education Professor of Chemistry Professor of Greek d—bu-Ln—L—L ...;A—L-b—L—L-Ld—L—s—awapmfififlflmONwmm m...- S . n .- . . . I.» «a v =9 .fiu .. a .J . a rd .. .. Cw . v i . .5 e c . .. 2. ad :9 Ev .3. . .3 . um. he «3 flu fit 3. ... A: .3. pa .... u v - his .. n V»: ..v f . . V. . e. \ .. . ....- .. .... ..n. _,.. A... .u .... s.‘ .. e. e... ..... 35 TABLE 3 PROFESSIONAL POSITIONS HELD BY RESPONDENTS AT PRESENT INSTITUTION PRIOR TO BECOMING CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER _ —_.__ ‘— — — —— —— — —‘—————-— Positign Dean of Men Professor of History Professor of Education Professor of Religion Professor of Sociology Professor of Psychology Professor of Business Administration Director of Admissions Director of Public Relations Professor of Economics Director of Placement Director'of Residence Halls Professor'of Mathematics Dean of Women Professor of Political Science Professor of Physical Education Professor of Chemistry Coach a E! 0" co '1 Ad—L—L—b—L—L—L—Ammmwuwmmm I i t TABLE 1+ PROFESSIONAL TITLES OF RESPONDENTS HELD CONCURRENTLY WITH THAT OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL. OFFICER we Number Professor of Education 1 Professor of Psychology Professor of Religion Professor of History Dean of Men Director of Placement Professor of Sociology Academic Division Chairman Registrar Coach Choral Director Professor of Economics Professor of Mathematics Professor of Business Administration Director of Health and Safety Professor of French Professor of Chemistry Professor of Languages a-s-s-s-s-s-satoNNuwumVV-t 37 Percentage of‘WorkingLTime Devoted to Student Personnel Werk All of the chief student personnel officers reporting indicated some time spent in student personnel work. The range of time reported was from 20% to 100% with the median reported as 75%. This was also the mode with 16 reporting that they spent 75% of their working time in student personnel work. TITLE OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER Current Title of the Chief Student Personnel Officer Of the 118 chief student personnel officers listed in the criterion group, 79 had the title ”dean of students." Among the remaining 39 listed, there were scattered 18 other titles. or the 70 respondents returning completed questionnaires in time for tabulation, 53 had the dean of students title with the remaining 17 reporting 11 different titles. These 11 different titles are not necessarily the same as those listed in the criterion group, as the titles reported on the questionnaire were not always the same as that listed in the directory. A complete listing of these titles is shown in Table 5. Length of Time Current Title Has Been In Use The current title held by the chief student personnel officer has been in use from one quarter year to 21 years. -fi-o 1 i sob do Ina-...- " ..I i \. . , - ~ ...-1 ‘ ‘- . .s-- .. ‘Q'. ... . . . _‘§.. 38 TABLE 5 TITLES OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS As REPORTED IN EDJCATION DIRECTORY, PART 3, m, AND AS REPORTED BY RESPONDENTS TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE All Titles in Criterion Group Number Dean of Students Director of Student Personnel Director of Student Affairs Personnel Director Director of Guidance Director of Student Life Dean of Student Affairs Student Personnel Dean of Student Personnel Director of Student Activities Personnel Officer Director of Personnel Dean of Student Life ‘ Dean, Student Personnel Services Chief Personnel Officer Counselor for Students Dean, Student Services Director, Personnel and Guidance Director, Campus Life (......e—e-e—s-e-emmmmwuuwuoo3 —L _3 (D Total Titles Reported by Respondents Dean of Students 5 Director of Student Personnel Dean of Men Dean of Student Affairs Director of Student Activities Chairman of Personnel Dean of Student Personnel Dean of Division of Student Life Dean, Student Personnel Services Director of Guidance Director of Guidance and Student Life d—L—s—s—L—LNNNp-w Total \7 O 39 The median length of time reported was six years. There were nine reporting that the title had been in use for 10 ‘years, and 10 reporting more than 10 years. The remainder showed a cluster around the median. Stated another way, this shows a rather uniform growth.of the use of these titles through out the decade of the 1950's. Previous Titles for the Chief Student Personnel Officer There were 51 respondents who reported that the current title was the only one ever used for the chief student personnel officer at their institutions. Of the remaining 19, 1h had had some other title and changed to dean of students; three had had the title dean of students and changed to some other title; two had changed from and to titles other than that of dean of students. ‘é Appropriateness of Current Title There were 11 respondents who did not feel that their titles were appropriate to the position. Of these, nine had titles other than dean of students, and advised that they believed the title should be dean of students. There was one who now has the title dean of students and believed that the title should be changed to director of student affairs on the grounds that ”it would be more descriptive of the responsibilities involved.” Another who is now doing the chief student personnel job with the title of dean of men believes his title should be changed to director of student personnel. Remarks Concerning Title All 30 of those making extra comments in this category felt that dean should be in the title, and preferably, that it should be dean of students. Reasons advanced for this stand were that: (1) it gave the necessary status and prestige to the office; (2) was generally accepted as descriptive of the job to be done; (3) gave the necessary direct access to the president. Two respondents mentioned that there might be some problem where counseling was seen as a major responsibility, but did not see this aspect as important enough to have any other title. Two respondents mentioned a possible conflict when the job also involved discipline, but did not believe a change of title would be advantageous. ORGANIZATIONAL POSITION OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER Reporting Responsibility of the Chief Student Personnel Officer or the 70 chief student personnel officers under investigation, 55 report to the president of the institu- tion; 10 report to the academic dean; three report to executive viceepresidents; one reports to a dean of 41 administration, and one to an administrative committee. Of the 10 reporting to academic deans, six feel that the arrangement is inappropriate and recommend reporting to the president. The one chief student personnel officer that reports to an administrative committee believes that he should be a member of that committee. 0f the chief student personnel officers who also teach, four indicate that they report to the academic dean for instructional purposes; two report to the president except in academic or faculty affairs, when they report to the academic dean; one respondent reports to the academic dean except in the area of financial aids which area is reported to the president. One of the chief student personnel officers reports to the academic dean on ”minor” matters and to the president on ”major” matters; one of those who reports to an executive viceepresident takes serious disciplinary matters to the president. Reporting Responsibilities of Others to the Chief Student PersonnglgOfficer By combining reported titles whenever possible, a total of 26 categories was obtained of offices reporting to the chief student personnel officer. In 35 institutions the chief student personnel officer has head residents, house- mothers, directors of residence halls, and the like report- ing to him. In 35 institutions, a dean of women reports to 42 the chief student personnel officer. The health service, reports through a doctor, nurse, director of health service, or some like title to the chief student personnel in 32 institutions. The next most common arrangements are dean of men in 21 schools and counselor, director of counseling or director of guidance in 15 institutions. See Table 6. Eight of the respondents believed that their report- ing arrangements were unsatisfactory. Of these, five feel that there are not enough of the personnel services reporting to the chief student personnel officer. One feels that there should be a dean of men reporting to him for discipline; one believes that he has too many people reporting to him; one feels that the failure of the director of counseling to report to the chief student personnel officer results in overlapping of responsibilities and a duplication of functions. Additional Comments on Organizational Position of the Chief Student Personnel Officer In 65 of the 70 cases reporting the chief student personnel officer is a member of an all-college administra- tive group. Of the respondents who made additional comments relative to organizational structure, 27 expressed satis- faction with the situation that allowed them to report directly to the president. Three who were not in the top was al , .‘ r “3 TABLE 6 STAFF AND AGENCIES REPORTING TO THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER IN ORDER OF FREQUENCY Staff or Agency Number Director of Residence Halls, Housemother, Head Resident 35 Dean of Women 35 Doctor, Nurse, Director of Health Service 32 Dean of Men 21 Director of Counseling, Counselor, Director of Guidance 15 Director of Placement 10 Director of Student Affairs, Activities Director of Housing Director of Food Service, Dietician Associate to the Chief Student Personnel Officer Director of Religious Affairs, Chaplain Faculty Advisors to Student Organizations Assistants to the Chief Student Personnel Officer Athletic Director Student Union Manager Campus Police Director of Testing Register Director of Admissions Director of Student Aid Maids and Janitors Remedial Services Publications Director of Associated Women Students Foreign Student Advisor Principal of Affiliated School administrative group felt that they should be. One respon- dent reports that he has been delegated more responsibility than can be discharged with limited authority; one believes that the lack of specific designation of duties and reapon- sibilities among the various persons administering student personnel functions works only because of the persons involved in the particular institution. INSTITUTIONAL DATA SIZE It may be that size itself will influence the role of the chief student personnel officer with different problems connected with more or fewer students. Size may affect the formality of organizational structure, facilities, and personnel available for student personnel work. These factors may influence the role of the chief student person- nel officer. The Education Directo , £253”; (35) from which the group was selected does not list a chief student personnel officer for institutions under 200. The size range of the criterion group was from 20h to 1979. Of the group com- pleting the questionnaire, the range was from 2A3 to l9h2. The mean size of the responding group was 765 and the mean size of the group that did not answer was 806. Arbitrarily “5 dividing the criterion group into four groups of 500 enrollment range, every group responding exceeded the group not responding, and all but the largest, i.e., from 1501 to 2000 exceeded the no response and acknowledged groups. These data are shown in Table 1 under representativeness of answers. Using the same 500 enrollment range grouping and comparing the institutions in the criterion group with other institutions of the same size, but not listing a chief student personnel officer, it is found that the larger institutions in the group, i.e., those with more than 1000 enrollment, listed a higher percentage of such officers. See Table 7. For the purpose of comparing the answers of the respondents, the institutions were divided into quartiles according to size. SOURCE OF CONTROL The source of control, whether church, private, or state, may influence the role of the chief student personnel officer. There may be differences in institutional purpose and.philosOphy; in training and philosophy of faculty and Staff; in source and amount of funds for personnel work; in composition of the student body. These may have an impact on the role of the chief student personnel officer. ...... ......Ju ......» ....A Q 771(\ TABLE 7 A COMPARISON OF INSTITUTIONS WITH AND WITHOUT CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS LISTED IN EDUCATION DIRECTORY, PART 3, 1959 Size Path CSPO Listed Without CSPO Listed Under 500 36 64 501-1000 51 75 1001-1500 21 20 1501-2000 J2 22 Total 118 1 8 Sourcle Control Church 73 ' 1 13 Private 26 33 State .12 .2. Total 1 18 168 Accredity Region North Central 56 78 Southern 39 61 New England 3 3 North West 6 6 Middle States 11 19 Western States __3 1 Total 1 18 763' 47 Church Related Institutions The investigator had thought that some division in the church group could be made. However, it was discovered that there were 2h church denominations represented in the criterion group and 17 denominations represented among those completing the questionnaire. .A division did not seem feasible. The 17 churches in the answering group seem to be fairly representative of the whole group. See Table 8. A tabulation of church connections of those institutions that would have been in the criterion group had they had a chief student personnel officer is in Appendix B. PrivateTInstitutions The group of private institutions seems to pose few problems. Although it is suspected that the decision by the institution to list themselves as private or church-related may be a matter of choice in some cases, the listing in the Educational Directory, 2233'; (35) was taken without ques- tion. The private institutions showed a much larger percentage of returns than did the other groups. See Table]. ‘under representativeness of answers. The private group has a higher percentage of chief student personnel officers than does the church group, but not so high as the state controlled category. There were no proprietary schools in the private group, all being of the nonuprofit type. 48 TABLE 8 A COMPARISON OF CHURCH AFFILIATION OF RESPONSES AND NON-RESPONSES IN COLLEGES SELECTED FOR STUDY Church Non-Response Methodist Lutheran Presbyterian Nazarene Baptist Southern Baptist Rbman Catholic Disciples of Christ Church of the Brethren African Methodist Episcopal Seventh Day Adventist Evangelical and Reformed Reorganized Church of Jusus Christ of Latter Day Saints Evangelical United Brethren Friends United Presbyterian Reformed Congregational Christian Mennonite Church of God Reformed Presbyterian Church of Christ United Churchs of Christ Interdenominational Total 8' Adda—deOOOO—LO d—b—Lo-bo-L—hwmumm 49 State Institutions The state as a source of control seems to be a fairly obvious division. Public control would be a more general term, but there are no municipal schools in the criterion group. There is one county controlled school in the criterion group, but a response was not received from this school. It is listed along with the state controlled schools in the no response category. See Table 1. State controlled schools have the largest percentage of chief student personnel officers in the group satisfying the other criteria, but the smallest percentage of response to the questionnaire. As most of the state institutions are in the fourth quartile by size, it is a moot question which factor is more important in determining the percentage of returns. GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION Regional customs, income, population density; state educational policies; and accrediting association policies may be factors affecting responses to the questionnaire. ‘Various alternatives were explored, and the regional accrediting area was chosen as a basis for dividing the responses. If a response came from a non-accredited insti- tution, it was placed in the area where it would be were it 4-. 50 accredited. A distribution of responses and non-responses is in Table 1, under representativeness of responses. A distribution by accrediting area of the schools satifying all other criteria but the listing of a chief student personnel officer is in Table 7. 'While the Middle States association has a somewhat smaller percentage of schools listing a chief student personnel officer, the percentage of responses from this group was the largest. Because of the relative smallness of the groups, the New England Association was included with the Middle States and the Western Association was included with the Northwestern group for purposes of comparison. GROWTH OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICE Tracing the growth of the chief student personnel office in the institutions studied presented some problems. The listing of such an office in Education Directory,'§gg£‘3 was taken as evidence of the presence of the office. Each year there were institutions entering and leaving the criterion group by changing their level of offering, type, or size. Of course, there were also new institutions in the time period under consideration. Two courses seemed to be open. Either the criterion group could be computed for each time Period, in which case they would not be strictly 51 comparable, or the 1959 group could be used and the growth within this group only could be considered. As there may be new institutions in this group with chief student personnel officers, the data may be somewhat biased upwards. The latter course, however, was chosen and each of the 268 schools having between 200 and 2000 students in 1959 and satisfying the criteria as to type and highest level of offerings was investigated at threedyear periods back to l9h7. This year as the starting point was chosen because it was the first post-war year (data being for 19h6) and because the method of reporting in Education Directogy, 235343 was relatively uniform during this period. After the 'beginning of this Study, the 1960 Directory was published; the 1960 data for this same group are included in the tabu- lation. See Table 9. In the years under consideration there was a rather uniform growth in student personnel offices, both with the title of dean of students and with other titles, until the 1953-56 period. During this period there was a marked decrease in the rate of growth of these offices. This trend was reversed in the 1956-59 period, and.seems to be continuing with the growth of the use of the dean of students title becoming more apparent. It may be 'fihat the slowing down of the rate of growth of the insti- tutions, with.en actual drop in enrollments during the middle fifties in some institutions, contributed to nt- f T n .- c —. Q I p ,—. 9 t H I a p p 52 TABLE‘9 GROWTH OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICE FOR SELECTED YEARS 1947-6O IN COLLEGES SELECTED FOR STUDY * Year Dean of Students Other Titles Total 1960 92 37 129 1959 79 39 118 1956 50 29 79 1953 43 24 67 1950 31 22 53 1947 22 1o 32 *Source: Education Directogz, Part :2, Higher Education,U.' S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education. For years 1947 through 1960. 53 slowness of the growth of the chief student personnel office during this period. CHAPTER IV AN ANALYSIS OF THE TOTAL RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS CONCERNING SPECIFIC STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS This chapter contains an analysis of the total responses to questions concerning the relationship of the chief student personnel officer to specific student personnel functions. There is also a summary of the responsible officers for specific functions and for final administrative authority under the president. Also included in this chapter is a summary of the responses to the open-ended questions concerning functions other than those selected for this study, and the specific functions in this study. TOTAL RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS CONCERNING SPECIFIC STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS The total responses to the questions concerning the relationship of the chief student personnel officer to specific student personnel functions were collected and tabulated by number and by percentage of total returns. See Tables 10 and 11. These responses can be helpful in determining the claims on the time and attention of the chief student 54 55 TABLE 10 IIIIL RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS CONCERNING RELATIONSHIP OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER TO SEEECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS Selected Student Personnel Functions fiance :0 eouwmxogaed JO uotstnxedng J0 uotqstnmdog GOWOJJOd 56 TABLE 11 PERCENTAGE RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS CONCERNING RELATIONSHIP OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER TO SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL. FUNCTIONS Selected. Studei‘t Personnel Functions Relationships (.0 o' r no d- E E'é ’1 860‘: 0”) g r-e o (o are 1: are e» 0 9+3 :9} ‘3 «'0 i? H' ' (DH 9’ fit: 0 3 3- 3° 2‘1 3% :> o 0 Hg 0 :1 o :5 o :5 or :s :r O O O O '1 o H) e p. I: o m :- xo 0\ \o 57 Appropriateness of Performance and Supervision or Direction The respondents considered their relationship to the performance and supervision of student personnel records most appropriate with orientation, housing (personnel) and personal or vocational counseling following. The only functions where this relationship was considered appropriate by less than half of the respondents were financial aids, food service, and religious life. Formulation of Polipy Orientation and student personnel records are the most frequently reported functions in which.the chief student personnel officer formulates policy. These are followed by housing (personnel) personal or vocational counseling and extra-curricular activities. The functions in which the chief student personnel officer'has the least relationship to policy formulation are official academic records, food service, and recruiting, in ascending order. Chairmanship of Policy Committee The chief student personnel officer chairs a policy committee for extra-curricular activities in more than half the cases reported. The next most frequent function is discipline with.personal and vocational counseling, housing (personnel) and student personnel records following. The functions in which the chief student personnel officer least frequently chairs a policy committee are official academic records, recruiting, religious life and food service, in order of increasing frequency. Appropriateness of Policy Relationship There is very little spread in the degree that the respondents consider their policy relationships to the various functions appropriate, i.e., from h1.H% to 52.9%. Admissions and academic counseling share the top percentage, while the part-time placement services are at the bottom of the list. Appropriateness of.Arrangement for Fingligdministrative Autho ri t1 Most of the chief student personnel officers agree that the arrangement for final administrative authority under the president in their institutions is appropriate. The spread is from 60% to 80%. Eighty per cent of the respondents believe the administrative relationship with the student personnel records is appropriate; this is followed closely by health service, housing (personnel), personal or vocational counseling. The least degree of satisfaction is expressed for the full-time placement function at 60% and the part-time off campus placement function at 61.h%. 59 personnel officer by the various student personnel functions and the responses to the questions concerning appropriate- ness can give some ideas about the nature of the relation— ships. In Chapters V, VI, the answers will be evaluated by selected variables to determine the affect of the variables, if any, on the responses. In the following sections responses are summarized by the various relation- ships selected for study. Performance The function performed by the largest number of chief student personnel officers in the study is personal or vocational counseling, with 75.7% of the respondents reporting the performance of this function. Discipline, student personnel records, and orientation follow in order of frequency. Official academic records, food service, religious life, and student recruiting are the least frequent reported in ascending order. Supergision or Direction The functions most frequently supervised or directed are extra-curricular activities, housing (personnel), personal or vocational counseling, discipline and orienta- tion, in that order. No respondent indicated that he supervised the recruiting function. Official academic records, admissions, and food service are the next least frequently supervised, in that order. 60 STAFF RELATIONSHIPS TO SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS In this section is a summary of the officers and agencies responsible for performance, direction or super— vision, and for policy determination when the chief student personnel officer is not the responsible officer. A summary is also made of the officers having final administrative authority under the president for each function. A summary of this information by function follows. Student Recruiting 21A director of admissions, admissions counselor or field representative is responsible for the performance or supervision of the recruiting function if 33 of the institu- tions in the study. A public relations director is respons- ible for this area in 12 institutions. The remainder of the institutations scatter the function among five offices. A director of admissions is responsible for policy determina- tion/in the recruiting area in 13 institutions and a public relations officer in eight schools. Provisions for policy determination are placed in seven different agencies in the remainder of the cases. A director of admissions has final authority under the president in 21 cases, followed by the public relations director in 10 schools, with the academic 61 dean, registrar, and dean of students following in that order. Orientation Performance, supervision, and policy determination is clearly dominated by the chief student personnel officer in this area. Only nine schools report the function scattered among five different offices for performance and supervision; seven schools utilize four different offices for policy determination. The dean of students is responsible for final administrative authority in L9 institutions, followed by the academic dean in nine with four more institutions reporting three other officers responsible. Admissions Admissions officers are responsible for the perform- ance and supervision of the admissions function in 36 schools, followed by the registrar in 12 cases and the academic dean in six. Policy determination is somewhat more widespread with the admissions officer responsible in 11 institutions, the academic dean in eight, the registrar in six, and other officers responsible in seven of the institutions. The academic dean takes the tOp spot as far as final administrative authority in this area is concerned in 22 institutions followed by the admissions officer in 20 cases, and the registrar, dean of students and public relations director, in that order. 62 Student Personnel Records Only eight schools report this function performed or directed by an officer other than the chief student pera sonnel officer. Seven of these report the registrar as the responsible officer. Three schools report policy in this area determined by other than the chief student personnel officer; in these institutions the responsible agency is the registrar, academic dean and the faculty. Final adminis- trative authority for student personnel records is in the hands of the dean of students in #9 institutions, the academic dean in nine and the registrar in one. Official:Academic Records Performance or supervision of this function is in the office of the registrar in H9 cases reported; the academic dean is responsible in 10 cases, and in one case it is handled by the admissions officer. Policy is determined by the registrar in 17 schools, the academic in 16 schools, followed by the admissions officer and the faculty in one case each. Final administrative authority is vested in the academic dean in 35 cases, the registrar in 17, and the remainder scattered among the dean of students, business manager, admissions officer, and an assistant to the president. Full Timeglacement The performance and supervision of this function is in 63 the hands of a placement director in lh schools, with the remainder widely scattered among ten different agencies. Policy, when not the responsibility of the chief student personnel officer, is in the hands of eight different officers and agencies in 16 schools. The dean of students is responsible for final administrative authority in 28 institutions followed by the placement director in eight cases and the academic dean in six. Seven agencies share this responsibility in ten more of the institutions reporting. Part Time Placement, On Campus When the chief student personnel officer is not responsible for the performance or supervision of this function, it is distributed among 12 different offices and agencies in 25 institutions; policy is determined by seven different agencies in 16 institutions reporting this function. Final administrative authority is in the hands of , the dean of students in 29 schools; the business manager in 12 schools; the academic dean in four and the placement office in three. Eight more schools report eight different officers as responsible in this area. Part Time Placement, Off Campus The performance and supervision of this area, when not a responsibility of the chief student personnel officer is in the hands of the placement director in seven 64 institutions. Thirteen other institutions report ten different offices and officers responsible. Policy is determined in nine different places in 11 institutions reporting in this area. Final administrative authority is exercised by the dean of students in 3h institutions, by a placement officer in five, and by the academic dean in four. Eight other schools report eight different agencies respon- sible in this area. Discipline The academic dean and the president are reported as responsible for the performance or supervision of the discipline function in two schools each; deans of men and women and a discipline committee in one school each. When the chief student personnel officer is not responsible for policy, the president is reported in four institutions, the faculty in three, the academic dean in two, and deans of men and women in one. Final administrative authority under the president is the responsibility of the dean of students in hl schools, the academic dean in seven, deans of men and women in three and a disciplinary committee in two. Testing The testing function, when not performed by the chief personnel officer, is the responsibility of a director of guidance in six cases, the academic dean in four, a director of testing in four, departments of education or psychology 65 in four, the admissions officer in two and a chairman of the lower division in one case. Policy determination is headed by the academic dean in six cases, the director of guidance in four, a director of testing and the faculty in two and the department of education or psychology in one. Final admin- istrative authority is the responsibility of the dean of students in 32 institutions, director of testing in three, department of education or psychology and director of guidance in one each. ‘ggglth Service When neither performed nor supervised by the chief student personnel officer, the health service is the respon- sibility of a nurse, doctor, or director in 1h institutions. It is the responsibility of a director of counseling, director of health.and physical education, and director of the student union in each of three other institutions. Policy for health service is determined by nurse, doctor or director of health in five schools; the academic dean, president, and faculty in two schoolsieach; a director of guidance and a director of development in one school each. Final administrative authority for health service belongs to the dean of students in no institutions. ‘A nurse, doctor, or director of health has this responsibility in eight schools; it is the responsibility of the academic dean in four schools; the business manager, deans of men and women, 66 and assistant to the president discharge this responsibility in one school each. Housing—~Personnel When the chief student personnel officer neither performs nor directs the personnel program in student, housing, this function is a province of the president in four schools; of the business manager in two; of a nurse, doctor or director of health and the deans of men and women in one each. Policy is determined by the business manager in two cases; by the president in two schools; and by the faculty in one school. Final administrative authority is the responsibility of the dean of students in an of the cases reporting. Such authority is the responsibility of the business manager in four schools; of the academic dean in two schools; of the deans of men and women in two schools; and of the assistant to the president in one instance. Hous ing-flanageri a1 Performance or supervision of the managerial aspects of student housing is the responsibility of the business manager in 30 institutions; of the treasurer in two schools; of deans of men and women, superintendent of buildings and grounds, and of the president in one school each. Policy in this area is the responsibility of the business manager in 18 schools; of the treasurer in two; and of deans of men and women, the president, and the faculty in one case each. 67 Final administrative authority is exercised in this area by the business manager in 32 institutions, and by the dean of students in 17. The treasurer and deans of men and women are responsible in two cases each, and the academic dean in one school. Personalor‘Vocational Counseling In the four cases where the chief student personnel officer does not perform or supervise this function, a director of guidance is the responsible officer. 4A director of guidance is the responsible officer for policy in four schools; the faculty in two, admissions officer and academic dean in one each. Final administrative authority is exer- cised by the dean of students in 53 institutions. The academic dean has this responsibility in four schools; deans of men and women in two, and a director of guidance in one case. Academic Counseling The academic dean is the responsible officer for performing or supervising this function in 2h schools; the registrar in one and a director of guidance in another case. Policy is determined by the academic dean in 20 cases; by the faculty in two cases, and by the registrar and director of guidance in one school each. Final administrative authority is exercised by the academic dean in 39 institu- tions; by the dean of students in 20 schools and by deans 68 of men and women in one school. Extra-curricular Activities In the cases where the chief student personnel officer neither directs nor supervises this function, it is the responsibility of the academic dean in four schools. In six other schools this function is scattered among six different officers. Policy is determined by the business manager in two cases; by the student council in two schools; by the faculty in two schools; and by the deans of men and women in one school. The dean of students is the officer with final administrative authority in 52 institutions reporting. The academic dean exercises final authority in three schools; deans of men and women in two; head of health and.physical education and assistant to the president in one each. Food Service Responsibility for the performance or supervision of food service is in the business office in 25 institutions; a dietician has this responsibility in 10 cases; a director of food service is responsible in four schools. Seven other schools report five different officers in charge of this function. Policy determination is the responsibility of the business manager in 17 institutions; director of food service in four cases; faculty in four cases. {A dietician is responsible in two schools; the treasurer in two schools, and the deans of men and women in one school. Final 69 administrative authority for this area is the responsibility of the business manager in kl institutions; the dean of students has this responsibility in nine schools; a director of food service is responsible in five schools, and the treasurer in two cases. Financial Aids Where the chief student personnel officer neither performs nor supervises this function, the business manager is responsible in 19 cases; the treasurer in four schools and the president in three schools. Five other schools report four different officers as responsible in this area. Policy is determined by the business officer in nine cases; by the academic dean in four; by the faculty in four and by the treasurer in two cases. The admissions officer, deans of men and women, and the president are responsible in one institution each, Final administrative authority for financial aids is the responsibility of the dean of students in 22 schools, and of the business manager in 20 cases. The academic dean is responsible in nine schools; the treasurer in four, and an admissions officer in two. Religious Life A director of religious life or chairman of the department of religion is responsible for performance or supervision of this function in 25 schools; a chaplain in in another 16. The pgrsident takes this responsibility in 70 two schools and deans of men and women in one case. Policy is the responsibility of the chaplain in 10 schools; of a director of religious life or chairman of department of religion in nine cases. The faculty is responsible for policy in seven schools; the president in three; and the academic dean, deans of men and women, and director of guidance in one each. Final administrative authority is the responsibility of the director of religious life or the chaplain in 27 schools; of the dean of students in 19 schools; the academic dean in four cases, and deans of men and women in one school. REMARKS CONCERNING STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS In this section is a summary of the open—ended questions in the questionnaire. These asked for any com- ments the respondent cared to make concerning other functions deemed appropriate to the chief student personnel office and functions which they were doing but considered inappropriate. There was also space on the questionnaire to expand any remarks believed necessary to clarify the relationship with the specific student personnel functions on the check list. A summary of the remarks in each of these sections follows in the order in which they appear in the questionnaire. 71 Other Functions Appropriate to the Chief Student Personnel Office Of those respondents who considered functions appropriate to the chief student personnel office in addition to those listed in the questionnaire, many listed some functions that were either obviously or by strong implication included in the 19 functions under consideration. Among the other suggestions, four took notice of their function of supervising automobile regulations and traffic; four gave convocation regulations and attendance as an appropriate function; three noted supervision of enrollment and faculty advisement; and three reported supervision of the college calendar. Two respondents reported remedial services and foreign student advisement as appropriate functions, and one suggested that student personnel research should be listed as a separate major function. Functions Inappropriate to the Chief Student Personnel Office Eleven of the respondents reported in this section that they had more work than could be done satisfactorily. Nine regarded their disciplinary function as inappropriate. Three reported that they considered the function of taking convocation attendance inappropriate. Among the other suggestions, two reported the class excuse system, auto- mobile regulation and administration, off-campus testing, 72 and teaching as inappropriate functions. Two reapondents also considered their function as registrar inappropriate in their situations. One each reported supervision of heusing, placement, health and safety, admissions, and campus tours and directory service as inapprOpriate functions assigned to their offices. Student Recruiting Six of the answering group felt that the chief student personnel officer's relationship to student recruit- ment was too limited. Four reported that the policy and philoSOphy of recruitment was an appropriate function of their offices. -Three of the respondents reported that they participated to some extent in prospective interviews and four reported that they made frequent field trips and appearances at career days programs. Two of the respondents felt that having student recruitment as a function of the academic dean's office was not preper, while one reported that he thought this is where it should be. Admissions Fourteen of the respondents making additional remarks in the area of admissions reported membership on the admissions committee. Four reported that theyadvise the admissions officer, five reported that they were consulted in problem cases only. Eight of the respondents remarked that they felt they should be implicated in the admissions 73 procedure more than they are. Student Personnel Records Five of the responding group report their student personnel records as inadequate; five believe that there should be more centralization. Two report that there is an unnecessary duplication with registrar's records; two feel that there is a necessity for keeping some of the personnel records confidential. One of the respondents believes that the division of men's and women's records is inappropriate; one doesn't know what to do about health records; one respondent does not have student personnel records readily available. Orientation Seven respondents report orientation as a committee function with the chief student personnel officer as a member of the committee. Three report that they utilize student help to some considerable degree. Three of the chief student personnel officers feel that they have too much to do to take an active part in the orientation program. Three report that their orientation program is inadequate; two feel that their programs have too much academic emphasis; two report it as a cooperative effort between the chief student personnel officer and the academic dean. 7# Full Time Placement Seven respondents report full-time placement as being inadequate; three report teacher placement by department of education and other placement by department heads. Two believe that there should be a closer relationship with the personnel office; two recommend that it should be in the hands of the alumni office. In one case the function is being moved to the personnel office; this is considered appropriate. In another case the function is being moved away from the personnel office; this is considered inappro- priate. One respondent believes that placement should be under the control of the academic dean. Part-Time Placement, On Campus Of the respondents in this area, seven believe that they should have closer contact than they now have; six are members of a campus work committee. Four advise that the function should be more centralized with supervision by the chief student personnel officer. Three report they believe the function is inappropriately in the business office; two want direct control; one has direct control, but does not think this is apprOpriate. Part Time Placement, Off Campus Seven of the respondents believe that this function is appropriately in their offices. Six report no particular interest or need; three believe the function is inadequately 75 performed at their institutions. One chief student person- nel officer desires a closer relation to this function than he now has; two believe the function to be appropriately in the business office. Discipline This area elicited the largest number of remarks. Thirty-seven of the respondents made additional comments concerning discipline. Of these, seven report that disci- pline was handled by a student-faculty committee. Five report that discipline is appropriately handled by the chief student personnel officer; five believe that this function should not be handled in the personnel office. Five respondents report the use of a student judiciary; five report that discipline is handled by a disciplinary com- mittee. Four feel that discipline is inadequately performed on their campuses; three feel that there should be more student implication in disciplinary problems. One respondent reports that discipline handled by an administrative council; another three report the use of the student affairs com- mittee. Testing Additional comments in this area include fourteen who believe that the testing is appropriately handled in the personnel office. Two report that they consider, personality and interest testing only as apprOpriate to FpIrII-I -..-II 76 their offices. Four feel that closer cooperation is needed between testing services and the personnel office; three believe testing on their campuses to be inadequate. Eight of the respondents report satisfaction with separate testing services. One chief student personnel officer reports that he does not feel competent to interpret many of the tests. gaglth Service Eight of the respondents indicate rather remote, but satisfactory, relations with the professional health service staff. Four respondents believe there should be closer cooperation with the personnel office; four recommend the use of a committee for this function; four believe it should be a direct responsibility of the chief student personnel officer; four believe their services to be inadequate. One respondent is, he believes, inappropriately responsible for this function; another reports it as a responsibility of the business office. HousinggyPersonnel Fourteen of the respondents made comments indicating agreement with this function as a responsibility of the chief student personnel officer. Three advise that in their institutions more cooperation is needed in this area. Two report that the function is in the hands of the business manager. One respondent believes he should.have more of a voice in this area. 77 Housingy-Managerial . Six respondents report that they share the respon- sibility for this function with the business manager. Five report that there needs to be more cooperation between responsible offices than there is. Two have direct respon- sibility in this area, but question the appropriateness of this arrangement; two who have direct responsibility believe it to be appropriate; two respondents believe they should have more voice in housing arrangements. Personal or Vocational Counseling The remarks of fourteen of the respondents indicate that they believe this function to be appropriately centered in the personnel office. Five report that they coordinate the efforts of the faculty in counseling; five believe the provisions on their campuses for counseling to be inadequate. Four of the respondents report that they refer counseling problems to the appropriate agency; three believe that the counseling function needs more coordination at their institutions. Academic Counseligg Ten of the respondents report that this function is the responsibility of the academic dean in their institu- tions; eight report that it is handled by the faculty; seven believe that closer c00peration among the various campus agencies is needed. Four chief student personnel officers 78 coordinate the academic counseling, while three report that they directly perform this function. One of this latter group remarks that the counseling function cannot be divided into areas. Extra-curricular Activities Fifteen of the respondents report that they accomplish this function by working with student committees of various kinds. Three report that there needs to be closer cooper- ation with the personnel office in this area. Two report that supervising this function would be too much work combined with their other duties. One chief student person- nel officer who is handling extra-curricular activities does not want to do so, believing it inappropriate to his office. In another case there is a problem where the sponsors of student groups are responsible to the academic dean, while the chief student personnel officer is responsible for the activities of the groups. Food Service Eight of the respondents report this function as the responsibility of the business manager solely; eight report that they cooperate with business management in the dis- charge of this function. Four report that they are impli- cated in food service only when there are complaints; three believe that there should be closer cooperation with.the Personnel office in this function; three believe that the 79 food service on their campuses is inadequate. Two of the respondents report that the function is handled completely by a catering company; one believes that food service should be under his control; one has charge of the student help involved in food service. Financial Aids Eight of the respondents report this area as handled by the business office solely; four report that it is handled by the chief student personnel officer. Six report that there is a need for closer cOOperation with.the personnel office in this area; six believe the provisions -for financial aids are inadequate on their campuses. Eight of the respondents are members of committees dealing with financial aids; two of these are chairmen of the committees. Three of the chief student personnel officers believe that the area is inappropriately handled by the president; one does not believe that it should be a concern of the person- nel office. Religious Life Five of the respondents report complete charge of this area. Four report that is in the hands of the chaplain; four report that it is the responsibility of the president. Six respondents indicate that they are members of committees in this area; two of these are chairmen of the committees. Four respondents believe that there should be more 80 cooperation with the personnel office in this area; one believes he should have more responsibility. Three of the respondents believe that the function is appropriately separate on church-related campuses; three of the respondents believe that the provisions for religious life at their institutions is inadequate. SUMMARY OF CHAPTER FOUR Material is presented in this chapter concerning the relationship of the chief student personnel officer to 19 student personnel functions and other administrative arrangements for these functions. I In the first section the total answers to questions concerning specific student personnel functions are considered. It was found that the functions most often performed by the respondents were personal counseling, discipline, student personnel records and orientation. Functions most often supervised are extra-curricular activities, housing (personnel), personal counseling, discipline and orientation. The respondents generally considered most appropriate their relationship to the functions to the degree that they perform or supervise the function. The chief student personnel officer formulates policy most frequently in orientation and student personnel 81 records, housing (personnel), personal counseling and extra-curricular activities. He is chairman of a policy committee most often in extra-curricular activities, discipline, personal counseling, housing (personnel) and student personnel records. .Admissions, academic counseling, and food service, areas in which generally the respondent is less concerned with policy, are the only functions in which more than half of the,respondents consider their relation- ship appropriate. Respondents generally consider the arrangement for final administrative authority appropriate. Areas in which there is more than 75% agreement are student personnel records, health service, housing (personnel) and personal counseling. The second section is concerned with the staff responsibilities for the various functions when the chief student personnel officer is not the responsible officer and the arrangements for final administrative authority under the president for each function. It was found that the admissions officer was most often responsible for the performance or supervision of recruiting and admissions; the registrar for student personnel and academic records; the the academic dean for orientation, academic counseling, and extra-curricular activities; a placement director for full- time placement and part-time, off-campus placement, the business manager for housing (managerial), food service, q- 82 part-time, on-campus placement, and financial aids; a director of guidance for testing and personal counseling; a nurse, doctor, or director of student health for health service; a director of religious life for the religious life area. When the chief student personnel officer is not responsible for policy the staff responsibilities for the various functions are very similar to those for performance and supervision except that the business manager and academic dean emerge as responsible for policy in more areas. The chief student personnel officer is responsible for final administrative authority most often in the areas of orien- tation, student personnel records, placement, discipline, testing, health service, housing (personnel), personal counseling, extra-curricular activities, and financial aids. The academic dean is the responsible officer most often in admissions, official academic records, and academic coun- seling. The business manager is most often the responsible officer in housing (managerial) and food service; the admissions officer in student recruiting, and the director of religious life in the religious life area. The third section is a summary of the open-ended questions in the questionnaire. These allowed for additional comment concerning the whole student personnel area and also concerning specific functions. Foreign student advisement, remedial services, and student personnel research are 83 listed as additional functions that might be considered. .Automobile regulations and convocation attendance are listed as being’appropriate and inappropriate by different respondents. Off-campus testing, teaching, class excuses, registrar's duties, the supervision of housing, placement, health and safety, admissions and campus tours and directory service are listed as being inappropriate to the student personnel office. In remarks concerning specific student personnel functions, the most common were the need for a closer relationship with the function, a need for more c00peration in the area, and the inadequacy of the current approach to the area in the respondent's institution. EM 7 CHAPTER V AN ANALYSIS OF THE RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS CONCERNING SPECIFIC STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY SELECTED INSTITUTIONAL FACTORS This chapter contains an analysis of the responses to questions concerning the relationship of the chief student personnel officer to specific student personnel functions grouped by institutional factors. The institutional factors considered as possibly affecting the answers are: (1) size of the institution; (2) source of control of the institu- tion; (3) geographical location of the institution. These will be considered in that order. SIZE OF THE INSTITUTION The institutions from which questionnaires were returned were arranged by size, from smallest to largest, and divided into quartiles. Because of the discreteness of the data and the number in the responding group it was impossible to get exactly the same numbers in the quartiles. Therefore, the first and fourth quartiles contain 17 cases and the second and third quartiles 18 cases. The data are expressed in percentages within the quartiles in order to 84. 85 compensate for the different size of the quartiles. The responses are considered in the order in which the relation- ship variables appear in the questionnaire. Performance The first quartile shows the largest percentage of respondents performing the orientation function. Only in the first two quartiles is official academic records a matter of concern. The first two quartiles show no chief student personnel officer implicated in food service. More respondents in the fourth quartile are concerned with the performance of the academic counseling and financial aids functions while fewer of the respondents from the larger schools perform discipline and.personal counseling functions. See Table 12. Sgpervision or Direction Admissions and extra-curricular activities functions are supervised more by respondents in the first quartile, while this quartile shows the smallest percentage of supervision of religious life. The fourth quartile shows the smallest percentage of respondents supervising the orientation, admissions, health service, housing (personnel), housing (managerial) and extra-curricular activities functions and the largest percentage supervising the testing function. See Table 13. _-_—- 86 TABLE 12 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BY QUARTILES OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS PERFORMING SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS, BY SIZE OF INSTITUTION :9 5 E Selected Student Personnel Functions (0'11 "0 *U "U 0-] 21 H'@ CD CD (1) :0 Eg NH ’1 '1 '1 d' 00 O 0 0 Ga; 00' (‘D (D (D CD CD (+0 311:3 5 5 Et- ‘liho 16"" as a: x: . a. 5.. O‘QO‘Q 09 09 0Q 0'1 0 (DO 0 0 (D O '1 a t. I: E“ r: a, g e e e s e 8? TABLE 13 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BY QUARTILES OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS SUPERVISING OR DIRECTING SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS, BY SIZE OF INSTITUTION Selected Student , Personnel Functions Supervision or Direction efiueu Eb u: 9334ueoaed qoeg so; aeqmnn afiequsoaed Iago; 88 Appropriateness of Performance and Supervision or Direction There are no discernible trends as far as appropri- ateness of performance and supervision of the functions are concerned among the smaller institutions. The respondents in the fourth quartile institutions show a higher degree of appropriateness than in the other groups for the placement functions, testing, health service, counseling (academic) and extra-curricular activities. See Table 1h. Formulation of Policy Policy formulation is least important in first quartile institutions in the areas of recruiting, the placement functions, housing (managerial) extra-curricular activities, counseling (academic) and food service. Policy formulation is most prevalent in the fourth quartile institutions in the part-time placement functions, coun- seling (academic) and financial aids functions. See Table 15. Chairmanship of Policy Committee There is only one institution in which the chief student personnel officer is chairman of a policy committee concerned with academic records; two for student recruiting and four for religious life. Aside from these, the first quartile shows a high in health service; the second quartile has a higher percentage of chief student personnel officers chairing committees concerned with orientation, discipline, In; 1‘ 89 TABLE 1h PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BY QUARTILES 0F CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE PERFORMANCE AND SUPERVISION OF STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE, BY SIZE OF INSTITUTION Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriateness of Performance and Supervision m m Hm 2..) 5 0:: 53E”: 0 CD {FUD gfilg- (D 5'? w HFU e ..., ‘3 (fig 113’ RH. on (D :5 tr: :1- m .2: a (‘D 90 TABLE 15 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BY QUARTILES OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS FORMULATING POLICY FOR SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS, BY SIZE OF INSTITUTION Selected Student Formulation of Policy Personnel Functions oL-quumn eBequeoueg Iago; eSueH ezts up efisqueouag qoea so; seqmnu 91 housing (personnel), housing (managerial), counseling (personal), counseling (academic). The fourth quartile shows a low in the areas of orientation, student personnel records, the placement functions, discipline, testing, health service, housing (personnel), housing (managerial), counseling (personal), counseling (academic), extra- curricular activities, and financial aids. See Table 16. Appropriateness of Policy Relationship There are few noticeable relationships between size and the degree to which the chief student personnel officers consider their policy determination appropriate. The first quartile is high in admissions and housing (managerial). The second quartile is below the total percentage for all groups in 15 of the 19 functions. The third quartile is low in housing (managerial). See Table 17. Appropriateness of Arrangement for Final Administrative Authoripy Size seems to have some affect on the answers to the appropriateness of the arrangement for final administrative authority. All but one function is lower for the first quartile than the percentage for the entire group. This one, counseling (personal is the same as the total per- centage. All of the functions in the fourth quartile show a higher degree of appropriateness than does the the average for the group. See Table 18. 92 TABLE 16 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BY QUARTILES OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO ARE CHAIRMEN OF A POLICY COMMITTEE FOR SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY SIZE OF INSTITUTION Selected Student Chairmanship of Policy Committees Personnel Functions uotqound qoeg so; JeqmnN go up eBsqueoued oSequeoxed Iago; 93 TABLE 17 IERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BY QUARTILES 0F CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THEIR POLICY RELATIONSHIP TO SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY SIZE OF INSTITUTION Selected 51115311“? riateness of P011 Relationshi Personnel nmctions Approp cy p 3 3 33’ EE 3 E .75 a. 2:1 :3 '1 P-H s a: .g 8;; 0:3 03 3:3 '1 5“ 5‘ s g g a e a =* 9h TABLE 18 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BY QUARTILES OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THE ARRANGEMENT FOR FINAL ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY FOR SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY SIZE OF INSTITUTION Selected Student . Personnel Functions APPrOPriateness of Final Administrative Authority H azIS QL-Jaqwnu afiequeoued Iago; efiueu ezts eaueoaeg eBue CO H? 93 u; nova so; JeqmnN 95 SOURCE OF CONTROL OF THE INSTITUTION The three sources of control chosen for consideration were: (1) church, (2) private, and (3) state. The designa- tion of each institution was taken from the way they list themselves in Education Directory, Zggfi‘l (35). The responses are tabulated by number and percentage in each group. The responses are considered in the order in which the relationship variables appear in the questionnaire. Performance Chief student personnel officers from state institu- tions in the study perform the recruiting, admissions, financial aids and religious life functions to a greater degree than in the other groups. None of the state officers performs the academic records or housing (managerial) functions. Fewer of the state officers are directly con- cerned with student personnel records, full-time placement, discipline, testing, housing, (personnel), personal and academic counseling. Respondents from the private schools perform the orientation, academic records, part-time placement, housing (personnel), housing (managerial), personal counseling, academic counseling to a greater degree than in the other groups. ~In the church group respondents perform orientation, 96 admissions, the part-time placement functions, and food service to a smaller degree than in the other groups. See Table 19. Supervision or Direction In the state institutions, chief student personnel officers are implicated to a greater degree in the super- vision of admissions, student personnel records, official academic records, full-time placement, testing, health service, housing (personnel), personal counseling, counseling (academic), and religious life. In the group of private institutions, respondents supervise to a greater degree the following functions: orientation, full-time, and part-time off-campus placement, housing (managerial), and extra-curricular activities. Chief student personnel officers in the church institutions supervise to a smaller degree than in the other groups the following functions: admissions, student personnel records, academic records, all placement functions, discipline, testing, health service, academic counseling, food service, financial aids, and religious life. See Table 20. Appropriateness of Performance and Supervision Only in two areas do the respondents from the state schools consider their relationship to performance and supervision of the functions less appropriate than do those 97 TABLE 19 NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS PERFORMING SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY SOURCE OF CONTROL OF INSTITUTION Performance Selected Student Personnel Functions wouooswmme Hoemw .‘mmwoonemmo wewdmeo wouoosdmmo memes wmucosammc orsuoulonmdon aOde zssumu u «o wflwomwo zsacow I Hm memwo zssoou I w assoc? memdoQ zsaomu u rm 98 TABLE 20 NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS SUPERVISING OR DIRECTING SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY SOURCE OF CONTROL OF INSTITUTION Selected.$tudent Personnel Functions Supervision or Direction :3 g? 33 g? 33 eg Kg @g g. .s 3‘: E (:3 s. a, fig ”” " “a 2 2% e v s A? 3 R 3 ET ‘5' ”g “3 8' 8’ n. a. StudentfiRecrui O I: O 0 39 O O 0 an on 2% g 0 60 AdmissIons 2 2 1 LL lat-J; ersonnel 6 8 Al 6 R rds 19 CEEICIRI’Acaaenic 33 7 —53 .Ak1_. Records 0 2 l *2. O gg _7 JL__ .Placenent 9 3 6 18 20 33 AD 26 PEERTTHEES-UTTFCampus "" Placement 9 3 6 18 20 33 he "26 PEERIRHEEE'OEICEmpus ‘glgcenent 9 h 6 19 20 hh hO 27 mm line 2'6 75 f) 36 All. 61 5; § n r 7 2 o 89 n Service 26' I +_Z§_a _JNl—. Elfin-sonnel) T”? 7 3 59 30118 El 2 22 L9 22__ JPers or'thatiogEl 4‘ b 20 26 Cfinpelmfl‘ 2’4 9 6 39 52 100 1.1.0 56 Calms c 12 h h 20 26 n 27 29 cular Activities 3; h 13 AA 59 Ah 8? 63 cc 1; 22, :5 fiiancIanda 8 ;-'g' a; "if: i 3 ans 0 10 E 12 22 L56 27 21 7 99 in the other groups; these are food service and financial aids where they are only slightly lower than the private group. The respondents in the church group consider their relation to the performance and supervision of the various functions less appropriate than do the other groups in all areas except student personnel records and personal counseling in which areas they are only slightly ahead of the private group. The respondents in the private group are generally between the other groups, being tied with the state respondents in recruiting, academic records and testing, and slightly ahead of the other groups in food service and financial aids. See Table 21.7 Formulation of Policy The chief student personnel officers in the state group are implicated to a lesser degree than those of the other groups in the formulation of policy in only four areas: part-time off-campus placement, housing (personnel), housing (managerial), and orientation. The respondents in the private groups are implicated in policy formulation to a slightly greater degree in orientation, part-time off-campus placement, housing (managerial), and to a smaller degree in recruiting, health service, extra-curricular activities, financial aids and religious life. 100 TABLE 21 NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE PERFORMANCE AND SUPERVISION OF SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BI SOURCE OF CONTROL OF INSTITUTION Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriateness of Performance and Supervision o m 2:? e a we on re gyro an: 5: Eg g; E: 2'3 g: 53 33 a e a .1 g a as g 3.3 g Ii? I I I gang. g g g as! \o 5-" 3 E'G Q o 0 § 8’ Do Student Becrui a9 ;§ 5% 52 ‘ 53 Adi? 1 on 20 “—234 £3 75’ as one 1 SW Personnel 9 J 1 O 9 Records 35 11 5h 16 82 73 17 c c R 0rd: 20 10 6 m 36 M 7 67 5L Placement 23 9 39 50 78 6O 56- P , alpue Placaent 19 10 36 ill 78 67 Jjb Placulent, 21 10 38 146 18 61 2; 15.0. Si 10 fi 78 67 67 67 :9 57 78 so so 63 7d 71 67 1.56 m :2 1:6 65 78 6o 66 37 he 6L 60 53 fiiaci line 55" fie“ 75 H ce é?- Houa ’5ersonnel 7 29 nous f . I 27;— Per or ocational— W 30 arms » ~o alt)» t3 Activities 211 g_2_ J2 89 67 Wayne I8— 32 1i.— 6 fiancia—I Aida 17" 1 "1%“ :g: one e 21 M 3 mum a «1 Mm ~ ~ o~ a» «4» 101 The chief student personnel officers in the church group are concerned with policy formulation to a smaller degree than in the other groups in the areas of orientation, academic records, the part-time placement functions, testing, personal counseling, academic counseling, and food service. Only in housing (personnel) is this relationship slightly greater than in the other groups. See Table 22. Chairmanship of a Policy Committee No respondents in the state group are chairmen of policy committees concerned with academic records, full-time placement, onucampus placement, housing (personnel), housing (managerial) and religious life. A higher percentage of state officers are chairmen of committees in recruiting, counseling (personal), counseling (academic) and food service. The private group has no chief student personnel officers who are chairmen of committees concerned with recruiting, academic records, food service, and religious life. There is a higher percentage of the officers in private schools who are chairmen of policy committees in the following areas: orientation, the placement functions, discipline, testing, health service, housing (personnel), housing (managerial), extra-curricular activities, and financial aids. None of the respondents in the church groups were 102 TABLE 22 NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS FORMULATING POLICY FOR SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY SOURCE OF CONTROL OF INSTITUTION Formulation of Policy Selected Student wouoosémmo aoamH wouooswmmo mawqwdo wouoobdmmo mamdo wannabemmo owcwornwowwaoa aowwH zeanu I <0 wwwdmdo zsauou I Hm m¢m¢e zcadou I w orbmor memeom assume I to P54 103 chairmen of policy committees concerned with recruiting or food service. One respondent from the church group is chairman of committee concerned with academic records and four with religious life committees; these are the only ones in these areas in the entire group. See Table 23. Appropriateness of Policy Relationship The respondents in the church group consider their relationship to policy formulation less appropriate than do those in the other groups in 17 of the 19 functions. They are tied in percentage representation with the state group in student recruiting and only slightly higher than the state group in the religious life function. The respondents in the state group consider their policy relationship most appropriate in 10 functions and in the private group in six functions. State and private groups are tied for high in three functiOns. See Table 2h. Appropriateness of Arrangement for FinglAdministrative Authority There are no discernible trends in the degree to which the respondents consider the final administrative authority appropriate in their institutions when they are compared by source of control. See Table 25. 101+ TABLE 23 NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO ARE CHAIRMEN OF A POLICY COMMITTEE FOR SELECTED STUDE‘IT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY SOURCE OF CONTROL OF INSTITUTION Chairmanship of Policy Committee 9 m a? a “2 g? 3? 2? 3' O 5% E: 35 is 52 :2 ag ag '1 D' '3 '1 8' '1 5‘: l3 8’ - 2 - - - 5:}: £ if .E E? W G 3 5° ' ’ ° ’5. 2' Student Recrui Q 2 0 0 22 eff on 2% g "iii" 33 :52; W 8 one t awmd, EL_AL_$L 13,lL a an n 2 1 % ficfii Academic ' 5 #L—‘J 33 27 Rama 1 o o 1 2 o o L. Placement 3 0 S 8 ’7 O 33 P , alpus fluent 6 o h m n o ig_ g Part , s fluent 6 1 3 m B u m em 11.. 3 £¥¥W‘% gggg 7 1.:j? ] _JL!1E“ Han l5 ce e1) i; ‘6‘ 26" 26 26 33 2 s ( ersonn ms efid7 ‘%}_TT_§E_;7 c) gL—EN' Per or ocational Counsel 6 mfififigL IL .5 2 217 hh 2L_JL_ _j 2 3 m u a m u 1 8 5h 33 67 5h muuu 2 g m 3 Wee E— O 6 2g 0 9 Financial Aids ,9 2 18 u7’ 26 a one u e T o u T—Tt—rv-s— 105 TABLE 2h NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THEIR POLICY RELATIONSHIP TO SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY COURCE OF CONTROL OF INSTITUTION Selected Student Appropriateness of Policy Relationship 94918 afleAIJd 04819 asequeozea OQRATJd afiequeoaea Igfioi efisqueosea 9W x JeqmnN P919198 nomuo 6 . Jeqmnm SI . zeqmnn 0L - Jaqwnn IVQOI Palelefi'QOano eBequeoaeg 106 TABLE 25 NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THE ARRANGEMENT FOR FINAL ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY FOR SELEIITED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY SOURCE OF CONTROL OF INSTITUTION 20 m a om mm m em a: is $3 §° g2 7% 35 ga . o . s a E s . a g . H :r H u g- r: a: 3 s g s I {1’ I I I g7 (g. 0%. g, £ 5% \o G" a) r O O 03 0 g 8* 9. Student Becrui 31 7 10 RB 67 78 6 6 m—r-Ea—‘fl—‘m on 7 Thu—Ti Admissions 7 SI 72 73 3 en ersonnel Records 38 7 11 56 83 78 73 80 6221ch Acadulic Records 32 7 13 52 70 78 87 7h Placement 25 7 10 M St 78 67 60 P , anus Placement 26 7 10 10 57 78 67 61 P , alpus glacanent $2,“ 7 12 116 59 78 80 66 Disci line 15 1 78 71 % 2.134;. i7 78 £57; '11 «vice gg_ 11 80 78 71 “IL Hons {Pi-Emil 11 £8 73 77 3"“ aria-U 31' I _L_1L_6.Q__61_ Per or ocEtionaI Counselig 35 7 12 Sh 76 78 80 77 Ac c Canada}; 33 7 10 50 72 78 67 1; 1m 35 6 11 52 76 67 1; 1;. Activities r ce 2 7 11 O 1Q 73 71 Financial Aids 6 11 6:7 11 67 R ous e 41 L _§7 j3 69 107 GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION OF THE INSTITUTION The data was tabulated according to regional accred- iting agencies. Where an institution was not a member of the regional association it was placed in the region in which it would be were it a member. There were but six of these nonaccredited institutions, three in the North Central association, two in the Middle States association, and one in the Southern association. There was only one reporting institution from the New England association; this is included, for the purposes of comparison with the Middle States. There was only one reporting institution from the Western association; this is included with the North Western group. The answers to the questions are tabulated by number and percentage in each group, in the order in which they appear in the questionnaire. Performance The Southern group is the only one showing any respondents performing the official academic records and food service functions. The Southern association is high in part-time, on-campus placement and food service and low in religious life. The North Central colleges show high percentages relative to the other groups in the performance by respondents of the student personnel records, personal counseling, and financial aids functions and low in health 108 service. The New England and Middle States groups report no chief student personnel officer performing the student recruiting and admissions functions and high percentages performing the housing (managerial), academic counseling, extra-curricular activities, and religious life functions. The North West and western associations show no respondents performing the part-time, on-campus placement and housing (managerial) functions, and high.percentages performing the orientation, discipline and testing functions. See Table 26. Supervision or Direction None of the groups shows any respondent supervising the recruiting function. The North Central group has no chief student personnel officer supervising official academic records and is low relative to the other groups in the full- time placement, part-time, off-campus placement, and discipline functions. The North Central group is high in the percentage of respondents supervising the health service and extra-curricular activities functions. The Southern association has the highest percentage of respondents supervising the orientation, part-time on-campus placement and financial aids functions and the lowest percentage in 'the testing area. The New England and.Midd1e States groups show no respondents supervising the admissions and housing (managerial) functions and low percentages in health service, housing (personnel), personal counseling, academic 109 TABLE 26 BY REGION OF INSTITUTION PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS PERFORMING SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS Performance Selected Student Personnel Functions wceoosammo aoemH z I we send recesses 6 2m: mumwmsa :HamHo mecacm z I mceoosemmo wondrous 2 I ma mouoosemmo zone: museumw z I wo 110 counseling, food service and financial aids. High percent- ages for this group are in part-time, off-campus placement and religious life. The North West and Western groups show high percentages of respondents supervising the admissions, student personnel records, official academic records, placement (full-time), discipline, health service, housing (personnel), housing (managerial), personal counseling functions and lowest in extra-curricular activities and religious life. See Table 27. Appropriateness of Performance and Supervision or Direction Although there is little difference percentagewise in the extent to which the respondents consider their perform- ance and supervision appropriate, there is a definite trend between groups. The New England and Middle States group is high in the degree of appropriateness in all functions except discipline and housing (managerial). In these two areas the highest percentage is in the North West and western group. The low areas are scattered with eight functions in the North Central group, six in the Southern association and three in the North West and‘Hestern group. See Table 28. Formulation of Policy A higher percentage of the respondents from institu- tions in the New'England and.Middle States associations formulate policy in 13 of the 19 functions. The percentage 111 TABLE 27 PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS SUPERVISING OR DIRECTING SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY REGION OF INSTITUTION Selected Student Supervision or Direction Personnel Functions e s 2: :7 g s we = :7 5-1- 3 ‘3 3 $133 ' 5’3 ' 3 7 ° §g . gs “1 g 3 g 7% a s s ig g 2!? (g ZHNE mes ‘§ ' z ' E2 “’5 33 s .2, ”a: a g as 0 Student Recruit o g o o o Orientation RT 52 554—51 Admissions T’£%‘-2'5'—FT Stufit Personnel 5 5 )4 Records 2 3 100 7 finial Acadaiic 2 Records 0 l, 11 20 h misc Placement 17 g; M; 60 26 m Placement 20 23 M; 140 26 Part E, 55 Camus 5 Place-lent 23 3 22 20 2 Disci The 37—17? 55 gas—*3; Test 17 31 an 60 1:1 $1” WT TUE—E nous (Personnel) 60 6§_ 80 g; s erfalf TT ‘56— Personal or ocational Raw 57 5h 33 100 56 c Counseling 33 31 11 20 29 -currfculsr Activities 70 62 £6 ho 63 .1 ‘33 3.9... Ail—LO ..lE PinancTal Aids Li H O .19 We 21 27 33 20 J7 112 TABLE 28 PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE PERFORMANCE AND SUPERVISION OF SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY REBION 0F INSTITUTION Selected Student Appropriateness of Performance and Supervision Personnel Functions 0 u: :21 22° ‘3 £1 8 ‘3 go? g a? 2: E 5:8 s :3 3H 8 ' g s g m :3 co :3 m g :s :3 o :3 paw g d’ o. d- (1' cc- 7» n: m m m (D (I 0 (D (D I 2: I E . z a 7—3 on ' o. m e o O m 95 ‘1 2‘4 d O\ c f5 8‘ 113 in the North Central group is slightly higher in student recruiting and student personnel records and in the North West and Western associations in admissions, official academic records, discipline, and housing (personnel). The respondents from the Southern association report the formu- lation of policy a smaller percentage of the time in ll functions with lows in the others scattered among the other three groups. See Table 29. Chairmanship of Policy Committee There is a higher percentage of the respondents in the North West and Western groups who act as chairmen of policy committees for 10 of the 19 functions. The respondp ents in the North Central group report the highest percentage in admissions, student personnel records, official academic records, part-time, off-campus placement, housing (mana- gerial) and extra-curricular activities. The Southern association has the high.percentage in part-time, on-campus placement and financial aids; the New England and Middle States group is high in religious life. See Table 30. Appropriateness of Policy Relationship The respondents in the New England and Middle States group consider their policy relationship more apprOpriate relative to the other groups in In of the 19 functions, and have the same percentage as North Central in admissions. North Central is high in student recruiting; the North West 111+ TABLE 29 PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS FORMUIATIM} POLICY FOR SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY REGION OF INSTITUTION Selected amt Formulation of Policy Personnel Functions 0 o 3 8‘39 3 ”“2? fit? :5 r: c: h: H IZ"! H d’O (+0 0 00 I 0 vs m :0 c we (I Mr S3 :2 s; a; 20% 0% 22°C“ 00‘: 0Q . (D 260 I 0 :30 (D 2 2: a U) I m (D O o N a: a d‘ ON t’ 115 TABLE 30 PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO ARE CHAIRMEN OF A POLICY COMMITTEE FOR SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY REBION 0F INSTITUTION Selected 8111th . Personnel Functions Chairmanship 0f Policy Committees Ow (mo mgvo 22° zru 0w 00 CF (‘0 m 33 :13 “51°53 ' '3 Hd’ are we «a: fig (‘05 mg: 0:3 m 3% if 6* 0° 00 22°01: (N 20 o w 0 2 IE I I on? g a: 7+ 3 a E? r: O O 116 and Western associations are high in part-time, on-campus placement, housing (personnel) and housing (managerial). The Southern association respondents consider their policy relationships least appropriate in all but the student recruiting and religious life functions. See Table 31. Appropriateness of Arrangement for Final Administrative Authority There appears to be only a very slight relationship between the region from which the respondents report and their judgement as to the appropriateness of the arrangement for final administrative authority. The respondents from the North Central group report high percentages in eight functions, the New England and.Middle States group in seven functions. Most of the low percentages are in the Southern and North West and Western groups. See Table 32. SUMMARY OF CHAPTER FIVE The institutional factors of size, geographical location and source of control of the colleges from which responses were obtained are considered in this chapter. In the first section responses to the questions concerning specific student personnel functions are analyzed according to size of the institution. There are no discern- ible relationships between size and performance, supervision, 117 TABLE 31 PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THEIR POLICY RELATIONSHIP TO SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY REGION OF INSTITUTION Selected mt Personnel mum Appropriateness of Policy Relationship g9; 22 a: .g are st; 5.: lg fig (35 m 05 e: 3E z 5’ 20 co as 2 I I2 *3 O I \o O 82- w <" :1‘ Ox [2. 53 ’46 ML h9 UL O U'l U) 5 LT‘ Q r ‘1 118 TABLE 32 PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THE ARRANGEMENT FOR FINAL ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY FOR SELECT- STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY REIGN OF INSTITUTION Appropriateness of Final Administrative Authority are on ru 02 re more 2 re as 2:: $55; .2: .a ct 0 d' 0 g I-' 0 m0 8 Q 8 E3 5' g m E. u 3:: o a s 5 s s gs: g a? :03 ”2'03 3% o ' . LE= s s ‘5’ a E: 3" ’5 Mt Recrui 62 8 o 59 Equation 4%? ' '13" "3‘9 + o Admissions W 66 F9 99 73 Mama: Records - 83 77 78 80 80 6551.1 We Records 83 62 78 80 7h Placement 70 50 56 6O 6O , mus Placmt 6? 5h 67 60 61 1M Placement, 7o 50 56 so 66 mi line if 65 7 so 73 flag I F __Q9 80 73 ‘39 U3 “'7 18 fig 79 Mlfimelf do 81 67 1,9 17 Hone ‘ 19.1) 73 §2 51 5} Personal or Vocationfl Counsel 77 81‘ 67 80 j} c Conn: 73 69 89 ’40 71 Extra-curricular Activities 17 77 78 ho 7h Food Service 72 69 __§9 71 financial Aids :1 6g __® 5:; an! e TL g 69 119 apprOpriateness of performance and supervision, formulation of policy and appropriateness of the policy relationship. Respondents from larger institutions are chairmen of policy committees in fewer functions than the other groups. Most of the respondents in the fourth quartile (lOlS-lQhZ students) believe their arrangements for final administrative authority are appropriate. Respondents in the first quartile show corresponding lows in the degree to which they believe this arrangement is appropriate in most areas. The second section of this chapter contains the responses to questions considered by source of control of the institution. A smaller percentage of the respondents from the church-related colleges are concerned with the performance and supervision of student personnel functions than in the other two groups. The respondents in the private group perform slightly more functions, the respondent; in the state group are slightly ahead in the percentage of functions supervised. The respondents in the state group show high in nearly all of the areas in the degree to which they consider their relationship to the performance and supervision of student personnel functions appropriate. The respondents in the church group are generally low in the degree to thich they consider their relationship to the performance and supervision of personnel functions apprOpriate. Respondents from state institutions formulate 120 policy in a higher percentage of cases than do those from the other groups. Respondents from the church group are low in the percentage of formulation of policy. Respondents from the group of private colleges show generally a higher percentage of chairmanship of policy committees; the state group is second and the church group is low. Respondents from the church group consider their relationship to policy less appropriate than do those in the other groups in most cases. When considered by source of control, there is little difference in the extent to which reSpondents consider appropriate arrangements for final administrative authority in their institutions. The third section of this chapter contains the responses to questions considered by geographical region. There seems to be little relationship between region and the performance or supervision of specific functions. Hewever, the respondents from the Middle States and New England group are higher in 17 of the 19 areas in the extent to which they consider their relationship to performance and supervision appr0priate. The respondents from the Middle States and New England associations are high in formulation of policy in most areas; the respondents from the Southern association are low. The Northwest, Western and North Central groups account for high percentages in the chair- manship of policy committees in 16 of the 19 groups. The 121 New England and.Middle States group is high in number of functions where the policy relationship is considered apprOpriate; the Southern group is low. There seems to be little relationship between region and the degree to which the arrangement for final administrative authority is considered appropriate. CHAPTER VI AN ANALYSIS OF THE RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS CONCERNING SPECIFIC STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY SELECTED PERSONAL FACTORS This chapter contains an analysis of the responses to questions concerning the relationship of the chief student personnel officer to specific student personnel functions grouped by selected personal factors. The personal factors considered are: (1) age of the chief student personnel officer; (2) sex of the chief student personnel officer; (3) marital status of the chief student personnel officer; (A) the amount of graduate student personnel work of the chief student personnel officer; (5) the percentage of time the chief student personnel officer devotes to student personnel work; (6) the title of the chief student personnel officer. These will be considered in the order given above. A summary of these data is in Chapter Three. AGE OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER The age range for the respondents was from 28 to on years. There were 69 of the 70 respondents who reported their ages. These were divided into quartiles as nearly as 122 123 possible, and the data reported in percentages within quartiles to compensate for the slightly different size of the quartiles. The responses are considered in the order in which the relationship variables appear in the questionnaire. Performance In testing (71%) and in personal counseling (100%) the first quartile, i.e., the youngest group performs the function to a noticeable higher degree than the other groups. See Table 33. Otherwise, age of the respondent and the extent of performance show little relationship. Supervision or Direction Supervision of the specific student personnel functios seems to have some relationship to age. No respondent supervises the recruiting function. Of the 18 remaining 12 are supervised by a higher percentage of respondents in the third and fourth quartiles. In the other six functions a higher percentage is reported for three in the first quartile. See Table 3A. Appropriateness of Performance and Supervision or Direction A higher percentage of the respondents in the second quartile (37-A1 age group) consider their relationship to the performance and supervision of the specific personnel functions appropriate in 16 of the 19 areas. The first quartile is high in this respect in the orientation and PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BY QUARTILES 0F CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL 1214 TABLE 33 OFFICERS PERFORMING SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY AGE Selected Student Performance Personnel Functions R {.9 E 3 E "' a? "’ *9 "’ t" 5,: :2: 5;: 3% E3 55 0) '4 I" 13 fl '1 55 5:5 55 r5 :5 :5 B S 8 1?— ‘° 8 Student Recruit 12 11 o 2 $3M ’5‘ grgr‘grji-ii Meme]. “—L—Lfl'lu—R Records 77 39 53 77 61 1&2 CHEM Aceduic Records 2 O O 12 O 3 Placement 19 2h 39 2h 2h 19 Placement, 35 M .214 h? 38 26 P : Placaent 29 his 13 53 36 25 51321 use 6 "‘3'?— 77 ML gain fez—2 42- 1%; 55 nous 'PersonnelT +3 50 3% 1E; Eons erialT g___ g R 19 Pets or Vocational Counsel loo 72 65 65 75.. sa% “1 39 “1 18 221—42 Activiti 59 29 59 55 1 sea—333;» 1; o 4.1. 2L? "L PIE-Eda Aids 22 2g 33 35 22 one to 7 12 6 :2 12 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BI QUARTILES OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL 125 TABLE 314 OFFICERS SUPERVISING OR DIRECTING SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY AGE Selected Student Personnel Functions Supervision or Direction i3; 3.33 1:53 33 :3 31?: sq: in: a: in: .5 fig Os 13 B 8 9— ‘° 8 StudentflRecruit O O 0 O 0 0 Adlgzsiongn 6§;"JgL 5* ‘3 3E: 33 ersonnel ja"""1L‘J£L1t'JgL *5 Records A? AA 65 29 A6 32 o'fliciai Academic o 6 12 0 h 3 Records Placenmt 18 22 hl 2h 26 18 Placement, I 12 33 35 2h 26 18 P . ms Pfilacasent 13 33 29 18 25 17 1 line ce 3 ”Personnel)’ 2 "1E%‘::é%;: :3 ::§§%E JPersonal or vocational A? 2: it“ 59 1 55 --:: Counsel 12mg: Camsechng 2h 33 29 29 29 20 -curr1ciIsr Activities 77 50 71 53 62 A3 Financial 3a. 1‘2ng #ifilifl °‘“ ' ii 3 .11 “ aw. v17: 126 housing (personnel) functions and the fourth quartile high in student personnel records. See Table 35. Formulation of Policy The respondents in the second and third quartiles (37-h8 age group) report high percentages for the formu- lation of policy in 16 of the 19 functions. The first quartile is high in orientation and housing (personnel); the fourth quartile is high in student personnel records. See Table 36. Chairmanship of Policngommittee Most of the areas show respondents in the third quartile reporting high percentages as chairman of policy committees, 13 of the 19 functions. In orientation the same percentage (53%) is reported for the first and third quartiles. Only two respondents report themselves as chairmen of committees concerned with student recruiting; these are in the second and fourth quartiles. One respon- dent is chairman of a committee concerned with official academic records, he is in the second quartile. Righ percentages relative to the other groups are in the second quartile for admissions, part-time, on-campus placement and housing (managerial). See Table 37. Appropriateness of Policy Relationship The respondents in the third quartile (NZ-AB age group) consider their relationship to policy appropriate to 127 TABLE 35 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BI QUARTILES OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE PEREORHANCE AND DIRECTION OR SUPERVISION OF SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY AGE Selected Student Per e1 tions Appropriateness of Performance and Supervision E "’ E 6? a? E T 8’ I." '” 2% a? a a? fig {33 on «a H s a: a is a 2% is: e s e 9 ‘° § Student Recruiting h? 72 111 h? 52 36 SSW” “L4 SEE Li‘— 3° D Mama 1‘7 ii r“ Records 77 83 65 88 78 Sh meal Academic Records ’47 61 53 h? 52 35 Placement 35 72 53 65 57 39 pmmt’ I as 61 5; 59 a» 3i gaining; hi“ ___§g_ 53 59 55 as sc sized 66? 54—13: 4% d; R th _ ce ‘59 72 s P cl) 8! g; 3 ”302ml; 65—4 ‘7: E g; can; on 1 65 83 59 59 67 h6 Ac c (Sounseluig‘;~ 53 51 h? 53 5h 37 Extra- Activities 71 72 53 h? 61 1:2 Food_8mi 1,; ...—g 1&1 2:08 0 Aid—2% ...—-... ’ TABLE36 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BI QUARTILES OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS FORMULATING POLICY FOR SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BI AGE Selectedstudent 1 Per cl Funct ions Formulation 0 Policy :3 er e: er a3 g; 1253223 ’5 :15 EE we gas 7'” $5 H5 :1 gr: Kg 53 es as '5: H. on coon iron own no 0 (II (I! 0 \003 SH 8 8 8 9 8 6 28 18 12 16 ll I. H1. naps. 129 TABLE 37 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BY QUARTILES OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO ARE CHAIRMEN OF A POLICY COMMITTEE FOR SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BI AGE Selected Student hi f Personnel Functions chairman” P ° P°11°Y Comttees “”0 b'd 'u *6 are as as 9: “39; H: mg as 58 813 fig 93 Pg .3 g; as up 5' to» m CNN cu coon iron Ian 0 0 0 a 0‘0 8 8 8 £3“ 130 a greater degree than the other age groups in all but two functions. In part-time, off-campus placement they are only they are only slightly lower than the second quartile. The same percentage of respondents consider their relationship to policy apprOpriate in the third and fourth quartiles for the housing (managerial) function. See Table 38. Appropriateness of Arrangement for Final Administrative Authority In 11 of the 19 functions a higher percentage of the respondents in the second quartile consider the arrangement for final administrative appropriate than in the other groups. Of the other functions, official academic records, discipline, and extra-curricular activities are high in the first quartile and student personnel records, academic counseling, and food service are high in the third quartile. The same percentage shows high in the third and fourth quartiles in the testing and financial aids areas. See Table 39. SEX OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER Sixty four of the responding chief student personnel officers were men and six were women. Because of the small female sample, the data will be somewhat inconclusive. Some tendencies may be noticed, however. The distribution of the 131 TABLE 38 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BI QUARTILES OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THEIR POLICY RELATIONSHIP TO SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY AGE Appropriateness of Policy Relationship Selected Student Personnel Functions 5'88??? 0%??? 833’ 3’2 :15 g as: m °§ '1 Ta 1% 3% 2% EH 503 0°"; “a: ”a :12 8; 8' 8 8 E’— e E; TABLE 39 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BI QUARTILES OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THE ARRANGEMENT FOR FINAL AMNISTRATIVE AUTHORITY APPROPRIATE BY AGE SelectedStudent . P at :1 1" ti . Appropriateness of Final Administrative Authority >ru :x>*o awe >*u were m2 (mm ORG) UQCD OQCD 00 NF: 0*: mks or: (Dr: d3 05 m8 C8 e8 mg Pia. 5% 00:: x): N: e: s we '8? 1:3 '3 '5? '1?” 5’ 8m -aq 5m Em at 35" (D (D (D (D O'\0 ("hi 0 o \o '6“ —‘ g k.) g :5 133 answers is eXpressed in both numbers and percentages, in the order in which the relationship variables appear in the questionnaire. Performance The male respondents report a higher percentage of performance than do the women in 16 of the 19 functions. Five of the six women (83%) perform the orientation and student personnel functions, and the percentage of women performing the health service functions is slightly higher than that for men. aneof’the women performs the student recruiting, admissions, official academic records, placement (full-time), housing (managerial), food service, and religious life functions. See Table NO. Supervision or Direction None of the chief student personnel officers super- vises the student recruiting function. Women lead in the percentage who supervise the part-time placement functions, housing (managerial), extra-curricular activities, food service, financial aids, and religious life. No women are involved in the supervision of the admissions or official academic records areas. See Table hl. Appropriateness of Performance and Supervision or Direction Women respondents are generally equal to or exceed men in the degree to which they believe their relationship to the performance and supervision of Specific student TABLE (+0 NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDDIT PERSDNNEL OFFICERS PERFORMING SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY SEX Selected Student Personnel Functions Performance 3"“ '11 um: [31.9 (0 mm mg 5 5g cum )3: E's ‘3 CD as ZR 0, md ‘” SD "08 208 0\ ll 4: O\ 135 TABLEhl NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS SUPERVISING OR DIRmTIM} SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY SEX Selected Student Personnel Functions Performance or Direction 3 z *o u: ~21 ~o E- E4 3 s 3 (D (D O E4 O U: (n g (D (D g 2 g m m d- . a; 23:: c3; u o 0\ 136 personnel functions is appropriate. Marked exceptions are in the testing, personal counseling, and extra-curricular activities functions where the percentage of men believing this relationship apprOpriate is noticeably higher. See Table AZ. Formulation of Policy Women are generally below men in the percentage of formulation of policy for the selected student personnel functions. In many of the areas there are only slight differences. No female respondent is responsible for the formulation of policy in the areas of student recruiting, official academic records, housing (managerial), academic counseling, and financial aids. These are small areas for the group as a whole, therefore the lack of women in these areas may be due to chance because of the smallness of the women's sample. See Table RB. Chairmanship of Policy Committee In the areas where both men and women are chairmen of policry committees concerned with wpecific student personnel functions, the women lead, percentagewise in five functions and the men in four. However, and again probably due to the smallness of the sample, there are ten areas in which no woman chairs a policy committee. See Table RR. Anngpppiateness of Policy Relationship Female respondents consider their relationship to 137 TABLE 142 NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE PERFORMANCE AND DIRECTION OR SUPERVISION OF SELECTED STUDENT PERSJNNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY SEX Selected Student Appropriateness of Performance and supervision N sepameg efiaquezued .179 = N 891:8“ afieiueoied 9 TABLE 43 NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS FORMULATING POLICY FOR SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL. FUNCTIONS BY SEX Selected Student Formulation of Policy Personnel Functions '11 ’11 ’11") m a (DO) ’1 '1 CD (DO El E0 to (fig g o (D 26' 0) ud- W m "a; 20:; (D 0‘ ll .1: O\ 139 TABLE u NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO ARE CHAIRMEN OF A POLICY COMMITTEE FOR SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY SEX Selected Shlden't Chairmanship of Policy Committees 1N0 policy formulation apprOpriate as much or more than do the men in all areas but part-time, on-campus placement, testing, and health service. See Table RS. Appropriateness of Arrangement for Final Administrative Authority Four of the six female respondents consider the arrangement for final administrative authority appropriate in their institutions in all but four functions. In these fifteen areas, the percentage of agreement is comparable to that of the male respondents. Only two of the women consider the administrative arrangement in orientation appropriate, and one half of the women consider the adminis- trative arrangement appr0priate in the part-time, on-campus placement, testing, and religious life functions. In these areas they are substantially below the male respondents. See Table R6. MARITAL STATUS OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER Fifty-nine of the responding chief student personnel officers are married, eleven are single. Because of the disparity of numbers in the categories, some of the data may be open to some question. There are some noticeable relationships, however. The distribution is eXpressed both in numbers and percentages, in the order in which the 141 TABLE 1:5 NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THEIR POLICY RELATIONSHIP TO SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY SEX Selected Student Appropriateness of Policy Relationship H d N setewe eSEiUQOJe fig = N setew afieluesaed 9: 11+2 TABLE 46 NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHEF STUDENT PERSDNNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THE ARRANGEMHJT FOR FINAL ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY APPROPRIATE BY SEX Selected Student . . . . ro riatene f F nal Adulnistrat ve A th t Personnel Functions App p SS 0 1 l u on y a E: g; :31 a? '1 a 2: 8 :3 M :3 co m :3 2 C“ (n m d- su su II on 20a ox“) II (D i: O\ 143 relationship variables appear in the questionnaire. Performance The percentage of married respondents who perform the selected student personnel functions equals or exceeds that of the single respondents in all but two functions. Only slightly higher percentages are reported by the single reapondents in the student personnel records and housing (managerial) functions. No single respondent performs the functions in the areas of student recruiting, official academic records, food service, and religious life. These are generally low categories for the entire group; the absence of single respondents may occur by chance. See Table #7. Supervision or Direction No chief student personnel officer in the study supervises the recruiting function. In the remaining areas, the single respondents lead in percentage of func- tions supervised in full-time placement, discipline, health service, housing (managerial), and religious life. See Table hB. Appropriateness of Performance and §gpervision or Direction The married respondents consider their relationship to the performance and supervision of individual student personnel functions appropriate to a higher degree than the single respondents in 15 of the 19 areas. The single 144 TABLE 1+? NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PMNNEL OFFICERS PERFORMING SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY MARITAL STATUS Selectedsmdmt 31ervision Personnelnmctions p 3 "-fI-u m (art; a: 89; '4' “a '1 ’10 g 630 P- H-(D l—' Hm a as. m “’3 lb 2;» 20!: IIOQ ICD l-‘(D \n H \O 1LI-5 TABLE ’48 NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS SUPERVISING OR DIRECTING SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY MARITAL STATUS Selected Student Personnel Functions Supervision or Direction 3 ”‘ a S? 9: a: 3 fi 3 s s 3 "" P' <0 H l—' m (D (D D (D 0 5 Q- 0: d' z s- m g: \0 1h6 respondents are only slightly higher in official academic records, full-time placement, part-time, on-campus placement, and housing (managerial). See Table M9. Formulation of Policy Single chief student personnel officers report a higher percentage who formulate policy in six of the 19 areas. These are student recruiting, health service, housing (managerial), extra-curricular activities, food service, and financial aids. See Table 50. Chairmanship of Policy Committee In seven of the 19 areas single respondents report a higher percentage who are chairmen of policy committees. These are admissions, discipline, health service, housing (personnel), housing (managerial), extra-curricular activities, and religious life. See Table 51. Appropriateness of Policy Relationship Marital status seems to have little relationship to the extent to which the respondents consider their relation- ship to policy appropriate. Married respondents lead slightly in 12 areas. The difference in none of the areas is large enough to attach any significance to. See Table 52. Apprppriateness of Arrangement for Final Administrative Authority In 18 of the 19 student personnel areas a higher percentage of married respondents consider the arrangement 147 TABLE 49 NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL. OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE PERFORMANCE AND DIRECTION OR SUPERVISION OF SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY MARITAL STATUS Selected Student Appropriateness of Performance and Supervision Personnel Functions parade SIEUIS efl‘equeomd II-N eIBUIs F ’1 |-" (D Q. ? U1 \0 TABLE 50 NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS FORMULATING POLICY FOR SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY MARITAL STATUS g:::::::ispunct:ons Formulation of Policy PQIJJBH afiequeoaeg II-N etfiurg 6S-N pen-raw TABLE 51 NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO ARE CHAIRMEN OF A POIICY COMMITTEE FOR SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY MARITAL STATUS Selected Student . ‘ Personnel Functions Chairmanship of Policy Committees peraxaw etfiu:s TI-N 9IQUIS eSequeoued 3'6 gm '1 ’10 H0 is. m 20'“: I0) U1 \0 150 TABLE 52 NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THEIR POLICY RELATIONSHIP TO SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY MARITAL STATUS Selected Student A , f P . . . Personnel Functions pPIOprlateness ° Ollcy Relationship perzavw GIBUIS eSequeOJed II=N 9I3uIS afiequeoaeg E '1 p. (D D.- Z I U‘l \O 151 for final administrative authority appropriate. Only in the housing (managerial) function is the percentage of single respondents slightly higher. See Table 53. GRADUATE STUDENT PERSONNEL WORK OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER Graduate student personnel work was reported in years, degrees, semester hours and quarter hours. These were arbitrarily reduced to semester hours by reducing quarter hours by one third, by allowing 20 hours per year reported, and by allowing 20 hours for a master's degree reported and 60 hours for a doctor's degree reported. The range of graduate work reported, using this system, was from O to 65 semester hours, with a median of 20 hours. The respondents were into quartiles as nearly as possible, and the data reported in percentages within quartiles to compensate for the slightly different size of the quartiles. The responses to questions are considered in the order in which the relationship variables appear in the questionnaire. Performance Performance of student personnel functions does not seem to be related in any discernible degree to the amount of graduate student personnel work of the respondents. The percentage of performance is almost uniformly distributed . 152 TABLE 53‘. NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THE ARRANGEMENT FOR FINAL ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY APPROPRIATE BY MARITAL STATUS Selected Student Appropriateness of Final Administrative Authority PaIJJVN 6S=N PGIJJVN afiequeoaed atflurg II=N aISUIS afiequeoaea 153 over the t0p three quartiles with only slightly less in the first quartile. See Table 5h. Supervision or Direction The percentage of chief student personnel officers who supervise or direct student personnel functions is related only slightly to the amount of graduate student personnel work. There is some tendency for the higher percentages to fall in the first two quartiles. See Table 55. Appropriateness of Performance and Supervision or Direction There is a slight tendency for the respondents in the first quartile to consider their relationship to the performance and supervision of student personnel functions less appropriate than do the other groups. See Table S6. . Formulation of Poligy, Although in the formulation of policy the respondents are well scattered according to the amount of graduate student personnel study, thereis one interesting trend. There are seven functions in which the degree to which the respondents formulate policy is in inverse relationship to the amount of graduate study. These functions are admissions, student personnel records, discipline, health service, extra- curricular activities, food service, and religious life. See Table 57. 154 TABLE 51+ PERCHTTAGE DISTHHJTION BY QUARTILES OF CHEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS PERFOM/IING SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY SEMESTER HOURS OF GRADUATE STUDY &huusmmm Performance Pammdrmamm ow ow 8w gm 2a 2 ICD I‘D (D (D 50 5% \l"! NH Lt: Ir-s ¢+ 3 0° 38 e0 are as E: 59 s g a HH SSd' ct acct and- ‘U 0 '19) an: a: n: no 5H; was '10:: Son can r1 0 (D Old) '10 ’10 \70 ’1 n H. mp. “P. 0g S s s s g E ‘2 8 8 E °3 5 155 TABLE 55 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BY QUARTILES OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS SUPERVISING OR DIRECTING SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY SEMESTER HOURS OF GRADUATE STUDY Selected Student Personnel Functions Slpervi sion or Direction 9: v: as s: 2s :2 \1I-1 (03 It: lv-g Se 5; O 0 go O\O O‘fi' 00‘ 82(1) CD 0 \nm 0 d'CD ea as a a ”e 5": ~19: cm E‘s» gm no SH: man '10!) $1012 $310!? '1 O (D mm am an 88 '1 5' s s s 5+ 531 s: s e s a: r O TABLE 56 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BY QUARTILES OF CHEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE PERFORMANCE AND SUPERVISION 0R DIRECTION OF SELECTED STUEENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY SEMESTER HOURS OF GRADUATE STUDY ggwfism‘Tms Appropriateness of Performance and Supervision 0's \ow MN: .1:: ZI-J no no om 5:» so 2 \7'1 N»: 1*: 1.1 Bd- 0 on go me “E. 30* 8:13 co (n me o co :3 gm: :3 :3 *1 PM od- <+ g:c+ succ- ru 0 as: :35» an m "(D UH: (not: #109 Gas 50!: *1 o m we we so \10 '1 P' H- (“H (”H ‘38 s :3 :5 :3 g E o .0 as :3“ _- S u 3 co TABLE 57 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BY QUARTILES OF CHEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS FORMULATING POLICY FOR SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY SEMESTER HOURS OF GRADUATE STUDY Selected Student Personnel Functions Formulation °f P °11°7 O Q"! ‘6 2"3 2 I? la) 8? (n so 31g '\7"$ N"! l"! I"! 56" :3 O 00 EC O\O O‘fi. 00" 8‘3 8 g ”‘9 53 S9} F3179" get- 816* Eur? "U 0 en: cm a: n: no 5H: (00‘? H09 50‘? cm ’1 O (D 010 '10) '1“) \30 ’1 H' "H- "’H- 0% :s H :5 s g E UQ 3" ‘3 f3 8 3 (n 158 Chairmanship of Polipy Committee The amount of graduate student personnel work seems to have little relation to the degree to which respondents act as chairmen of policy committees for student personnel functions. In four areas, however, the chairmanship of policy committees is in inverse relationship to the amount of graduate study. These areas are admissions, housing (personnel), housing (managerial), and food service. See Table 58. Appropriateness of Policngelationship The percentage of respondents who consider their relationship to policy appropriate is lowest in the third quartile for all functions but religious life, where it is only slightly higher than the first quartile. In 13 of the 19 functions the respondents in the fourth quartile, i.e., those with the most graduate work, consider their relation- ship to policy as most appropriate. The second quartile respondents are high in orientation, student personnel records, the placement services, and food service. See Table 59. Appropriateness of Arrangement for Final Administrative Authorigy Those chief student personnel officers who have the most graduate work consider the arrangement for final; administrative authority in their institutions appropriate 159 TABIE 58 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BY QUARTILES OF CHEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO ARE CHAIRMEN OF A POLICY COMMITTEE FOR SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY SEMESTER HOURS OF GRADUATE STUDY Selected Shident Personnel Functions Chairmanship of Policy Committees om \ovu N'U vs z-e 2 la) la) Om go) so ES \1'1 NH lg 1'1 Bd- o 00 ~ on: (fig, 00‘ SEC!) (D I‘m mm (D (*0) 0:: ms 2: :3 a H-r: s:.+ ow god- gcd *u 0 '1‘” cm 9: SD Im SH: mm: was Con son *1 O (D can: '10 ’10) \10 '1 (n m Om I-" H‘ P' P' 5 S1 .2: s :3 :1 S o o .0 cm :— .. #8 w 2 o .~.. c’ 160 TABLE 59 PERCENTAGE DISTHHITION BY QUARTILES OF CHEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THEIR POLICY RELATIONSHIP TO SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY SEMESTER. HOURS OF GRADUATE STUDY 3°1ch smut Appropriateness of Policy Relationship Personnel Functions ra ow mm mm gm zo wz it: i, w <39; . 9; S” ES 0 03 go oxo 0‘15 0 0‘ 83$ 0 CD mm (D (*0 :3 g: :3 r: '1 m we ‘3 3 s S 8: S 53 u 53 S H. am "SOQ San Flat: 0 0 (D m (D ’1 0 '1 a) \7 (D ’1 co m 0 :3 P' P‘ l—" P‘ d- 51 :5 :3 :s :3 m o o 03 g —- 8 u 3 161 to a greater degree than do the other groups. The fourth quartile is high in all but full-time placement, and part- time, off-campus placement, in these areas the second quartile is slightly higher. See Table 60. THE PERCENTAGE OF TIME THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER DEVOTES TO STUDENT PERSONNEL WORK Not all of the respondents spend all of their time on personnel work. The range of time reported in percentages was from 20% to 100% with the median and mode at the 75th percentile. The respondents were divided into three groups, those reporting under 50% of their time spent in student personnel work, those reporting between 51% and 75%, and those reporting from 76% to 100%. The data is reported in actual numbers and in percentages within groups to com- pensate for the different size of the groups. The responses to questions are considered in the order in which the relationship variables appear in the questionnaire. Performance As might be expected, in many of the functions there is a direct relationship between the amount of time spent in student personnel work and the percentage of respondents performing the function. This occurs in 11 of the 19 functions. In admiSsions, student personnel records, 162 TABLE 60 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BY QUARTILES OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER; THE ARRANGEMENT FOR FINAL ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY APPROPRIATE BY SEMESTER HOURS OF GRADUATE STUDY Selected Shzdmt puma Functions Appropriateness of Final Administrative Authority '6 0’6 \O’U Na) '0 ZI—B la) la) Or: 59a; go LEE \1’1 NH lo [*3 d- :35 o Oo rm oxo o‘fi 00‘ mm o 15:: \nm a: <+CD 05 ms 6* :3 9-: 14-0-3 ¥=<+ 0:1» gm me ~11 o ":51? CED (m on: llcn SH) (.0012 010': Co can r1 0 (D mm '1 '10 \10 n; P' 14- mg mp. 0g :3 :3 :5 d' 5‘? 8 a”; S 9 f3 9 (n 163 housing (personnel), and extra-curricular activities, no particular trend is noticeable. In official academic records, the two respondents reporting performance are in the under 50% group; the three reporting performance in food service are in the lowest two groups. In academic coun— seling there is an inverse relationship between the amount of time spent in personnel work and the number of respondents performing the function. See Table 61. Supervision or Direction In only five areas, orientation, health service, housing (personnel), food service, and religious life, is there a direct relationship between the amount of time spent in personnel work and the number of respondents supervising the function. In 12 areas the percentage of respondents supervising the function in the 51-75% group is smaller than the other two groups. In housing (managerial) there is an inverse relationship between the time spent on personnel work and the percentage of respondents super- vising the function. In extra-curricular activities the . middle group (51-76%) is slightly higher than the other two groups. See Table 62. Appropriateness of Performance and Supervision or Direction There is a direct relationship between the degree to which the respondents consider the arrangement for perform- ance and supervision of selected student personnel functions 161+ TABLE 61 PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS PERFORMING SEIECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY PERCENTAGE OF TIME DEVOTED TO STUDENT PERSONNEL WORK Selected Student Performance Personnel Functions 23‘: 0’1 ’1 U1. IO N E; 68 - JeqwnN %SA'IS La - JaqwnN goot-9L 0L - aequmm % 191°; 165 TABLE 62 PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS SUPERVISING OR DIRECTING SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY PERCENTAGE OF TIME DEVOTED TO STUDENT PERSONNEL WORK Selected Student Personnel Functions axpervision or Direction ZC‘. ZU‘l ZN zD-J S3 ‘5'.“ 5‘.” E3 U‘CD U‘xl U‘H 6' CD“! (DUI (DC (DE '1 HER '10 '1 ‘8 I IT,Q I 341 E N N N \O «I O 166 appropriate in their institutions and the amount of time spent in personnel work in 17 of the 19 functions. Those Spending the highest percentage of their time in personnel work consider their relation to the performance and super- vision most appropriate in all areas. In the part-time, off-campus placement, and testing functions, the middle (51-76%) is slightly below the low group (under 50%) and still much below the highest group (76-100%). See Table 63. Formulation of Poliqx In all of the student personnel areas except housing (managerial), a higher percentage of the respondents in the top group (76-100%) is responsible for the formulation of policy. In the housing (managerial) function, the under 50% group formulates policy a higher percentage of the time. In the orientation, student personnel records, health service, housing (personnel), personal counseling, academic counseling, and extra-curricular activities functions, there is a direct relationship between the amount of time spent in personnel work and the degree of formulation of policy. In the other 12 areas the middle group (51-76%) is lower than either the bottom or top group. See Table 6U. Chairmanship of Policy Committee In the areas of testing, personal counseling, and academic counseling the top group (76-100%) chair a policy committee to a greater degree than in the other groups. 167 TABLE 63 PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL. OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE PERFORMANCE AND DIRECTION OR SUPERVISION OF SELEXITED STUDENT PERSONNEL. FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY PERCENTAGE OF TIME DEVOTED TO STUDENT PERSONNEL. WOHC Student gxmtecell Functions Appropriateness of P°rf°man°° and sup°rViSi°n 2C: 2m ZN 2% as ET E?‘ E3 U‘CD C‘s‘l O‘H GE. (0"! mm. 00 3 am HER “1% N 11% I I I E1 {‘3 2’: 3’ 168 TABLE 61+ PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL. OFFICERS FORMULATING POLICY FOR.SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY PERCENTAGE OF TIME DEVOTED TO STUDENT PERSONNEL WORK ---—-—--—-------------------- --..---- .---r- "------ -—-----—~----—----- -—~--- Selected Student Personnel Functions Formulation of Policy E? E3} E? E23? 0‘ 8' 0‘ L1 8‘ H 0‘ f; a: u m U1 0 ‘D 0-; '1 ha *5 g '1 ‘eQ U1 I l I I I m M g £1 8 «x 0 Student Recruiting ' 14 10 22 16 Orientation 64' 66 81 '22 Adiiissions 21 14 30 22 StudenE Personnel— 64 66 81 2 Records 7 OTficIal AcadeITiic Records 14 4 19 11 iii Time Placement 28 21 52 31b Part TE 0?? Campus Placement, 36 21+ 59 1+0 Part Time 5 Campus Placement, 36 24 52 37 Discipline 5O 41 59 5o Testgg £13 33 55L 4? Health Service 76 j AL gurus Personne 50 76 78 62 30mg (ManagerTaU 36 17 25 1L1...— ersonaI—orYocationaiL 57 62 Counseling 70 64 Academic Counsel 21 21 1-11 29 Extra-curricular Activities 43 “5 63 52 Food Service Th 10 19 AL Financial Ai_d‘s 21 7 141k 214. Religious Life 21 10 33 22 169 The other 16 functions are evenly divided between the other two groups in the percentage of reapondents chairing policy committees. See Table 65. Appropriateness of Policy Relationship In 18 of the 19 student personnel functions, a higher percentage of the respondents in the 76-100% group consider apprOpriate their relationship to policy than do the respon- dents in the other groups. In 13 of the areas there is a direct relationship between the amount of time spent on the Job and the degree to which the respondents consider the policy relationship appropriate. The middle group (51-75%) is slightly higher in the area of student recruiting than either of the other groups. See Table 66. Appropriateness of Arrangement for Final Administrative Authority The respondents who spend more time doing student personnel work consider the arrangement for final adminis- trative authority appropriate to a greater degree in 15 of the 19 areas. In the other areas the low group (under 50%) is high in part-time, on-campus placement and equal to the top group in discipline. The middle group (51-75%) is high in extra-curricular activities and religious life. See Table 67. TABLE 65 PERCENTAGE OF CHEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO ARE CHAIREEN OF A POLICY COMMITTEE FOR SELECTE STUDENT PEBONNEL FUNCTIONS BY PERCENTABE OF TIME DEVOTED TO STUDENT PERSONNEL WORK Selected Student Personnel Functions Chairmanship of Policy Committee 2 if it E? as :28 3‘5 an ER s 2. a 171 TABLE 66 PERCENTAGE OF CHEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THEIR POLICY RELATIONSHIP TO SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY PERCENTAGE OF TIME DEVOTED TO STUDENT PERSONNEL WORK 8 t ' 33:23:21 Fmdétions Appropriateness of Policy Rel/3131011511113 2C: 2U! ZN 21H! ES. 5'." E?‘ E13 5593 33% a?“ 8”?!- H HR ’18 ’1 VI 3Q 3Q I3 I I I E1 8 2’: 8' 172 TABLE 67 PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNAL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THE ARRANGEMENT FOR FINAL ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY FOR SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY PERCENTAGE OF TIME DEVOTED TO STUDENT PERSONNEL WORK Selected Student Appropriateness of Final Administrative Authority WI . JaqmnN %OS depun 62 - aequmn %SL-IS L3 I ueqmnN %00I-9L 0L . JeqmnN % IPQOI 173 THE TITLE OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER Of the 70 responding chief student personnel officers, 53 report their titles as "dean of students", the other 17 report the use of 11 different titles. Table 5 in Chapter Three gives a complete listing of these titles. The respondents were divided into two groups, dean of students and ”other titles" and the data reported in percentages within groups. The answers to questions are considered in the order in which the relationship variables appear in the questionnaire. Performance In 10 of the student personnel areas a larger percentage of deans of students performs the function; in the other nine categories the other titles are high. In most areas there is little percentage differences between the two groups. See Table 68. Supervision or Direction A higher percentage of deans of students supervise nine functions. A higher percentage of other titles supervises seven functions. In two areas the same percent- age is reported in each group. In many areas the percentage differences are very small. Only in two of the larger groups are there large differences. In the orientation and extra-curricular activities functions the dean of students “~- ~~ "D‘hv‘ ‘ 174 TABLE 68 PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS PERFORMING SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY TITLE Selected Student P f Personnel Functions er °man°° 3'0 CW *5"! (D H0 00 g? 33 3 TE 0 HQ g0 E40) (+8.. :3 c: :1 P'H 53 33 23 8 as at "m 3’ a m a” " z? 5? E u g 3 V CE 175 group reports a much larger percentage supervising the function than does the other titles category. See Table 69. Appropriateness of Performance and Supervision or Direction The respondents in the other titles group consider their relationship to the performance and supervision or direction appropriate to a greater degree in 16 of the 19 functions. The two groups show the same percentage in the student recruiting area; the dean of students group lead only very slightly in two functions, admissions and financial aids. See Table 70. Formulation of Policy A higher percentage of the other titles group report that they formulate policy for specific student personnel functions in every one of the 19 areas. See Table 71. Chairmanship of Policy Committee The respondents in the other titles group report higher percentages who are chairmen of policy committees in eight areas; the deans of students are high in ten areas. The same percentage is reported by both groups in the religious life area. Most of the percentage differences are quite small. See Table 72. Appropriateness of Policy Relationship A higher percentage of the respondents in the other titles group consider their relationship to policy appropriate in 17 of the 19 areas. Only in the student recruiting and 176 TABLE 69 PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS SUPERVISING OR DIRECTING SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY TITLE selected Sindent Supervision or Direction Personnel Functions O’U I-J’U z 231 Ham 00 g5 13‘“: '1 <+'1 :35 (no £20 £50 00‘ I10) 0 CD d‘CD :5 5:3 :3 9'” act Dart Ed- 0 Hill of» SD 7.1"") CNN 50‘? on 0 H0 do: \1“) '1 0 (a O "’ r? E if g :r kn —* \0 fl 177' TABLE 70 PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL. OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE PERFORMANCE AND DIRECTION OR SUPERVISION OF SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY TITLE Selected 8111th Personnel Punctions Appropriateness of Performance and Slpervision 3; as er a; on t: #3 5 ’10 mo E] 00‘ ° 9% g £39} at 80% 0%; o CDCD (*0 V0 '1 m m 0 g" t fig 0 .‘3‘ —- UK \1 \A) 178 TABLE 71 PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS FORMULATING POLICY FOR SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY TITLE Selected Student Formulation of Policy :2: $3 a: 5? 2g 38 3 ”3 8e ”a 5% fig 32 ES as ES gm d-oq ban on 0 Ha) (+0 \103 ’1 (D (n O ‘1; t9 E I! g :2" U1 —e w \l TABLE 72 PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO ARE CHAIRMEN OF A POLICY COMMITTEE FOR SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS BY TITLE Selected Student . . Personnel Functions Chairmanship of Policy Committees QBSQUSOJSd ES -N squepqu JO ueeq afiequeoaed CA -N I910; afiequeoaed qoeg Jo; Jeqmnn 3" (D ’1 H p. d‘ H (b 01 2 I H \l 'p- 180 religious life functions are the deans of students somewhat higher. See Table 73. Appropriateness of Arrangement for Final Administrative Authority In 16 of the 19 student personnel areas the respon- dents in the other titles group consider arrangements for final administrative authority in their institutions appr0priate to a greater degree than do the deans of students. In the housing (managerial), financial aids, and religious life areas the deans of students are only slightly higher. See Table 7h. SUMMARY or CHAPTER SIX The personal factors of: (1) age, (2) sex, (3) marital status, (A) amount of graduate personnel work, (5) percentage of time spent in personnel work, and (6) title, of the respondents are considered in this chapter. when age of the respondent is considered, the youngest group (Q1) shows high in the percentage of performance in the testing and personal counseling areas. The third and fourth quartiles are high in the number of functions supervised. The respondents in the second and third quartiles show high percentages in the formulation of policy in most areas; the third quartile is high in chairmanship 181 TABLE 73 PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THEIR POLICY RELATIONSHIP TO SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY TITLE Selected Student Personnel Functions Appropriateness of Policy Relationship '11 0'11 ran-1 Z 3m mm 00 2 3'1 *1 cH-s :3 on can mo 00‘ ”a as “a 5:9; '-3c+ Q-d Zd' o I-“m 00% log 51-9 dm :3 o l—‘(D d-cn «:0 r: (o m o m U .31 20> m ”f "t a \n H w \j 182 TABLE 7h PERCENTAGE OF CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS WHO CONSIDER THE ARRANGEMENT FOR FINAL ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY FOR SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS APPROPRIATE BY TITLE select°d Student Appropriateness of Final Administrative Authority *6 0'0 »—3 a) Hero 03’ g? (DO (920 fi 00‘ “ 8 e S g 81° v-ad‘ ad 26" 0’1 14-9.: on: a) gar-o; as 51°53 "03 o 8 “e a "‘ zo 5? f 11% g -‘ U\ \1 w 183 of policy committees; a higher percentage of respondents in the third quartile consider their policy relationship appropriate in most of the functions. Although there is little difference when considered by age, the highest percentages of respondents considering final administrative arrangements appropriate are in the second quartile, with the lowest percentage being predominately in the fourth quartile. There are only six women in the responding group. In general when sex is considered, the female respondents perform, supervise, formulate policy and chair policy committees in a smaller percentage of cases than do men. They generally consider their relationship to the performance and supervision and policy appropriate to a greater degree than do the male respondents. The percentage of women who consider the arrangements for final administrative authority apprOpriate is below that of men in most areas. Married respondents perform, supervise, and consider this arrangement appropriate to a greater degree than single respondents. The percentage distribution is about even in the formulation of policy, chairmanship of policy committees and appropriateness of policy relationship. The married group consider the arrangements for final administrative authority to a greater degree than do the single respondents in 18 of the 19 student personnel functions. 181+ When the amount of graduate student personnel work of the reapondents is considered it is found that perform- ance is concentrated in the tOp three quartiles, while supervision has some concentration in the first two quartiles. Respondents with the least graduate work (Q1) consider their relationship to performance and supervision slightly less apprOpriate than do those in the other groups. The groups do not differ noticeably in the percentage of formulation of policy and chairmanship of policy committees. The respon- dents with the most graduate work consider their policy relationship more appropriate in most of the areas. Respondents with the most graduate work also consider the arrangements for final administrative authority more appropriate in most cases. Respondents who devote more time to personnel work also show a higher percentage of performance in most areas. Time spent in student personnel work and supervision of student personnel functions do not show much relationship. Those who spend most of their time with.personnel work consider their relationship to performance and supervision more apprOpriate than do respondents in the other groups. Time spent on the job and the chairmanship of policy committees do not seem to be related. In the formulation of policy, appropriateness of policy relationship and appropriateness of final administrative authority the 185 respondents who spend most of their time in personnel work show high percentages in most of the areas. Whether the respondent holds the title dean of students, or some other title seems to have little relation- ship to the performance, supervision, and chairmanship of policy committees. The other titles group is high in the extent to which they consider performance and supervision appropriate, in the formulation of policy, in appropriate- ness of policy relationship, and in appropriateness of arrangements for final administrative authority. CHAPTER VII SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Problem This was a study to survey the current practices of the chief student personnel officer and asCertain his relationship to selected student personnel functions and the extent to which this relationship is considered appropriate by incumbent officers. A description of the development and extent of the personnel office and the title and place in the organizational hierarchy of the chief student personnel officer were included. Personal characteristics of the chief student personnel officer and institutional charac- teristics of the colleges represented in the criterion group were considered. The relationship of the chief student personnel officers to 19 student personnel functions was investigated, Relationships considered were the degree of performance, Supervision, policy formulation, chairmanship of policy committees, and arrangements for final administrative responsibility. The degree to which incumbent officers considered these relationships appropriate were investigated. Methodology A questionnaire was devised, submitted to a group of 186 18? six experts for criticism, revised and discussed with the investigator's guidance committee. It was then revised again and sent to all liberal arts colleges below 2000 in full-time enrollment and awarding only the bachelor's and/or the first professional degree and having a chief student personnel officer. Findings There has been a rather steady growth in the estab- lishment of an office headed by a chief student personnel officer in coeducational liberal arts colleges with under 2000 enrollment in the United States since Herld.War II. In recent years the use of the title ”dean of students" has been increasing relative to the use of other titles for this officer. There has been a tendency for the establishment of these personnel offices to be somewhat associated with size. Within the criterion group the larger institutions have a larger percentage of chief student personnel officers. State institutions have a higher percentage of such officers than do private or church-related colleges. This may be associated with their size, as the state institutions average larger than the other two groups. However, private celleges have a higher percentage of chief student personnel Officers than do the church schools, and the private schools average smaller than do the church-related colleges. 188 Colleges in the New England, Western and Northwestern regional associations have a somewhat higher percentage of chief student personnel officers than those from other regions. The number of schools in the size and type group, however, from these regions is quite small. The median age of the responding group was hi. Most of the respondents were male and married. The respondents had a median of 20 semester hours of graduate student personnel work, or the equivalent of a Master's degree. A variety of positions and titles were held by the respondents prior to becoming chief student personnel officers as well as concurrently with that office. In the responding group 53 held the title of dean of students. The other 17 respondents held other titles. A wide variety of personnel and groups repdrt to the chief student personnel officer. The median amount of working time devoted to student personnel work by the respondents is 75%. Each of the 19 selected student personnel functions is performed by some of the responding chief student personnel officers. The functions most often performed are personal counseling, discipline, student personnel records and orientation. Size of the institution and region seem to have little relationship to the performance of the selected functions. Respondents from church-related colleges perform fewer functions than do those from the other groups. The w—fi . 189 youngest group of respondents perform testing and personal counseling to a greater degree than do the older respondents, otherwise age seems not to be related to the performance of functions. Male and married respondents perform functions in a higher percentage of cases than do female and single respondents. Respondents with the least graduate work perform fewer functions; respondents devoting more time to student personnel work perform more functions; title does not seem to be related to the degree of performance. The student recruiting function is the only one not supervised by some of the responding chief student personnel officers. Functions most often supervised are extra- curricular activities, housing (personnel), personal counseling, discipline, and orientation. Size and regional location of the institution do not seem to be related to the extent of supervision. Respondents from the church group supervise fewer functions than do respondents from the other groups. Older, male, and married respondents super- vise functions to a greater degree than do their younger, female, and single counterparts. Respondents with less graduate work supervise more functions. The amount of time spent on the job and the title of the reapondent do not seem to be related to the degree of supervision. Supervision seems to reduce the degree of performance in some areas and increase it in other areas. 190 The respondents generally consider most appropriate their relationship to the functions to the degree that they perform or supervise the function. Size of the institution does not seem to influence this relationship. The respond- ents in the church group consider their relationship to . performance and supervision less appropriate than do the other groups; the respondents from the Middle States and New England associations are high in the degree to which they consider this relationship appropriate among the regional groups. The respondents in the second quartile by age consider their relationship to performance and super- vision most appr0priate. Married and female respondents consider their relationship to performance and supervision least apprOpriate; those spending most of their time in student personnel work consider this relationship most appropriate. Respondents with the dean of students title consider their relationship to performance and supervision less appropriate than do the respondents with other titles. The chief student personnel officer in this study formulates policy most frequently in orientation, student personnel records, housing (personnel), personal counseling and extra-curricular activities. Size of the institution does not seem to be related to formulation of policy. A high.percentage of respondents from state colleges formulate policy; resPondents from church schools are low. 191 Respondents from the Middle States and New England group show a high percentage in the formulation of policy; those from the Southern Association are low. The personal factors of age, marital status, and the amount of graduate work do not seem to be related to the formulation of policy. Male respondents formulate policy to a greater degree than do females. Reapondents who spend most of their time in student personnel work formulate policy more in most areas. Respondents with titles other than dean of students formu- late policy to a greater degree than do the deans of students. Those respondents who formulate policy most also usually chair more policy committees and generally consider their policy relationship most appropriate. The chief student personnel officer in this study is chairman of a policy committee most often in extra-curricular activities, discipline, personal counseling, housing (personnel) and student personnel records. Respondents from smaller schools, from the private colleges, and from the Northwest and Western regions are generally high in the degree to which they chair policy committees; respondents from the church group and the Southern association are low. Age, marital status, amount of graduate work, percentage of time spent in personnel work, and title seem to have little relationship to the chairmanship of policy committees. women chair policy committees in a smaller percentage of 192 functions than do men. Admissions, academic counseling, and food service, areas in which generally the respondent is less concerned with policy are the only functions in which more than half of the respondents consider the policy relationship appropriate. Size of the institution does not seem to be related to the degree to which the respondents believe their policy relationship appropriate. Respondents from the church colleges are low in appropriateness of policy relationship; those from the New England and Middle States are high and from the Southern association are low among the regional groups in this relationship. Age and marital status seem to have little affect on the degree to which they believe their policy relationship appropriate. Women consider their relation to pelicy more appropriate than do men, generally. Those respondents who have the most graduate work, those who Spend most of their time in personnel work, and those with titles other than dean of students show high percentages in appropriateness of policy relationship. Those respondents who formulate policy in more areas also consider the policy relationship more appropriate, in most cases. Respondents generally consider the arrangement for final administrative authority for the student personnel functions appropriate in their institutions. Areas in 193 which there is more than 75% agreement are student personnel records, health service, housing (personnel), and personal counseling. Most of the respondents from the larger institutions believe the arrangement for final administra- tive authority appropriate to a greater degree than those from smaller schools. There is little difference in the way respondents view this relationship when source of control and region are considered. The younger male and married respondents consider the arrangements for final administrative authority appropriate to a greater degree than do their older, female and single counterparts. Chief student personnel officers with the most graduate work, and spending most of their time in personnel work believe the arrangements for final administrative authority most appropriate. Respondents with other titles agree with the arrangements for final administrative authority more than do the deans of students. The chief student personnel officer in this study is responsible for final administrative authority most often in the areas of orientation, student personnel records, place- ment, discipline, testing, health service, housing (personnel), personal counseling, extra-curricular activities, and financial aids. Conclusions There seems to be an increasing number of chief 194 student personnel officers in the size and type group of colleges selected for this study. With a median amount of graduate student personnel training of 20 semester hours or a Master's degree and a median of 75% of their time spent in student personnel work, training and amount of time on the job is probably increasing also. Since the chief student personnel officers in this study have final administrative authority under the president more than any other officer in the institution in 12 of the 19 selected functions, and some of them have such authority in each of the functions this would indicate that these officers are assuming an increase importance in these institutions. The expectation that the role of the chief student personnel officer in the size group studied would be substantially different than that of such officers in larger institutions seems to have been justified. The degree of performance and personal supervision of specific functions shown by the respondents would be impracticable if not impossible in the large college or university. The implication seems to be present that the training and experience for persons anticipating jobs of this nature will be different than those aspiring to jobs that involve mostly administrative duties. In the areas of personal counseling, orientation, 195 student personnel records, housing (personnel), extra- curricular activities and discipline the respondents in this study are particularly close to the performance, super- vision, and formulation of policy. For graduate schools training people in these areas it would seem to be apprOpriate to consider offering more intensive work along with Opportunities for internship experience, and the opportunity and encouragement to develop a sound philos0phy for this work. This investigator believes that these six functions have an inter-relationship that might make them the core for intensive student personnel training and eXperience that is not shared to the same degree by the other functions studied. The personal characteristics of age, sex, and marital status do not seem to be particularly important in deter- mining the role of the chief student personnel officer in this study. People seeking chief student personnel jobs and hiring institutions may perhaps minimize these character- istics in their considerations. 0f more importance will be the amount of graduate student personnel work and the job characteristics of percentage of time allotted to student jpersonnel work, title, and.place in the organizational Ihierarchy. Those respondents who consider their relation- ships to student personnel services most apprOpriate are in the high groups in amount of student personnel graduate 196 work and in percentage of time devoted to student personnel work. Most of the respondents, likewise, believe that the title of dean of students is most appropriate for the job and that they should report to the president of the institution. Of concern to persons interested in being chief student personnel officers in church-related institutions will be the indication that such officers in this study have less impact on the entire personnel progran and are less satisfied with their relation to the program than officers in the state and private institutions. Respondents from church-related colleges are below those from state and private schools in percentage of performance, supervision, policy formulation, policy chairmanship, and appropriateness of these relationships. This supports in some degree the findings of Scott (27) who found generally the chief student personnel officer assuming less significance in the schools in his study than have been found in this investigation. Fifteen of the sixteen schools in Scott's study were church related and the other a YMCA college. Chief student personnel officers in this study from institutions in the Southern Association seem to behind those of the other groups in the policy areas only. Recommendations for More Study Many questions arise from a general study of this 197 type. Those that have occurred to this writer in the course of the investigation would prompt the following kinds of investigations. A study could be made of the offerings of the colleges training student personnel workers to discover if they are preparing people in the areas suggested as impor- tant in this study. A study could be made of the chief student personnel officer's role in church-related institutions to check on the conclusions in this study that these institutions are lagging behind others of the same size and type. Any number of studies could be made investigating the relationship of particular aspects of the chief student personnel officer's role to selected functions. Performance, supervision, or policy relationships would be particularly rewarding. The titles of student personnel officers and the organizational structures for personnel work in colleges of the size and type, but not having a chief student personnel officer would be an interesting study. A thorough study of the relationship of the chief student personnel officer to any one of the selected student personnel functions would be useful. The relationship of the chief student personnel officer to various committees within his institution would 198 ‘ be an interesting and worthwhile study. A study of the same general nature of this one could be undertaken investigating different kinds of institutions. Colleges of education and junior colleges would be apprOpri- ate groups for further study. Arising only incidentally out of this study, the question of the effect of accrediting organizations on personnel work and the presence and role of a chief student personnel officer needs answering. The investigator feels that in his own institution the installation of a chief student personnel officer was the result of a self-study preparing for regional accreditation. A self-study of his own role in relation to the factors investigated in this study would be worthwhile and rewarding for any chief student personnel officer. BI BLIOGRAPHY 9. 10. BIBLIOGRAPHY Arbuckle, Dugald 3., Student Personnel Services in Hi her Education, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1983. Arbuckle, Dugald S. and Joseph.F. Kauffman, ”Student Personnel Services in Liberal Arts Colle es", The Personnel and Guidance Journal, XXXVIII December, I959), z§6:269. Beck, James Dennis, "Functions and Responsibilities of Deans of Students in Selected Negro Institutions of Higher Learning", Unpublished Doctor's thesis, Indiana University, Bloomington, 1959. Bennett, John N., "A Study of the Prevalence of the Office of Dean of Men in American Colleges and Universities", Secretarial Notes Seventh Annual Conference National Association g:_Deans Eng Advisers 'gf‘flgg, (April, 1935) 20-55. Blaesser, Willard W., et. al., Student Personnel Work in the Postwar Colle e, American Council on Education ‘Studies, Series VI, No. 6, Washington: American Council on Education, 19h5. Bradley, Le Jeune P., ”The Office of the Dean of Students in Selected Institutions of the Southeastern States", Unpublished Doctor's thesis, Indiana University, Bloomington, 1951. Brumbaugh, A. J., "Student Personnel Work in Univer- sities", North Central Association Quarterly, XIII (April 1939) 518-328. Brumbaugh, A. J., and Ralph F. Berdie, Student Personnel Programs in Transition, American Council on Education, eries VI, No. 15, Washington: American Council on Education, 1952. Cauffiel, Paul W., "A Survey of Some Current Student Personnel Patterns and Functions in Selected Land- Grant Colleges and Universities in the United States", Unpublished Doctor's thesis, Pennsylvania State College, State College, 1952. Chandler, Everett M., "Reorganization of the Student 200 11. 12. 13. lu. 15. 16. 17. is; '._/ 19. 20. A x 21,; 22. 201 Personnel Program in the California State Colleges", The Personnel and Guidance Journal, XXXI (November 1952) 76-82. Coleman, William, ”Coordinating Specialized Student Personnel Services on the Campus", The Personnel and Guidance Journal, XXXI (May 1953), SZE-S. Committee on Student Personnel Work, Th3 Student . Personnel Point 2; View, American Council on Education, Series VI, No. 3, Washington: American Council on Education, 1937. Cowley, W. H., "The Disappearing Dean of Men", Occupa- tions XVI (November 1937), 1&7-Sh. Cowley, W. H., "The Strategy of Coordination", Occupa- tions XVI (May 1938), YER-27. Feder, Daniel D., et. al., The Administration 22 Student Personnel Programs InIAmerican ColIe es and Universities, American CounEIl onIEducation Studies, Series VI, No. 19, Washington: American Council on Education, 1958. Findlay, James Franklin, “The Origin and Development of the Work of the Dean of Men in Higher Education", Bulletin of the Association‘gf American Colleges, XXV (May 19397—277783: Gardner, Donfred Huber, Student Personngl Service, The Eyaluation of Higher Institutions, Vol. 5, Chicago: University 3? Chicago Press, 1935. Lloyd-Jones, Esther, ”Personnel Administration", Journal 2; Higher Education V (193h) 1hl-h7. Lloyd-Jones, Esther M., and M. R. Smith, A_Student Personnel Program for Higher Education, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 193 . Lloyd-Jones, Esther, and M. R. Smith, Student Personnel Work gg Deeper Teachin , New'York: Harper Bros., 1955. Long, Lawrence W., ”Evolution of the Dean of Students", Journal gf'Higher Education, XV (October 19hh) 383-5811? Long, Samuel Murray, "The Coordination of Instructional, 23. 2h. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 202 Administrative, and Sutdent Personnel Services in Pennsylvania's State Teachers Colleges", University Park: Pennsylvania State University, 1958. Abstract in Dissertation Abstracts, 19 (May 1959) 2830-31. Love, L. L., Proceedingg g; the Ninth.Annua1 National Conference 23 Higher Education, Recorder's Report, Group 19, Washington: Association for Higher Education, 195R. Lowrey, R. 6., "Philosophy for a Dean of Students”, Association of American Colleges Bulletin XXXVIII (May 1952) 35H- . Lubbers, Irwin J., College Organization and Administra- tion, Evanston: Northwestern University Contributions to Education, School of Education Series, No. 7,1932. Nygreen, Glen T., "Ethical Problems Encountered in Coordinating the Various Personnel Services on the Same Campus , Personnel-O—Gram, XII (June 1958), h7-h8. Scott, William L., "A Study of Student Personnel Services in Small Liberal Arts Colleges", Unpublished Doctor's thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1959. Shoben, Edward J. Jr., ”A Rationale for Modern Student Personnel Work", PersonneleO-Gram, XII (March 1958), 9-120 Strozier, Robert M., "The Office of the Dean of Students" in Norman Burns (ed) Proceedin s of 222 Institute £2£.Administrative Officers 2: fiififier Institutions, 19K7, Chicago: The University of cago ress. United States Department of Labor. Dictionagy 22 Occupational Titles, Second Edition, Su lament‘l. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1955. Vogel, Fred J., "A Study of Concepts and Practices Relating to the Allocation of Certain Student Personnel Responsibilities in Selected Institutions of Higher Learning in the United States. Tallahassee: Florida State University, 1958. Abstract in Dessertation Abstracts, 18 (May 1958) 1705-6. Wilkins, Theresa B., Education Directory, 1256-52, 33- 3h. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. to. Al. AZ. 203 Part E, Higher Education. U. S. Department of Heal , Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, Washington: Government Printing Office, 1956. Wilkins, Theresa B., Educatiog.Directogy, 1951-58, Part 3, Higher Education. U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, Washington: Government Printing Office, 1957. Wilkins, Theresa B., Education Directogy, 1958-g9, Part 3, Hi her Education. U. S. Department 0 Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, Washington: Government Printing Office, 1958. Wilkins, Theresa B., Education Directo 1959- 6, Part 3, Higher Education. U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, Washington: Government Printing Office, 1959. *Wilkins, Theresa B., Education Directo , 1960-61, Part 3, Higher Education. U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, Washington: Government Printing Office, 1960. Willey, Harold'L., "The Role of the Dean of Men in Institutions of Higher‘Learning" , Knoxville: University of Tennessee, 1958. Abstract in Dessertation Abstracts, 19 (February 1959) 1982. Williams, Lloyd P., "Quiescence, Tradition, and Disorder--Cross-Section of a Small College" , American Association of Universit Professors Bulletin, XXXXIII (December 1957), 61 - ‘Williamson, E. G., "The Dean of Students as Educator", Educational Record XXXVIII (July 1957) 230-2h0. Williamson, E. G., et. al., The Student Personnel Point of View, American Council on Education, Series VI, No. 13, Washington: American Council on Education, 19h9. Williamson, E. G., and J. G. Darley, Student Personnel Work, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1937. Woolf, Maurice D. and Jeanne A. Woolf, The Student Personnel Pro ram: Its Development and Integration in the High School and College, New York: McGraw- 'fiIif7 19 2cm #3. Wrenn, C. Gilbert, Student Personnel Work in College, New York: The Ronald Press Company, 1951. Ah. Zook, George F., ”The Administration of Student Personnel Work" Journal Lf Higher Education III (October 1932) 3&9-35- APPENDICES APPENDIX A QUESTIONNAIRE AND LETTERS TO RESPONDENTS THE DEFIANCE COLLEGE Defiance, Ohio December 31, 1959 In the next day or two you will receive from me a brown envelope with another example of that bane of all of us-- a questionnaire! I hope that by analyzing the results I can get a little closer to an Ed.D. -- I'm working under walter F. Johnson at Michigan State for this. However, I do firmly believe that I can make a contribution to defining an effective role for chief student personnel officers in small colleges -- with your help. With the exception of the firstdpage introduction and the last-page glossary there are eight pages. Only the first four need to be answered. The other pages are for you to explain any of your answers to the questionnaire, to make any comments, criticisms or remarks of any kind that you think might be useful. If, for any reason, you find it impossible to complete the questionnaire, will you please send it back anyway with a short note of eXplanation? I will, of course, send you an abstract of the thesis if I am able to complete it satisfactorily. Thank you very much for your help. Sincerely, ‘William M. Reynolds Dean of Students THE DEFIANCE COLLEGE Defiance, Ohio February 13, 1960 I have been receiving an excellent return of my question- naire "The Role of the Chief Student Personnel Officer." Thank you very much for your efforts. I especially appreciate those of you who have gone out of your way to eXpress interest in the topic. The kind eXpressions of sympathy are gratifying tool If you have not sent the questionnaire back will you please do so as soon as possible? If you find it impossible to complete the questionnaire will you please send it back anyway and include a short note of explanation? Thank you again. The results thus far are encouraging. I believe it will be possible to produce somethingof value. Sincerely, William M. Reynolds Dean of Students Page 1 THE ROLE OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER This is an attempt to define an effective role for the chief student personnel officer in the small college. Your cooperation in filling out the form as completely as possible will be deeply appreciated. It is believed that the student personnel officer in small colleges has peculiar problems, and that these problems have not been adequately studied. It is hoped that by comparing the present status of the office of the chief student personnel administrator, the relationship of the chief student personnel officer to the various Student personnel functions, and comparing your exper- iences and recommendations, that new light may be thrown on an effective role for the chief student personnel officer. This questionnaire is being sent to all coeducational, liberal arts and general colleges, with a full-time student enrollment of under 2,000, that list a chief student personnel officer as part of their administrative staff. The basis for selection was those institutions listed in Education Directory. 1959-6O Part 3, U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Educa- tion, under classification II by highest level of training (only the bachelor’s and/or first pro- fessional degree), and the following classifications by type of program: (b) liberal arts and gen- eral; (c) liberal arts and general, and terminal -occupational; (e) liberal arts and general, and teacher preparatory; (f) liberal arts and general, teacher preparatory, and terminal -occupational. The size limitation is arbitrary. It is believed that chief student personnel officers in institu- tions in this size group do more performing and personal directing and supervising than in larger institutions. It is further believed that this has an impact on the development of an effec- tive role for these officers. The classification by highest level of learning and by types of program were chosen in the at- tempt to get relatively homogeneous institutions with liberal arts emphases. The study is limited to coeducational institutions in the belief that the job of chief student personnel officer is enough different in these institutions from sexually segregated institutions to make them worth separate study. Where the question asks for your opinion and recommendation as to the appropriateness of a par- ticular arrangement. will you please answer according to your philosophy of student personnel work in the specific situation rather than considering any particular personal relationships in your institutional setting? l'hese forms are coded for the purpose of Studying the responses , but of course complete anon- ymity will by preserved in reporting the results. It is expected that the results of the question- naire will be used in preparation of a dissertation on an effective role for the chief student personnel officers in the small, coeducational, liberal arts and general college. Page 2 PERSONAL DATA Age Sex DMale DFemale Marital status: [:1 Married DSingle Approximately how much graduate student personnel work have you had? What other professional positions have you held before becoming a chief student personnel officer? Of these which ones were at your present institution? What other titles or departmental designations do you now hold? Approximately what percentage of your working time is devoted to the job of chief student person- nel officer? TITLE (a) What title is now assigned to the chief student personnel officer in your institution? (b) How long has this title been used? (c) What other titles have been used previously to designate the cheif student personnel officer in your institution? (d) Do you consider the present title appropriate? (yes or no) (e) If your answer to (d) is no, what title would you suggest? (f) If you have any comments concerning the relationship of title to the effectiveness of the role of the chief student personnel officer in your institution, will you please include them here? (a) (b) (C) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) Page 3 TABLE OF ORGANIZATION To whom does the chief student personnel officer report? If the chief student personnel officer reports to more than one person, will you list the people and the functions which he reports to each? Do you consider this administrative structure appropriate? (yes or no) If your answer to (c) is no, what arrangement would you suggest? Who (other than clerical) reports to the chief student personnel officer? Do you consider this arrangement appropriate? (yes or no) If your answer to (f) is no, what arrangement would you suggest? Is the chief student personnel officer a member of an all-college administrative committee __ (yes or no). If you have any comments concerning the relationship of place in the table of organization to the effectiveness of the role of the chief student personnel officer in your institution will you please include them here? Poge4 RELATION OF THE CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICER T0 SPECIFIC STUDENT PERSONNEL FUNCTIONS Please fill in the blanks, either with an x or the appropriate title. in each case. Please record remarks or explanations in the space provided on the extra sheets. The last pace zlossary may help in the deiinition at some of thet ter ms 12315678910111213141516171819 ~¢ .o .c *9 0 A 000%,“),i9‘900’0/"o’ @o’o?i°o%vo%% oOC‘aoQQoO/g / s 0, 0 so! 99 a '09 8 oz {/0 (4 ($29, 2,6 Q, 9‘ (90 ’9’ ’00 ”’0 ’° 49 '0 8°! 60, @64, [’0 0 00» Qig [’00 9’09 0%, Q"; ’9] 0% ’9, "v’fzr yorgrr’o’OQ‘Z/Q 00,, 91;! 60 00, 0Q.) a 00% Q 00% 913996? 0‘) ’e 9/ c "/ v . a 9.- o ’0 0 '39 ’4» (’9 I (9/) of, 6%, .01, 0°» 0, a 9. , OJ ‘7’ q, 0‘, 09 0,, p f 0% ° 9: o ’9’) ’o (’9 00 0 1 x91 0 a) Check the spaces in this line ii the CSPO performs the function. in Check in this line if the CSPO supervises or directs the function. c) if the CSPO neither performs nor directs the function, write in the appropriate column who does (by title) . Check the functions in which the CSPO formu- iates policy. G v B- V Check in this line if you consider the above arrangement appropriate. Check the functions (or which the CSPO is chairmen of a policy committee. 3 3) ii the CSPO neither formulates policy. not is chairman of a policy committee. who is (by title) ” H' v Check in this line if you consider the above arrangement appropriate. i) Write in each column who has final administra- tive authority under the president for each function (by title) . 1) Check in "“- line it you consider the above me ppropriate. Page 5 OTHER FUNCTIONS ' If there are functions of the chief student personnel officer in your institution not listed on the previous page that you consider appropriate to the role of the CSPO will you explain them here? If there are functions of the chief student personnel officer in your institution that you consider inappropriate to the role of the CSPO will you explain them here? Page 6 The following pages are provided for the purpose of recording any remarks, explanations, or comments that you may have concerning the relationship of any of the specific student personnel functions to the effectiveness of the role of the chief student personnel officer in your institution. 1. Student Recruiting 2. Admissions 3. Official Academic Records 4. Student Personnel Records S. Orientation 6. Placement (full-time) 7. Placement (part-time, on campus) 8. Placement (part-time, off campus) 9. Discipline Page 7 10. Testing 11. Health Service 12. H ousing (personnel) 13. Housing (managerial) l4. Counseling (personal or vocational) Page 8 15. Counseling (academic) 16. Extra-curricular activities 17. Food Service 18. Financial Aids 19. Religious Life Page 9 l‘ '*" “15:33: Page 10 GLOSSARY Below are a few explanatory statements concerning the categories on page 4. It is recognized that these categories may not be mutually exclusive, but for uniformity of response please follow them as closely as possible. If there are any remarks concerning the appropriateness of your responses in particular sections, will you please add them in the 'remarks” section. 1. Student Recruiting: Interpreting the college and its objectives and programs to prospeCtive students, parents. and high school counselors; representing the college at college days and similar functions. 2. Admissions: Processing applications for admission, applying admissions criteria to prospec- tive students and determining which applicants will be admitted. 3. Official Academic Records: Academic records, achievement and aptitude testing, formal academic and disciplinary actions. This category might be reserved only for those records that will become a matter of permanent record, and that will be transmitted to qualified agencies and institutions. '1‘ 4. Student Personnel Records: There may be duplication of the above, plus personal data, anec- dotal records, activity records, periodic statements of academic and vocational objectives, results of personality and vocational inventories. These records may be considered primarily as those that will be of help to the student and his advisors while he is in college. 5. Orientation: Acquainting the new student with his college environment; may include pre-college counseling, "freshman week", orientation courses. 6. Placement (full-time): Helping the student to find an appropriate job after leaving college, pro- viding contact opportunities, maintaining informational files. 7. Placement (part—time, on campus): Fitting part-time campus opportunities to student applicants on the basis of need and/or abilities, according to the requirements of the student and institu- tion; may or may not be integrated with financial aids program. 8. Placement (part-time, off campus): Acring as liaison between students and potential off- campus employers; helping to fill jobs with qualified students and helping students to find jobs. 9. Discipline: Regulation of student conduct, including punitive measures when necessary. 10. Testing: Development and administration of the all-college. non -curriculum testing program; may include personality, vocational, aptitude, achievement, interest, attitude testing; may include interpretation of tests or submission of scores to interpretative agencies. 11. Health Service: Determining the health status of the student and providing appropriate health service; clinic, out-patient, referral. 12. Housing (personnel): Providing for the staffing, supervision, and administration of the person- nel program in college housing. 13. Housing (managerial): Business management of college housing; may include maintenance, custodial, business records. 14. Counseling (personal or vocational): Counseling students with personal, social, emotional, vocational problems; may include maintenance of vocational and educational files. 15. Counseling (academic): Principally concerned with the student's academic progress; advising on appropriate programs and the satisfaction of requirements for such programs. 16. Extra-curricular Activities: Includes social life, social organizations, special events, students government, service organizations. Generally does not include curriculum-connected activi- ties such as drama, athletics, publications, music. 17. Food Service: Business management of the campus food service. 18. Financial Aids and Scholarships: Scholarships, grants, work grants when considered as financial aid. 19. Religious Life: The program of religious life through chapel, religious organizations, special programs. religious counseling. APPENDIX B DISTRIBUTION OF CHURCH AFFILIATION IN THE SIZE AND TYPE GROUP BUT WITHOUT CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS DISTRIBUTION OF CHURCH AFFILIATION IN THE SIZE AND TYPE GROUP BUT WITHOUT CHIEF STUDENT PERSONNEL OFFICERS l-J 4 Methodist 1.: ‘1 Presbyterian l--‘ b.) Roman Catholic Baptist Southern Baptist Seventh.Day Adventist Lutheran United Presbyterian Evangelical United Brethren Christian Methodist Episcopal American Missionary Association Church of the Brethren United Lutheran Disciples of Christ Mennonite Free Methodist Protestant Episcopal Congregational Christian Friends African.Methodist Episcopal #4 i4 a) to n: to u: k» u: L0 in C: ;r .p- #7 4r' oi