ACADEMIC ADJUSTMENT OF SELECTED MALE STUDENTS REPORTED FOR. DESCIPLENARY ACTION AT MECHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Thesis TOP “‘19 Degree of Ed. D. MICHIGAN STATE UNTVERSITY James William Costar 1958 llllIlllllllllllllllIlllllllllllllllllHHIHIIIIIMHI 1293 10484 3903 This is to certify that the thesis entitled ACADEIJIC ADJUSTMENT Ob" SELECTED MALE. STUDENTS presented by James W. Costar has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ed.D Counsel ing dc Guidance degree in /) ‘ f/ // A H“:- .5! J / L COL A; '5' xm/vjch_ Major professor Wal ter F . Johnson Date May 16, 1958 O~169 LIBRARY ," <." . w umuhwm \fat‘c RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped beIow. MSU LIBRARIES mt r. (I: .“x M K! 31E 9% #1 4 / ACADEI-IIC ADJUSTMENT CF SELECTED MALE STUDENTS REPORTED FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION AT NECHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY by James William.Costar AN ABSTRACT Submitted to the School for Advanced.Graduate Studies of Tichigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION Department of Administrative and Educational Services ’“ Year 19 8 Approved 4/% 7 ’ Wm James William Costar AN ABSTRACT The Problem This study was concerned with the general problem of the academic adjustment of male students reported for disciplinary action at Michigan State University. It was the purpose of this research to investigate the academic progress in selected areas made by these students during the four regular academic years they would normally be expected to remain in school. A secondary problem was to examine certain characteristics of disciplinary sbudents at the time of their admission. The Sample The sample was composed of all male students admitted to Michigan State University for the first time in the fall of 1953 and subsequently reported to the‘Dean of Student's office for disciplinary action during one of the succeeding four regular academic years. This group consisted of 122 men of whom 18 were transfers from other institutions of higher learning and 10h were freshmen entering college for the first time. When compared with nonfdisciplinary students at the time of admission, the men in this group were more likely to be younger, non-veterans, and graduates of larger high schools. No significant differences were found between the disciplinary and non-disciplinary students at that time when the factors of scholastic aptitude, state residence, transfer status, James William Costar 2 declaration of a major, and attendance at a Michigan State University summer clinic were considered. Pkthodology and Procedure The entire population of 2,u80 male students entering Michigan State University for the first time in the fall of 1953 was divided into disciplinary and non-disciplinary groups. Data was obtained for all subjects on the following variables: (1) contacts at the Counseling Center, (2) enrollments in the improvement services, (3) repetition of courses, (h) attempts to accelerate courses, (5) changes of majors, and (6) withdrawals from school and grade point averages. Both within group and between groups comparisons were made. The chi-square, "t" test and analysis of variance statistics were used in the analysis of the data. The ijor Findings 1. Significantly more disciplinary than non-disciplinary students contacted the Counseling Center during the second and third.years of the study. No significant differences were found for the first and fourth years. 2. Significantly more disciplinary than non-disciplinary students changed preferences during the second and third years of the study. No significant differences were found for the first and fourth years. James William Costar 3 3. Significantly fewer disciplinary than non-disciplinary students withdrew from school during the first year of the study. No significant differences were found for the second, third, and fourth years. h. Significantly more disciplinary than non-disciplinary students enrolled in the improvement services during the second.year of the study. No significant difference was found during the first year. 5. Significantly fewer disciplinary than non-disciplinary students attempted to accelerate a Basic College course during the second year of the study. No significant difference was found during the first year. 6. Significantly more disciplinary than non-disciplinary students repeated courses during the first and second.years of the study. 7. The grade point averages of the disciplinary students were lower than those of non-disciplinary students for all quarters in the study. The differences were significant for nine of the twelve terms. 8. No significant differences were found among the grade point averages of disciplinary students for the two quarters prior to and the two quarters following the term in which the offense was committed. Conclusions The results of this study lead to the general conclusion that a majority of the male students reported for disciplinary action have committed minor offenses which do not differ greatly from acceptable behavior. It was also concluded that the disciplinary students were not as well adjusted academically as the non-disciplinary students during the period under consideration. ACADEMIC ADJ USTIVIENT OF SELECTED MALE STUDENTS REPORTED FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION AT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY by James Nilliam Costar 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 Department of Administrative and Educational Services 1958 James William.Costar Candidate for the degree of Doctor of Education Final Examination: May 15, 1958, 8:30 a.m., Room 17, Merrill Hall. 'Dissertation: Academic Adjustment of Selected Male Students Reported for Disciplinary Action at Michigan State University Outline of Studies: Najor area - Guidance and Counseling Minor areas - Educational Psychology, General Psychology Biographical Items: Born - February 19, 1925, Hawarden, Iowa Undergraduate Studies - State University of South Dakota, Vermillion, South Dakota Graduate Studies - State University of South Dakota, Vermillion, South Dakota, 1950-1952 Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, l9Sh-l958 Experience: Canton Public Schools, Canton, South Dakota Social Studies Teacher and Coach, 1950-1952 Teacher-Counselor, 1952-1953 Director of Guidance, 1953-195h Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan Graduate Assistant, 195h-1955 Temporary Instructor-Counselor, 19Sh-l955 Instructor in Guidance and Counseling, 1955 - present Member of American Personnel and Guidance Association, American.Psychological Association, Michigan Psychological Association, Michigan Counselors Association, Phi Delta Kappa ACKNOWLEDGNENTS The author wishes to express his sincere appreciation to Dr. Walter F. Johnson, Jr., who, as his major professor and.Guidance Committee Chairman, provided invaluable assistance in this research and untiring cooperation and guidance throughout the entire graduate program. He also wishes to eXpress his gratitude to the other members of his Guidance Committee: Dr. Byron Van Roekel, Dr. Raymond N. Hatch, and Dr. Carl Frost for the giving of their time and suggestions. In addition, he is greatly indebted to Dr. Willard Harrington of the Office of Evaluation Services, Michigan State University, for his efforts and encouragement in the collection of much of the data. Special gratitude is also felt for the coOperation of Dr. John Truitt, Director of the Men's Division of Student Affairs, Michigan State University. Finally, to his wife, Joy, the author expresses his utmost appreciation for her assistance in tabulating, for her typing of the rough draft, and for her constant encouragement and inspiration without which this project would have been impossible. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ........................................... Statement of the problem .......................... Assumptions ....................................... Definition of terms ............................... Sc0pe and limitations of the study ................ Need for the study ................................ Organization of the thesis ........................ II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ............................... Literature pertaining to college discipline ....... Conceptions of student discipline ............ Formulation of conduct codes ................. Administration of discipline programs ........ Research studies concerning college discipline .... Summary ........................................... III. PROCEDURE AND METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY ................. A description of the student disciplinary program at Michigan State University ................. Method of choosing the sample ..................... Operational hypotheses ............................ Hypotheses concerning the use of certain university services and the academic PAGE N 11 12 12 1h 15 17 22 2t 2t 28 28 CHAPTER progress made by male disciplinary students at Michigan State University ... Within group comparisons ................ Between groups comparisons .............. Hypotheses concerning the grade point averages of disciplinary students ................ Procedure for analyzing data ...................... Analysis of data relating to the use of certain university services and the academic progress made by male dis- ciplinary and non-disciplinary students ................................ Analysis of the data relating to the grade point averages of disciplinary and non- disciplinary students ................... Summary ........................................... IV. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SAMPLE .......................... Number of offenses ................................ Kinds of offenses ................................. Characteristics of the sample ..................... Summary ........................................... V. ANALYSIS OF DATA PERTAINING TO.ACADENUC PROGRESS AND UNI-VEIRISITY SEWICES 0.00.00.00.00.........OOOOOOOOO PAGE 28 29 29 3O 30 30 31 32 3h 35 35 35 b1 1:2 CHAPTER Introduction ...................................... Presentation of data and testing of hypotheses .... Within group comparisons ..................... Between groups comparisons ................... Counseling center contacts .............. Preference changes ...................... Withdrawals from school ................. Use of improvement services ............. Acceleration of courses ................. Repetition of courses ................... Summary ........................................... VI. ANALYSIS OF DATA PERTAINING TO GRADE POINT AVERAGES .... Introduction ...................................... Presentation of data and testing of hypotheses .... Term grade point average comparisons.......... Trends in grade point averages ............... Summary ........................................... VII . SUID’ARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The problem ....................................... Methodology and procedures ........................ Hypotheses concerning the use of certain university services and the academic progress made by male disciplinary students at Michigan State UniverSity 00......0.00.00........OOOOOOOOOOIO vi PAGE N2 b2 12 145 E6 ha 149 50 51 52 53 55 SS 55 SS 56 62 63 63 6h 65 CHAPTER Within group comparisons ..................... Between groups comparisons ................... Hypotheses concerning the grade point averages of disciplinary students ........................ The findings ...................................... Findings in the data pertaining to the disciplinary students at the time of their admission ......................... Findings in the data pertaining to academic progress and the use of certain university services ..................... Findings in the data pertaining to the grade point averages of disciplinary and non-disciplinary students ............... Conclusions ....................................... Implications for further research ................. Implications for discipline programs .............. BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................... APPENDIX A Procedure for handling of student disciplinary situations by All-University Judiciary Committee ................................. APPENDIX B Student Conduct Report Form .................... APPENDIX C Non-Conformist Report Forms .................... vii PAGE 65 66 66 67 67 68 69 69 71 71 73 77 80 82 viii PAGE APPENDIX D Term.Frequencies of Students in the POpulation Who Participate in Various Academic Activities ................................ 85 APPENDIX E Differences Between the Individual Grade Point Averages of Disciplinary Students and the Khan Grade Point Averages of Non- Disciplinary Students for the Quarters Prior to, at the Time of, and Following the Offense ......OOOOOOOOOO......OOOOOOOOO 92 TABLE I. II. III. VI. VII. VIII. XI. XII. XIII. LIST OF TABLES Number and Kinds of Disciplinary Offenses by Quarters .. Chi-squares for Characteristics of Disciplinary Students at the Time of Admission ................. "T" Tests of Mean Scores Earned by Disciplinary and Non-Disciplinary Students on Entrance Exam1rlations ...0............OOOOOOOOO0.0.0.0...... Disciplinary Students Each Year Who Participate in Various Academic Activities One or Mbre Times ..... Disciplinary and Non-Disciplinary Counseling Center "Contact Students" for Each Year of the Study ..... Disciplinary and Non-Disciplinary "Preference Change Students" for Each Year of the Study .............. Disciplinary and Non-Disciplinary "Withdrawal Students" for EaCh Year Of the Study ......OOOOOOOOOOOOOOIOOO Disciplinary and Non-Disciplinary "Improvement Service Students" for the First Two Years of the Study .... Disciplinary and Non-Disciplinary "Acceleration Attempt Students" for the First Two Years of the Study .... Disciplinary and Non-Disciplinary "Repeat Students" for the First Two Years of the Study .............. Comparison of Term Grade Point Averages of Disciplinary and Non-Disciplinary Students ........ Analysis of Variance of Differences in Grade Point Averages Earned by Disciplinary and Non- Disciplinary Students for the Quarters Prior to and Including the Term of the Offense .......... Analysis of Variance of Differences in.Grade Point Averages Earned by Disciplinary and Non- Disciplinary Students for the Quarters of and Following the Offense ............................. PAGE 36 38 ho h? 1:8 149 SO 51 S2 57 60 61 LIST CF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1. Mean Differences Between.Grade Point Averages Earned by Disciplinary and.Non-Disciplinary Students ..... S9 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Student misconduct is a major problem for college and university officials. Recent publications dealing with college discipline con- sistently point out the growing interest of student personnel workers in this tepic. A strong emphasis upon the develOpment of the total personality of the student has strengthened the curiosity about such behavior. In past years the concepts regarding the misbehavior of youth have changed. many college officials now regard the acquisition of socially acceptable modes of behavior as a natural part of the growing up process. As such, it is viewed as an important factor in the total educative process. E. G. Williamson, a strong advocate of this point of view, summarized the thinking of many when he wrote: Herein behavior is, therefore, to be expected as a deduction from the general theories and observations on human learning in all aSpects of develOpment. It follows, I believe, that the school must adapt itself to the probability that negative behavior is as much to be expected as is positive. If my prOposition is sound, then it follows that each school should anticipate that it will be engaged in the rehabilitation business as a normal part of its emphasis upon helping the individual to deve10p positive behavior and to eliminate, or at least to avoid, negative instances. In brief, I believe that error is inherent in human deve10pment and that elimination of error, which.we call rehabilitation in disciplinary counseling, is a normal part of education. (hl:68) Such a concept holds considerable significance for disciplinary programs in institutions of higher learning. College officials are now less inclined to judge a student as good or bad on the basis of his behavior. They, on the other hand, feel a stronger need to organize their services in such a way that the total resources of the school may be used to help satisfy the unique needs of the disciplinary student. The desirability of such a program is expressed by J. D. Foley: Although a great deal has been written about this phase of student life, few writers have suggested renedial or preventive techniques which are of assistance to the administrator who faces such problems. Since it seems likely that discipline will always be with us because each new generation of college students mst repeat the life cycle of the species, it is inportant to plan systemtically to c0pe with this problem. (15:569) Such a proposal is based upon the assumption that anti-social behavior in college students may be the result of the inability of a norml student to cope with a specific and unusual situation. In support of this idea Foley further states: There are three points which are imortant in our orientation of discipline. First, one mst differentiate between delinquent behavior and the delinquent individual. Delinquent behavior is often found in an individual who is not characteristically a true delinquent. In the second place, problems which we call disciplinary are problems of adjustment. Social and ethical deviations are symtoms of mladjustamt as are problems of scholar- ship, personal conflict, or vocational choice. Finally, delinquent behavior is a function of the number of laws and regulations which are set up to effect the social control of students. (15: 569) Providing a positive kind of assistance for students who demonstrate undesirable forms of behavior is now considered to be an imortant function 3 of most colleges and universities. Whether or not schools are effective in carrying out this activity is dependent upon the possession of a conprehens ive understanding of the unique educational needs of these students. . STATEI‘ENT CF THE PRGLEH The apparent lack of infomtion which would help provide a more utilitarian understanding of students who fail to conduct themselves in an acceptable manner was a motivating factor in this research. The purpose of this study was: (1) to describe certain traits of sale students at Michigan State University who were reported to the Dean of Student's office for disciplinary action; (2) to coapare these students with no... disciplinary students in the utilization of selected university services; ( 3) to test some typotheses concerning the trend in the term grade point averages of disciplinary students during the four-year period during which they would normlly be expected to retain in school; and (h) to discover the inplications of these findings for the organization and administration of college disciplinary programs. A nore detailed description of the specific twpotheses to be tested will be presented in the discussion of procedures and nethodology found in Chapter III. ASSUIPl'ImlS Before the collection of data in this study began, several basic assunptions were mde. They were that: 1. Human behavior is a complex process and individual behavior of one kind (discipline) is likely to be closely associated with that of another form (academic). 2. The records kept in the offices of the Michigan State University Registrar and Dean of Students are sufficiently accurate and complete for purposes of the present study. 3.. The grades earned by male students at Michigan State University are comparable from one college or department to another. Disciplinary program - Disciplinary action - Disciplinary case - Disciplinary student - DEFINITION OF TERMS A disciplinary program consists of all those policies, regulations, facilities, and services being used by the university in the punishment and prevention of undesirable behavior and in the rehabilitation of students committing such acts. The term disciplinary action is any restriction of privileges, assessment of fines, assignment of duties, or regulation of attendance placed upon a student or student organization for the violation of a university regulation. Any student reported to the discipline officer for disciplinary action is classified as a disciplinary case. The terms disciplinary student and disciplinary case are regarded as synonomous in this study. Grade point averag - Preference - Non-Preference - Accelerate a course - Igrovement services - In order to facilitate calculation, points are assigned to letter grades at Michigan State University. Four points are assigned for each credit of A work; three points for each credit of B work; two points for each credit of C work; one point for each credit of D work. An F is classified as a zero. The grade point average is a mmber found by dividing the total points earned during a period of one or more terms by the total credits carried during the same period. This term is used to indicate the choice of major mde by the student at the time of or following his admission into the university. Non-preference means that the student has not declared a preference. At Michigan State University students say receive credit in certain basic courses without attending the class sessions if they receive a grade which is sufficiently high in the preceding course in the series and are able to obtain a satisfactory score on a comrehensive examination over related material. Non-credit courses in reading, writing, speech, arithmetic and spoken English are offered in the Basic College at Michigan State University. SCOPE AND LIMITATIGIS 0'“ THE STUDY sage 2i as. m The scape of this study has been delimited in several major areas. First, factors affecting the availability of certain related data restricted the study to the four-year period from the date the experimental group of students were admitted to school until their normlly eaqaected time of graduation. Second, because of the wide differences in mores pertaining to the behavior of male and femle students and in the manner in which regulations governing such behavior are enforced, only mle students are included in this study. Finally, just those factors thought most likely to be associated with academic achievement were chosen for study. Limitations 3; the M This study was an attempt to describe some personal characteristics and the academic progress of disciplinary students. (1) The ability to accurately describe students who are reported for disciplinary action does not always carry with it the ability to predict which students will be reported. This stumr has nde no attempt at prediction. (2) Oily Michigan State University students were studied in this research problem. Because of this, the findings are more applicable to this institution than to other universities. (3) Three mpotheses involving grade-point averages were tested. To the extent that final grades reflect the subjective judgment of the instructor, the objectivity of the findings are likely to be reduced. 7 (A) Failure, due to limitations in the records which were used, to analyze the factors of repeating courses, atteqiting to accelerate courses and use of the imarovement services during the third and fourth years of the study m obstruct the identification of trends in these areas. (5) There will be very little infomtim concerning the effect of a change in environment on the student because no attegit was sade to follow the academic progress of disciplinary students who withdrew from Michigan State University and enrolled at other institutions. NEED FCR TIE STIMY Uith constantly increasing enrollments, the task of assisting students who find it difficult to adjust to their new surroundings is rapidly becoming one of the most pressing functions of the college or university staff. This factor has also added to the comlexity of the problem. The increasing heterogeneity of the modern student body is as imortant as the increase in size. A largernunber of high school graduates entering college has resulted in a more diverse combination of interests, objectives, motivations, and talents. lbre and more students caught in the wave of increased enthusiasm for a college education are finding it difficult to aka a satisfactory adjustment to the comparatively strange academic and social denands of institutions of higher learning. It is also true that a more heterogeneous student body increases the number of different kinds of maladjustments with which the university mist be prepared to work. These new demands suggest an increasing need for accurate up-to-date infomtion pertaining to the field of student discipline. 8 However, very little of a scientific nature has been done in recent years to increase the effectiveness of college disciplinarians. Such a con- dition is described by Hilliamson and Foley with emphasis upon the particular kinds of information which are needed: The literature contains no description of methods of investigation to determine the facts of the alleged misbehavior, the nature of the individual's background and its relationship to the nature of theoffense, or methods of apprehension and procedures of handling the individual case. The few public descriptions nade of discipline in contenporary education refer usually to mchinery whereby alleged offenders are brought to trial for determination of guilt; and little description is given with respect to what takes place after the action or punishment has been determined. (h2:27) A supporting observation is made by Conway in a more recent comment: Despite the persistence of disciplinary problems in American Colleges there is a paucity of material in the current literature to indicate the specific nature and extent of the problem, the procedures followed in dealing with deviant behavior in its varied forms, or the effective- ness of such procedures and the remediation or prevention of aberration from established norms. (7:351) The situation has become more conplicated because of the acceptance of a newer and more recent philosophy of discipline by college and university officials. Good discipline has come to be regarded as self- discipline which exists within the imiividual and has as its basis self-understanding and self-control. Gilbert Urenn explained this orange in point of view when he wrote: lo one can speak about discipline without making quite clear what he means by the word. In a discussion of the subject it should be clear that whereas the ordirary connotation of the word discipline is that it means punish- ment of some sort, a restriction or an obligation placed upon a person because he has violated the mores or a law, there is another entirely different meaning. By this meaning of the word, ”discipline” signifies self control. A well disciplined person is an individual who has thorough mntrol of himself, who takes care of the situation with- in himself and without outer regulation. The actual evolution of the concept of discipline in colleges is that of moving from the first concept to the second. We are more concerned now than ever before with matters of self control, self decision and self determination in the lives of students. we realize now that m of the arrangements mde for the so-called “welfare” of students have not con- tributed at all to the welfare of the growth of the individual. These arrangements have, on the other hand, been for the welfare of the group or of the institution, or of society, but perhaps at the expense of the growing maturity of the individual. (1:11:625) Having recognized the need to modernize their disciplinary procedures, college officials are now desirous of accurate and detailed informtion about disciplinary cases which will guide their thinking during the plan- ning and administration of such programs. It was the intent of this study to obtain informtion pertinent to one aspect of the total program; namely, that dealing with the academic qualifications and progress of ale students who have been referred to school authorities for disciplinary action. WIZATION (1“ THE THESIS This thesis is divided into seven chapters. The first chapter includes a statement of the problem, definitions of term, underlying assunptions, and the limitatilms of the stucw. In the second chapter a review of the literature pertinent to the study is made. ChapterThree contains a description of the methodology of the study and the procedures used in analyzing the data. The disciplinary program at Michigan State University is also discussed. Selected characteristics of disciplinary 10 students at the time of their admission to Michigan State university are reported in Chapter Four. Chapters Five and Six contain an analysis of the data. Hypotheses concerning academic progress and the use of certain university services are examined in.Chapter Five, while those related to gradeepoint averages of disciplinary students are found in.Chapter Six. A.final chapter is devoted to a consideration of the importance of the findings for the organization and administration.of disciplinary programs in institutions of higher learning. CW II REVIEW (1“ TIE LITERATURE A thorough review of the literature pertaining to this study seems necessary before an adequate interpretation of the findings can be for-:lated. To gain insight into the basic problem underlying this research, written accounts of the thinking and experiences of persons actively engaged in the field of student discipline are systematically reviewed. Special consideration is given to the questions: (1) what is student discipline? (2) Hint is the role of the college in the administration of discipline? (3) what is the relationship of discipline to the academic program? . The amount of literature pertaining to scholastic achievement at the college level is voluminous. Since this stum' was not basically concerned with achievement, no attempt is made here to review all the 1 studies of the prediction of academic success. f __ Douglass (12), nurflinger (13), Borow (3), Cosand (8), Garrett (l7), Segal (33), Travers (36), and Harris (20) have published surveys of the literature related to this topic. Together, these surveys cover the period from 1930 to 1953. Host of the studies correlated high school rank and entrance examination scores with grade averages. In a ujority of the cases, the coefficients ranged from .30 to .60. An excellent review of non-academic factors associated with college achievement are found in the doctoral dissertations of DeRidder (ll) and Fessenden (1h). The relationship of scholastic success to such things as family background, housing, veteran status, major, age, size of high school, and personality characteristics is described. 12 I. LITERATURE PERTAIIIIG TO C(IJEGE DISCIPLINE Conceptions 3f Student Discipline. The concept of student discipline has changed considerably since institutions of higher learning first assumed the responsibility for mintaining control over the behavior of their students. The early universities looked upon the misconduct of students as a syaptom of a depraved mind. The most suitable punishment was devised and administered accordingly. while elaborating on this description, Cowley stated in 19M.“ The natural depravity theory dominated the thinking of most educators until about a century ago. Growing from the theological doctrine of the natural depravity of man, the theory as it operated during its heyday, assumed tilt the natural inclinations of children and college youths were corrupt and unregenerate and that students should be subjected to strict discipline both in their personal lives and in their courses of study. (9:6) Since those early times the concept of discipline has been in an almost constant state of change. Today the view held by mam college administrators is quite different from the one described by Cowley. itiens reviewed some of the deve10pments in the area of discipline when he wrote: Four concepts of discipline, as defined by Hebster, are pertinent to this discussion: Punishment, enforced obedience, training, and instruction. In the order enum- erated, these concepts reflect the historical development of school discipline. By 1917 a new concept was developed. It conceived the function of discipline to be (a) the creation and preservation of the conditions that are essential to the orderly progress of the work for which the school exists; (b) the pr aration of the pupils to participate in adult society; (c gradual imression of the fundamentals of self- control. ( 39616-136) 13 This more mdern concept, that discipline is a utter of instruction, is of particular interest to institutions of higher learning. Students at this level are considered to be in need of experiences which will help them acquire the nature traits of self-sufficiency and self-control. may colleges are now inclined to define discipline on a broader basis. While discussing this point, l-iawkes has said: Discipline may be defined either broadly or narrowly. Broadly defined, it is as wide as education itself. Physical, moral, and intellectual discipline an be defined so as to include the entire development of the individual, involving his relationships to his environ- ment both animate and inanimate, both lumen and devine. (21:180) Meller (27), Redl (32), Cowley (9), Benn (2), and Coleun (6), all describe the development of this newer concept of college discipline. A su-ary of the point of view held by these educators is presented by Clark, ihgie and Laidrus in their statement: Discipline at its best is not a negative list of "thou shalt nots' enforced by standardized or unusual punishment, but rather, it is a positive process of learning and development achieved through responsible participation in real life situations. (5:189) Acceptance of a more liberal definition of discipline iv w institutions of higher learning has strengthened the belief tint the super- vision and control of student behavior is a vital function of the school. It is also a papular notion that discipline is administered best when it is closely integrated with the instructional program. Hilliauon lends support to this theory in his writings: 'An educational institution is not Justified in taking for granted that students will readily learn and even more readily accept and be guided by a new set of ground rules 1h merely because the institution states in the official bulletin that these are the ground rules at dear old Siwash. lie must learn to apply instructioml and pedagogical methods effectively to this aspect of the students' college life as well as to his learning new study methods, new methods of preparing for examinations, new methods of reading more nterial, and the like. (lili79) Miner stated with respect to this conclusion: The modern concept of college discipline is predicated on the student personnel philosOpr that discipline is an educative process, corrective not punitive. It should be a learning experience affording the student every opportunity for understanding himself better. It should also play a vital role in helping him adjust with greater facility to behavior patterns more acceptable than those which originally got him into trmble. (25:551) Formulation 3_f_ Conduct Codes. There are nary types of institutions of higher education, and the literature sets forth many different ways of administering disciplinary programs. Variety is fostered from the start by the fact that rules governing the behavior of students are formlated by a number of different legislative bodies. Clark (14693) points out that student regulations are usually established by one or more groups. He lists the following as exasples: (l) the regents or governing board; (2) the president or dean; (3) faculty committees; (h) the student body or representatives of it; or (S) representatives of all of these groups meeting jointly. Regardless of the origin or means of enforcing student regulations, there is a great deal of uniformity among institutions in the objectives they hold for discipline. Almost every article on college discipline since 1920 refers to the desirability of programs which thasize the education and rehabilitation of students instead of punislnent and coercion. 15 names (21), Peiffer and walker (31), Cowley (9) and Gruendorf (18), all refer to the need for good discipline in education and to the relative ineffectiveness of punishment as a means of achieving it. Administration 35 Discipline Programs. The area of student discipline most adequately covered in the literature is that pertaining to principles for administering disciplinary programs. K. H. nieller (27:302-09), one of the most prolific present-day writers in this field, asserts in an article dealing with the theory of campus discipline that the disciplinary officer is gradually turning away from religion and philosOphy as the source of his principles and theories. He now looks more often to the social sciences for newer concepts to guide his thinking such as: mental health, mdal behavior, student mores, and sub-culture patterns. In an earlier article Meller (26) points out that this search for new concepts in the social sciences is the result of a growing movement in the present era from absolute to relative standards of behavior. She states further that relative standards are in reality ”quasi-absolutes' or 'temporary absolutes' which have been found necessary for the peaceful co-existence of the individuals who make up a society. meller (28) further suggests that the wide difference between our expectations concerning the conduct of male and femle students is an exasple of these relative standards at work. As early as 1938, Lloyd-Jones and Smith (21;) wrote of the advisability of administering discipline on an individual basis keeping in mind the specific motivations, limitations, and resources of the offender. Others, 16 such as Miner (25), Uilliamson (140), and Urenn (hi4) contend that dis- cipline should be thought of as counseling. Wrenn lists three principles governing the use of the counselor in the disciplinary program: (1) The counselor in any circumstance should not have disciplinary authority over the individual whom he is attemting to help or he will risk losing his rapport and his effectiveness in the counseling ul‘t‘onShipa (2) lo student regulation case comes before a discipline comittee until it has first been screened through the counseling process. (3) The relationship between the counselor and the student is of greatest importance. (“4:627) Agencies responsible for the handling of disciplinary programs are of various types. The most common arrangement for the administration of discipline is by joint action of administrative officers and faculty com- mittees. Bailey (1:1331) lists the individual agencies in order of popularity. The most frequently mentioned is the student dean (Dean of hen or beam of Women), followed in order by the president, academic dean, student governing board, faculty-administrat ive committee, administrative committee, faculty committee, administrative-faculty-student committee, and the faculty as a whole. The role of the peer group in administering student discipline is described by several writers in the field. Cunningtnm (10), Redl (32), Clark, ihgie, and Landrus (S) are a few who have been strong advocates of the ignortance of understanding the power of the student body to set and maintain standards of behavior. Williamson (hi) imlies that the group can be an effective means of preventing misconduct from occurring. 17 II. RESEARCH STUDIES CQCERNING COLu-Iifi DISCIPLINE As stated previously, very few research studies dealing with college discipline are to be found in the literature. A majority of them con- sist of general surveys of disciplinary practices and procedures as they are found in selected institutions of higher edication. (he of the earliest studiesof this nature was reported by Gardner (16) in 1936 and Haggerty and Brumbaugh (19) in 1939. It consists of an analysis of student personnel work for the year 1937-38 in two hundred and sixty colleges and universities accredited by the iiorth Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools. In general, the authors found that the institutions under study held a wide range of theories regarding the discipline of students. However, a vast majority of them, 93 per cent, defined discipline as a means for the mental and moral train- ing of students. linety-four per cent of the group holding this attitude reported that it is the policy of their institution to vary the procedures and penalties on the basis of the individual needs of the student with 70 per cent agilaining that it is sometimes necessary to sacrifice the training of an individual to protect the student body or the institution. Over half of the schools issued written statements of behavior regulations to assist their students. In 19%, The National Association of Deans and Advisors of lien (29) conducted a national survey of the functions of student administration for men in colleges and universities. Their findings point to an increas- 1139 wareness of the need for assisting the student with his personal and 18 social adjustment. Fifty-four functions of the Dean of Men were arranged in order from the most to the least inportant. The first three mentioned were to: (l) analyse and adjust the student's social problems; (2) analyze and adjust the student's moral problems; and ( 3) analyze and adjust the student's emotional problems. Also in 191:8, Williamson (143) and his associates at the University of Hinnesota began a study of selected characteristics of disciplinary students at that institution. Attention was focused on such features as the age, sex, class, major, and grades of 1,570 male and female disciplinary cases originating between July 1, l9hl, and July 30, l9h8. lo attemt was nde to assess the personality structure of the students. The authors concerned themselves with the major hypothesis: students into co-it misbehaviors are a random sapling of students in general. The chi-square technique was used to test for differences among the groups where data were tabulated by frequency counting. It was concluded that no significant differences existed in the proportion of disciplinary and non-disciplinary students in veteran status, high school scholastic rank, or percentile rank on the American Council on Education psychological examination. Significant differences were found in some areas. Proportionally more .le than fale students were reported for disciplinary action. The discipline cases were distributed in such a way that there was a slight over-representation in the Arts College and under-representation in Agriculture and the Graduate School. Fewer seniors were involved in dis- Ciplimry situations than might be expected. Students from states other 19 than Minnesota appeared more often in the disciplinary population. Differences in the numbers of disciplinary cases among the types of college residences were significant at the l per cent level. In conclusion, the authors stated their belief that there is some evidence to show that students charged with misbehavior are not markedly different from students in general. Conway (7), in 1952, conducted a study very similar to that of ihggerty and Dru-haugh. By this time there were 312 institutions of higher learning in the lorth Central Association. No hundred and eighteen responded to a questionnaire regarding disciplimry procedures as of July, 1951. Com-ray was primarily concerned with (1) the institutional purpose of disciplinary action; (2) the nature and extent of deviant behavior; and (3) the methods of dealing with misconduct, including both corrective and preventive measures. Some of the significant findings were: (1) In response to the question relative to the purpose of the institution in disciplinary action, over half of those sampled listed the welfare of the student as their njor concern. It is interesting to note that one third of the salple failed to respond to this item. ( 2) Only to per cent returned numerical data concerning the nature and extent of the three types of deviant behavior which were described. ( 3) The percentages reporting success in the prevention of disciplinary situations through the better known means were quite small (52 per cent or less in each case). (it) The student tended most frequently to fall short of institutional expectations in the area of social conduct. 20 (5) Hide variations were still noted in the nature and extent of deviations, procedures and practices, sources of control and support, and type of dis- ciplinary organization. (6) when comared with the earlier studies, there were substantial increases in the tendency to (a) vary procedures according to individual needs; (b) favor general rather than specific rules; (c) issue state- ments of rules and regulations; and (d) allow students to participate in the framing of the rules and regula- tions. More recently, 1955, Truitt (37) carried out an intensive study of the operation of disciplinary programs at ten large midwestern universities. The methodology included the use of a structured interview with the school official in charge of each program, discussions with other staff meters and students, direct observation, and an examination of school catalogs and other printed materials related to the program. Over half of the persons contacted felt that their total disciplinary programs were at least 90 per cent effective in reaching the objectives set up for them. The administrative officials were also agreed that the university should accept the responsibility for the total deve10pment of each student. A portion of this responsibility was taken to include the prevention of the violation of students' privileges and civil rights. Truitt concluded that since student discipline has the same objectives as the other per- somel services, it should be comidered as one of them. According to him, it would then logically follow that the same amount of preparation Ind encouragement should be given to it by administrators. Other pertinent findings were: 21 (1) line of the ten universities have connittees for student discipline. (2) hat of the housing units have a judicial organiza- tion to handle disciplinary probleas arising within the unit. (3) There is a large amount of uniforaity in the dis- ciplinary actions taken by the different schools. (It) The nest desirable characteristics of disciplinary workers are a sincere interest in people, adeqmte experience, and cospetent training. (5) The orientation of new students to campus regulations is an iportant function of the disciplinary program. (6) Ineffective comnication between disciplinary officials and staff members of other departments is often the result of differences in a basic philosoplv of discipline. In two more recent studies, one by Osborne, Sanders, and Young (30) and the other by Jackson and Clark (22), the personality dynamics of the student were identified as an iqaortant factor in discipline cases. The findings in both studies support the-use of the Minnesota mlti-Phasic Personality Inventory as a useful tool in identifying potential behavior deviates among college students. Jackson and Clark also point out that students in their stuch' apprehended for theft (a) have academic ability equal to other students, (b) do not achieve as well scholastically as students of equivalent class status, and (c) are from the large commi- ties. Parental status and college residence did not seen to be significant factors. l»? ‘I 'e 22 SUWY A review of the literature reveals an increasing interest in student discipline at the college and university level. However, constant refer- ence is still being made to the lack of research inthis particular area. Hhea cospared to other phases of higher education such as admissions procedures, scholastic achievement and finance, very little nterial related to college discipline seeas to exist. A large portion of the books and articles give some consideration to the concept of student discipline. There appears to be wide-spread agreeaent among the authors todmr that punishment is not a satisfactory deterrent for aisconduct. A acre pepular conception is that discipline should be viewed as a positive attemt to assist the student in becoming self-sufficient and self-controlled within his society. There is an increasing tendency to provide this assistance in colleges and universities through foraal disciplinary prograas. The control of student conduct has established itself as an acceptable part of the total instructional program. Standards of behavior are becoming more relative than absolute. Rules and regulations are in most cases for-slated democratically through the combined efforts of adainistrators, faculty aeabers and students. As a result of more efficient methods of comnication within the student personnel profession, there has been an increasing uniforaity in the procedures for administering discipline ngraas e 23 Only a few studies have dealt with characteristics of disciplinary students. For 319* years aisconduct was viewed as a syspton of a depraved aind. Discipline officers today are mothesizing that students who behave in a socially unacceptable sinner are a random samle of students in general. There is soae evidence to support this theory when it is applied to such factors as scholastic aptitude, college residence, veteran status, and high school rank. There is conflicting data regarding the factors of age, college grades, choice of curriculum and size of coamnity fron which they came. Several studies support the belief that personality dynamics are important items in the description of disciplinary students. Thus, a review of the literature reaffirms the belief that there is a particular need for additional research into the characteristics of disciplinary students. CHAPTER III PW AND METHCDQIHY CF THE STUDY I. A WK]! (1“ THE STUDENT DISCIPLINARY PRCERAN AT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVEFBITY The student disciplinary program at Michigan State University is a function of the Dean of Student's office. Mile disciplinary cases are handled either by a systen of student courts or by administrative representatives of the Men's Division of Student Affairs. Coordinating the efforts of each system. is a function of the Office of the Dean of Students. Bach university housing unit has a student judiciary committee to which ainor offenses arising within the unit are referred. Offenders residing in other than university housing are referred to the All- University Judiciary Court.1 Violations by officially recognized grows are handled by the executive committee of the Inter-Fraternity Council. Another all-university student court exists for the sole purpose of hearing appeals for traffic violations. Student courts do not have the responsibility for arriving at a final decision on cases coaing before them, but she reconendations for action to the head disciplimry official. T Procedures for the operation of the All-University Judiciary Court are found in Appendix A. 2S The Dean of Students has been delegated the authority to act as the head disciplinary official at Michigan State University. He is assisted by personnel of the Men's and Women's Divisions. The Director of the Men's Division is responsible for supervision of the conduct of all male students regardless of their place of residence. He may place students on social or warning probation without prior approval of the head dis- ciplinary official, make recommendations to the Dean of Students for action to be taken in situations which are more serious in nature, and coordinate the remedial efforts involving the services of other departments of the university. The type of disciplinary action taken against a student is largely dependent upon the severity with which the offense is viewed by the All- University Judiciary Court and administrative officials. The following is a list of disciplinary actions as described in the orientation handbook entitled Student Judiciary (35:28). I. Egulsion £522 college ReSponsibility of President Terms: a. Forfeit fees. b. Academic Dean determines grade for term. c. May not return to Michigan State University. II. Suspension Responsibility of Dean of Students Terms: a. Forfeit fees. b. Academic Dean determines grades for term. c. may return upon recommendation of ‘Dean of Students. III. Strict Disciplinary Probation Responsibility of Dean of Students Terms 3 a. b. c. d. Entry nde on transcript of credits. This entry resins on record. It my be removed at graduation if requested by the student himself to the Dean of Students. No extra-curricular activities. Parents are notified. Additional restrictions may be added to include social probation, as well as any other provisions deemed of therapeutic value. IV. Disgiplinary Probation Responsibility of Dean of Students Terms: a. b. e. lo extra-curricular activities. Parents are notified. Additional restrictions m be added to include social probation, as well as any other provisions deemed of therapeutic value. v. Social Probatign Responsibility of Dean of Students or authority delegated Terms: a. b. c. d. last report to resident adviser each night at a specified hour. Must stw in the dormitory or room for the balance of the night. Cannot leave campus to go home without special permission. The three above terms are for men. Terms for women are in the A.H.S. regulations. Any other restrictions eaqaected to be of value to the student. VI. Iarnigg Probation Responsibility of Dean of Students or authority delegated 26 27 Terms: my include any restrictions up to disciplinary probation, and any other action that would be of value to the student. VII. Parents are notified in cases where underage students are reported drinking off campus. Remedial or rehabilitative procedures in addition to the stipulations of each disciplinary action are an integral part of the disciplinary program. The most severe cases may be asked to withdraw from the univer- sity with no provision for being readmitted. In some instances a student my be withdrawn and readmitted if he presents evidence that he has assumed responsibility for his own rehabilitation while out of school. Some students are referred to the university's Psychiatric Service, Counseling Center, or Improvement Services. Occasionally no specific remedial action is recommended. Special report forms (Appendices B and C) are used in keeping a permnent confidential file of all disciplinary situations coming to the attention of the News Division. The Student Conduct Report includes personal data regarding the individual, a brief account of the situation in which the student was involved, and disposition of the case. The reports for file students are filed in the office of the Director of the Ben's Division of Student Affairs. Reports of minor offenses handled by the residence hall judiciary committees are held in the office of the Educational Director. A systeatic program for the orientation of students concerning camus regulations is an important part of the disciplinary program at 28 Michigan State University. The Dean of Students first discusses conduct during orientation week. However, a major portion of the responsibility for interpreting the specific rules and regulations rests with the staff in the residence halls where printed copies of the behavior codes are distributed to all new students and regularly scheduled meetings to discuss the rules are held. 11. mm) a? CHOKBING THE SAMPLE The purpose of this study was to trace the academic progress of disciplinary students over the four-year period they would normally be expected to remain in school. Hence, the sample of students selected for this study included all iales who entered Michigan State University in the fall of 1953 and were subsequently reported to the Dean of Student's office for disciplinary action during any regular academic year prior to the fall of 1957. The offenders were identified from the report forms on peremnent file in the Men's Division of Student Affairs. A more comprehen- sive description of the samle is found in Chapter IV. III. (PERATIONAL HYPOTHESES Uith reference to the general statement of the problem found on page three, the TVpotheses included for study my now be stated in operational terms. Motheses Concernig £25 Hg 2;: Certain Universig Services and 21: Academic Progress Fade a tale Discipliniry Students 33 Michigan State University. 29 Ei2212.§£222 Comparisons. That for each of the years included in this study there will be no difference in the prOportion of disciplinary students who: 1. contact the Counseling Center one or more times during the fbur‘years included for study. 2. change preferences one or more times during the four years included for study. 3. withdraw from school one or more times during the four years included for study. h. enroll in an improvement service one or more times during die first two years included for study. 5. attempt to accelerate one or more courses during the first two years included for study. 6. repeat one or more courses during the first two years included for study. Between Groups Comparisons. That for each of the years included in this study there will be no difference in the pr0portion of disciplinary and non-disciplinary students who: I. enroll in an improvement service one or more times during that year. 2. contact the Counseling Center one or more times during that year. 3. attempt to accelerate one or more courses during that year. ’4. repeat one or more courses during that year. 5. change preferences one or more times during that year. 6. withdraw from school one or more times during that year. Motheses Concerning the Grade Point Averages 3}; Disciplinary Students. There will be no difference in the grade point averages of: l. disciplinary and non-disciplinary students for any of the twelve school terms included for study. 2. disciplinary students for the term in which the offense was conitted and the two terms prior to it. 3. disciplinary students for the term in which the offense was omitted and the two terms following it. IV. PRCEEWRB FCR ANALYZING DATA Information about disciplinary and non-discipl inary students was gathered from the records of the Registrar, the Dean of Students, and the Office of Evalmtion Services. IBM cards were used to facilitate the analysis of the items. The Michigan State University Tabulating Department processed much of the data. Analysis 2;; Data Relating 3.3 235 £53 33 Certain University Services 312 Eh: Academic Pr0gress Made a file Disciplim .a_n_d lion-disciplm Students. Data pertaining to the hypotheses in this section were analyzed in Chapter V. Both within group and between groups coaparisons were made. The analysis procedure appropriate to this type of data is the chi-square. This statistic is used to test for significant differences among actual and theoretical frequencies as described in walker and Lev. (38:81-108) 31 The significance of the chi-square value is found by referring to 2 table constructed for that purpose. The table is entered a special X at the appropriate mailer of degrees of freedom. The degrees of freedom are found by subtracting one from the mmber of groups or classes. If chi-square is greater than the number in the table, it is significant at the level indicated. The .05 level of significance is acceptable for this Steal” a M 3; 2112 Data Relating 32 5333 Grade Point Averages 2; Disciplinary gig Non-Disciplinary Students. Data related to the hypotheses in this section were analyzed in Chapter VI. The two major purposes for analyzing this information were: (1) to discover any differences which may exist between the grade point averages for disciplinary and non-discipl inary students for each term in the study, and (2) to search for any trends in the grade point averages of disciplinary students which may exist during the terms prior to and following the term in which the offense was committed. The apprOpriate statistic to use in the testing for significant differences between two means is Student's "t" test which is discussed in walker and Lev. (38illi5-h6) The level of significance for 't' is found by entering a 't' table in the nnner suggested previously for chi-square. The .05 level is also acceptable for this part of the study. In the search for significant trends in the grade point averages, the man difference in the arm earned by disciplinary and hon- disciplinary students were first plotted graphically in order to facilitate 19 New] // r. /, l3? 32 the visualization of any patterns which w exist. The grades for the terns before and after the offense were analyzed separately using the analysis of variance statistic. Strength was added to the test by including the grades for the tern of the offense in each of the groups. The method of analysis of variance, as described by Johnson (232210-15), permits the coparison of more than two aeans at the same tine. The resulting value of F is equal to the ratio of one nean square divided by another. The significance level of this number is found by looking in an 1“ table like the one found in Snedecor (3h:216). SUM The samle for this study consisted of all aale students who entered lichigan State University for the first tine in the fall of 1953 and were subsequently involved in situations requiring disciplinary action during the next four regular academic years. Cases were identified free the discipline reports on file in the office of the Director of the Men's Division of Student Affairs. Data on all ale students were collected from the records of the Registrar and Office of Evaluation Services. Information concerning the disc ipliaary cases was gathered from the files belonging to the Director of the lbn's Division. The informtion was then coded and put on Elm. It was decided that a careful mainstion would be nade of certain admissions data regarding the sale before najor typotheses were tested. 33 The data used in the study were generally of two types, frequency tabulations and means. The chi-square statistic was used to analyze the frequency data. The significance of the difference between two leans was leasured by Student's *t' test while the comarison of several means was accoqalished through analysis of variance. Because the study was considered to be a survey type, it was decided that the .05 level of significance would be apprOpriate in each case. Q CWJ’I‘ERIV cmRACTERISTIC‘S (1‘ THE SAMPLE The population of students from which the sample was drawn consisted of 2,1i80 males who entered Michigan State University for the first tine in the fall of 1953. All of the students in the papulation reported for disciplinary action in the four regular acadenic years following their admission were included in the samle. These cases represent the most recent group of disciplimry students whose acadeaic progress could be mnined for that period of tine. The salple was comosed of 122 men of whoa 18 were transfer students and 1014 were freshmen. Since this investigation relates to specific situations--discip1iinl'y cases among sale students entering Michigan State University in the fall of l953—-the question of generalizations which nay be drawn naturally arises. If the results of the study are to be applicable in other situations, one list be able to describe the student and the type of offense in which he is involved. It seeas reasonable to suppose that the disciplinary problem at Michigan State University are siailar to those of other large universities. Therefore, it is conceivable that to the extent to which certain factors related to the student can be identified with the disciplinary situation in which he becones involved, progress can be established in accordance with the philosoptv mressed in Chapter II. An awareness of the frequency and nature of offenses would also be helpful in this regard. 35 M 2f Offenses. A total of 136 disciplinary situations were reported. In the first year 61 cases occurred; in the second, to cases; in the third, 23 cases; and in the fourth, 12 cases. Fourteen of the students were reported for two offenses during the period of time included for study. These are tabulated in Table I. 32292 of Offenses. Table I presents the kinds of offenses ranging froa ainor social aisbehavior to serious crises. Using the classification systu preposed by Uilliaason and Foley (1:2:810 and based on the overt behavior of the offender, the numbers of students connitting each type of offense were as follows: theft and burglary, 9; financial irregularity, 1; aisuse of privileges, 15; disorderly conduct, 21; sex aisconduct, 8; ainor misconduct, 78; and aiscellaneous, h. Characteristics 2;; the SEE-1:. To characterize the offender, a careful malysis was made of certain factors associated with the samle at the tine of adnission. The need for a more comrehensive stuch' of these item was suggested in the research of Uillimon, Jorve, and Lagerstedt-Knudson (103615-16) mentioned earlier. The authors say that their data seened to support the ivpothesis that sons college disciplinary situations :3 arise because students are not well acquainted with the sores and regulations of the institution. Their study also suggested that further inqury into the relationship of chronological age to dis- cipline see-ed warranted. In light of this, transfer status, state residence, size of high school, choice of njor, veteran status, age, and atteMance at the pre-school orientation clinics were chosen for study because of their relationship with age and faailiarity with campus regulations. TABLE I WAN!) KINDS CI“ DISCIPLINARY (FFEHSES BYQUARTERS Offense Quarter Total 53 Shih Sh 5:55 55 56 56 56 57 57 Mt and burglary 2 1 5 1 9 Hisuse of privileges 2 2 3 S 2 1 15 Sex aisconduct h l l 1 1 8 Financial irregularities 1 1 Disorderly condmt S 9 3 l 1 2 21 Minor aisconduct 7 10 17 S 7 7 S 13 2 2 3 78 Miscellaneous 2 l l h Totals 9 19 33 10 15 15 6 1 16 h 5 3 136 37 To deteraine the characteristics of the disciplinary students, the aen in the 8&‘310 were compared with all of the non-disciplinary nles in the population from which the sasple was drawn. Chi-square was used to test the significance of differences between the prOportion of disciplinary -and non-disciplinary students in each of the classifications selected for purposes of characterization. The underlying assumtion was that the proportion of disciplinary students in each classification would be the sane as the proportion of the total population in each classification. The chiesquares are reported in Table II. lo significant differences were found for in-state or out-state residence, declaration of a mjor at the tine-of adaission, or attendance at the suner orientation clinics. Significant findings were: (1) There is a significant difference between the proportions of disciplinary and non-disciplinary students who transferred froa other colleges and universities. The miner of transfer students who were involved in disciplinary situations is somewhat lower than the nuaber expected. ~ (2) There is a significant difference between the proportions of disciplinary and non-disciplinary students who graduated from large and sun high schools. The n‘udaer of disciplinary students froa large high schools was greater than would be meted. (3) There is a significant difference in the proportion of dis- ciplinary and non-disciplinary students who have been neabers of the Araed Forces. The veterans in the disciplinary group were under-represented. TABLE II OPE-W FCR CHARACTERISTICS (F DISCIPLINARY STUDENTS AT THE TIME (1“ ADHISSICN 38 s- on- s- ciplinary ciplinary 2 Confi- Characteristics who did who did x dence I T f 1' Level Transfer from another college 18 28.2 5110 529.8 5.05 .05 Have Michigan hone address 93 96.5 1815 1811.5 .611 NS Freshnen born MO“ 19311 7 1803 319 30707 8097 001 Transfers born before 19311 8 111.0 1126 1120.0 11.96 .001 Pro: class A or B high school 70 511.8 818 833.2 111.26 .001 Have emerience in Araed Forces 12 23.1 mu. 1132.9 6.93 .01 Attend 11.8.11. sun-er clinics 28 28.3 531 530.7 .003 NS State preference at admission 92 99.2 1869 1861.8 3.82 E 39 (11) There is a significant difference in the prOportion of dis- ciplinary and non-disciplinary students in the various age classifications. Younger students were over-represented in the disciplinary papulation. This was true of both the tramfer and freshmen groups. Since three of the hypotheses to be tested were related to the scholastic achievement of students in the samle, the performce of the latter on the battery of entrance examinations was carefully scrutinized. Comarisons were aade between the nean scores of disciplinary and non- disciplinary students obtained on the various tests and sub-tests of the battery. The "t" test was used to evaluate the significance of a differ- ence between the scans. No significant differences were found. A simary of the 't' ratios is found in Table III. 'T" TESTS (F MEAN SCORES EARNED BY DISCIPLINARY AND Hw-DISCMARY STUDENTS CN ENTRANCE EXAMINATIQIS TABLE III ho 5" 01'1- 13" O :- Exaninat ion ci 1 ina cjpl inaly T dence Fr Iverage N? Average Value bevel English 116 26.63 2195 211.62 1.39 NS Arithmetic 117 311.65 2199 311.66 .03 NS ACE Quantitative 120 113. 25 2236 112.22 1.06 NS ACE Linguistic 120 63.66 2236 61.90 1.28 115 Total 120 106. 91 2236 1011. 12 l. 35 NS Reading, Verbal 120 23.05 2236 23.67 .87 IS Reading, Comrehension 120 23.62 22 36 211.03 .61 NS Reading, ii I may vary because all students were not required to take the mainstions. 111 SUMMLRY The samle included in this study consisted of all male students who entered Michigan State University for the first tine in the fall of 1953 and were subsequently reported to the college authorities for disciplinary action prior to comletion of the spring tern of 1957. There were 122 nen responsible for 136 offenses in this group. The types of offenses ranged from ainor social misconduct to severe criaes. Certain personal characteristics of the sample at the tine of adaission were thought to have a possible bearing on the outcomes of the study. These traits were analyzed using the chi-square and "t' tests. Significant differences between disciplinary and non-disciplinary students were found in their age, transfer status, veteran status, and in the size of the high school from which they graduated. omen V ANALYSIS G“ DATA PERTAIIING T0 ACADEMIC PMRESS AND UNIVERSITY SERVICES INTRGNCTIG The data used to test the hypotheses regarding the academic progress and use of certain university services are presented in this chapter. Within group coQarisons were nade among the disciplinary cases. Between groups comarisons were nade between the disciplinary and non-disciplinary students. All students committing an offense within the four-year period were included in the disciplinary group. As reported in Chapter III, chi-square was used to test for significant differences in the proportion of students found in each category. Significance, in each case, was established at the .05 level of confidence. PRESENTATICII G‘ DATA AND TESTm Cl“ HYPOTHESES £252 95.99 Congarisons. The following null hypothesis is based on the assumtion tint students connitting an offense during the first, second, third, or fourth years of the study w vary in their progress toward the attainnent of a degree and in their use of certain services provided by the university: There are no differences in the acadeaic progress and use of certain university services made by students reported for disciplinary action (hiring the first, second, third, and fourth years included for study. .. .... ...-.7...” —- as.“ -7 {re- I? ALL ‘ ‘ ‘ i. 1 FA; .1 _ - 1 113 Six topics were analyzed using this lupothesis. They are: (1) enroll- aents in iqoroveaent services; ( 2) contacts at the Counseling Center; (3) attths to accelerate courses; (8) repeats made of courses; (5) changes of curriculum preferences, and (6) withdrawals from school. The students involved in a disciplinary situation during each of the four years were identified, and the extent of their participation in each of these activities was comared. Chi-squares for the areas exanined are located in Table IV. All the data were gathered on the sale of 122 am students described in Chapter IV. It should be noted that the degree of participation for each individual is based on one or acre occurrences of the event during the four-year period with the three exceptions noted in the table. The latter are based on the first two years only. Data describing the extent of participation each year by the total disciplinary group is found in a later section of this chapter.1 Table IV shows that for each year no significant differences were found in the proportion of disciplinary students who contacted the Counseling Center, clunged a preference choice, or withdrew froa school one or aore tiaes during the four years under study. neither was there a difference in the number repeating a course, using the imroveaent services, or attemting to accelerate a courseat least once during the first two years. However, several less significant trends are worth noting. The percentage of disciplinary students during the third year of the stuch' f Refer to the section entitled Between Groups Coqarisons on page 115. :83» on... no «use» 25 has: on» 9:86 35>» an... .«o eco names as 5 32:39.3.“ on: use» been 3525. we aces use or» cons venue on p.303 comuflanauufi: :33» of mo oomnun hashing.“ of 9:26 «953 an» .«o 36 can»... be 5 ouunmoguen on: nook our» 3563» no econ non or... con: venue on 393» comugeunaeuufis m2 8. mmomm atrium Somd 43.0" £0030 vagavood 3 23932 . m2 :m .m mm .mm mm . b: 00 .8 NM .mm 130350 no aces-ones . ma Hm. Doom.“ acowm 8.0m Naomw gnusw 0:803."an no on: . Q .0 OmoN 00.3 amoMN 8omw MOcmw *AOO‘UW lam Egg“: 0 m2 Mbom 8omh Omocb omsNO flwsfim twig .«o 3320 . m2 anew mmowm Nmomw 8.0m 04.54 $03600 aoacsu m5 ”uncooo . figuou Na “50% :0» “‘0’ “8* occur a»: EMF El bah llLFI'lIIIIIIILAFI'il-illl ghasagg §gg>a uhgaggbgmofi Sagan >H ah 115 who contacted the Counseling Center one or aore tines demonstrates a sizeable increase over the sail but steady rise found in the other years. A siailar trend is found in the percentage of students who nde at least one change of preference. The preportion of students leaving school each year grows saaller in spite of the fact that during the fourth year, graduation increased the proportion ordinarily expected to withdraw during a given year. There is also a decline froa the first to the fourth years in the number who repeated courses. An increase in size is observed in the yearly percentage of offenders who attested to accelerate one or acre courses with the second year being an exception. lo trend is apparent in the use of the irprovenent services. Between m Cogerisons. The null hypothesis in this instance is based on the assumtion that differences any exist between disciplinary and non-disciplinary students in their acadeaic progress and use of university services: There are no differences in the acadeaic progress and use of certain university services ude 1y disciplinary and non-disciplinary students each year. The topics conceming iaproveaent service mollaents, counseling center contacts, course repeats, acceleration attemts, preference changes, and withdrawals froa school analyzed in the preceding section were re-exanined for differences between disciplinary and non-disciplinary students. Became of the small nuaber of frequencies found in many of the quartgrs, the data were combined into yearly groups for statistical analysis. This unipulation was acceptable because the basic purpose 1, For a listing of frequencies by terns, refer to Appendix D. ‘ 1:6 of the research was to identify broad trends which may exist. The nature of the records used in the study was such that the basis of couparison was the combined mmber of students participating in a specific academic activity at least once during any or all quarters of a given year. Hence, this aspect of the study is an evaluation of the extensity rather than the intensity of participation in each of the activities. Counseling Center Contacts Table V presents the data regarding contacts rude at the Counseling Center by disciplinary and non-disc iplinary students for each of the four years being studied. The reader should bear in mind that the actual frequencies for each year represent the ninima number of contacts nde by those in each group during that year. The students in this case will be referred to as I'contact students” and "no contact students" in the discussion of the table. Significant differences were found for the second and third years when proportionally aore disciplinary "contact students" kept appointments with the center. The percentage of the total muber of "contact students" which was attributed to the disciplinary cases gradually increases each year until the fourth year. At this tine there was a snll decline. h? TABLE V DEIPLIIARY AND HG-DISCIPLDIARY CW CENT ER WAIST STUDENTS” FOR EACH YEAR (1“ THE STUDY!» Dog-ac u efinoxsi-His- 5;: if: 2 Conf i- Year ciplinagy . :ipli diifitiigtlfiige x 3:32: First 37 3h.2 639 61.1.8 5.148 .26 us Secmd h8 32.8 600 615.2 7.112 8.15 .01 Third 18 10.2 1814 191.8 8.91 6.116 .05 flourth . M _ _j 3.8 70 72.2 7.90 1.35 NS Totals 109 11193 df-l a "Contact Students' are all students who contact the Counsel ing Center during my given tern of the year under consideration. he Preference Changes A anjor difference between the frequency of participation during the second and third years was also found in Table VI. In general, a larger preportion of disciplinary than non-disciplinary "preference change students“ were reported during each of the four years. TABLE VI DISCIPLINARY AND NW-DISCIPLINARY ”WE CHAMP: STUDENTS” Fm EACH YEAR (1“ THE STUDY!!- ——_...—_- .. -._.-—..-_‘_.— ———-__ ..-... ......w “_“—'w————-“—-———_s*—. Reference Chan e Students Per cent Year ci 11$- c1331 3. «11:21:13.: x2 322::- __ TIL-g“ A nag; students i Level__ First 33 25.5 h72 h79.5 6.5h 2.50 NS Second hl 20.5 365 385.5 10.01 22. 87 .001 Third 30 19.2 31.9 359.8 7.92 6.75 .01 Fourth 8 7.1 132 132.9 5.71 .12 115 Totals 112 1318 df-l *"Preference change students' are all students who change their preference during am given tern of the year under consideration. Significant differences are found in the second and third years with the ratio in the second year being unusually high. This sudden increase in the second year is also apparent when one looks at the percentages of all 'preference change students' who were offenders during each of the four yen-3. 119 withdrawals From School Students my withdraw froa school for any of a number of reasons. Sale of the acre common ones are financial difficulties, low scholastic achievenent, general lack of interest or motivation, suspension by disciplinary action, or graduation. It is interesting to note in Table VII that the only significant difference between the disciplinary and non-disciplinary groups in this respect is found in the data for the first year. It is there that the proportion of disciplinary students who were classified as "withdrawal students" was considerably less than was theorized. There were also fewer than expected during the third year, but the difference was not statistically significant. TABLE VII DISCIPLIIARY AND NW—DISCIPLINARY WITHDRAWN. STUDENTS" Fm EACH YEAR as THE STUDY-I- ’m 9—24-18 1* :Wa (1:23:23? * at: First 15 30.3 585 569.7 2.50 8.87 .01 Second 21 17.1 318 321.9 6.19 .98 Is Third 9 11.0 208 206.0 this .39 115 Fourth 38 35.2 657 659.8 5.117 .26 15 Totals 83 1768 df-l *Iiithdrawal Students. are all students who withdraw from school during any given tern of the year under consideration. 50 3 Use of Improvement Services Analysis of Table VIII reveals that there is a sharp increase from the first to the second year in the percentage of disciplinary cases in the entire group of *isprovenent service students." It my also be noted that a larger preportion of the students involved in disciplinary situations enrolled in the ilprovenent services during the second year than was true for non-offenders. This is significant at the 5 per cent level. Altluugh the opposite is true during the first year, the difference is not statis- tically significant. TABLE VIII DISCIPLINARY AND NCN-DISCIPLINARY ”IMPROVE”? SERVICE SNMTS' PG? THE FIRST TWO YEARS CF THE STUDY-l- "‘— _.___ ‘ I— _ grovenent Service Students Per cent 1 s- :Hon-‘di s- who are 2 Conf i- Y... I sit“ 1* are. 2:23:32” 3 :22: First 38 h7.0 892 883.0 14.08 2.08 as Second 12 6.8 122 37,2 8.96 11.27 .05 Totals 1.0 1011. df-l tIQroveaent service students" are all students who enroll in one of the imrove-ent services during any given tern of the year under consideration 3" “‘— ‘ Because the data for the third and fourth years was not available in the records used for this study, the tables relating to the use of inprove- aent services, repeatim courses and acceleration of courses are smaller in size. Aside froa this exception, the interpretation of the tables shmld contime in the sane unner as that described on page 116 for Tables V, VI, and VII. ”1 L. 51 Acceleration of Courses Students who are qualified My request permission to receive credit in certain Basic College courses by examination rather than the usual procedure requiring attendance at class sessions. A grade of “A” in the preceding course of the series is usually required before the student is considered qualified to try the necessary examinations. The fact that the student thought he night be successful in having the course require- aents waived was thought to be of value to this study. TABLE IX DISSIPLINARY AND sou-015cm 'ACCEIERATIW ATTEMPT STUDENTS" FORTHEFIRST THOY'EAIG C!“ THE STUDY!- is- W who are 2 Confi- Year cipline}; :iplinaiy (16:61:13? X 3:22: First 20 17.9 333 335.1 5.66 .27 ms Smog 2 8.6 168 161.14 1.18 5.1.6 .05 :5 Totals 22 501 df-l “Acceleration atteIpt students" are all students who attemt to accelerate a course during any given tern of the year under consideration. Table Di indicates that a significantly smaller umber of disciplinary "acceleration attespt students" were classified as such during the second year when comared with non-disciplinary cases. The proportion during the first year was very close to that expected for the aale students in general. or the total maber who were listed as “acceleration attespt 52 students," the percentage who were at one time involved in a disciplinary situation dropped notably during the second year. Repetition of Courses Failure to obtain a passing mrk may cause a student to repeat a course. According to Table X, a larger percentage of all "repeat students" during the second year were violators in comparison with the first year. It should be noted that no courses are repeated by students during their first term in school. In presenting the relationship between the students' disciplinary status and their need to repeat one or more courses, Table X reveals that preportionally acre disciplinary than non-discipliinry repetitions were included in the minimum number for each of the first two years of the study. This condition is sore pronounced in the second year than in the first. During the first year the differences are significant at the l per cent level while those for the second year are acceptable at the one-tenth of 1 per cent level. TABLE X DISCIPLINARY AND NCN-DISCIPLINARY "REPEAT STUDENTS" FORTHEFIIBT TUOYEARS (FTHE STUDY* €935“ We-.. 5:: iii“ 2 ...“- Y‘” I rL—W “m E‘B‘m‘qf 8233232“ x 3332? First 38 25.0 1.57 1.70.0 7.68 7.93 .01 Second 71 1.2.9 778 806.1 8.37 21.96__ .001 Totals - 109 1235 lF-l «- "Repeat students" are all students who repeat a course during any given tern of the year under consideration. 53 SUWY Six factors associated with the academic adjustment and use of selected university services made by nale students reported to the Office of the Dean of Students for disciplinary action were examined in this chapter. These factors included: improvement service enroll- Ients, counseling center contacts, course repeats, course accelation attquts, preference changes, and withdrawals from school. Comarisons of the frequency of participation were aade both within the disciplinary group and between the disciplinary and non-disciplinary samles. The chi-square technique was used to make these tests. Statistically significant differences at the 5 per cent level or less were found in the year by year between groups comarisons mde of the disciplinary and non-disciplinary students. 1. Proportionally acre of the counseling center "contact students" during the second and third years of the study were disciplinary cases. 2. Proportionally more of the ”preference crange students. during the second and third years of the study were disciplimry cases. 3. Preportionally fewer of the ”withdrawal students" during the first year of the study were disciplinary cases. 11. Proportionally acre of the "imrovenent service students" during the second year were disciplinary cases. 5. Proportionally acre of the '.repeat students” during the first two years of the study were disciplimry cases. 6. Proportionally fewer of the "acceleration attempt students" during the second year were disciplinary cases. Sh The within group comparisons were less productive. No significant differences existed anong the disciplinary students for each year when the factors of counseling center contacts, use of improvement services, course repeats, changes of preference, course acceleration attempts, and withdrawals from school were analyzed. VV\ _'_ 5...: new it.- CHAPTER VI ANALYSIS OF DATA PERTAINING TO GRADE POINT AVERAGES INTRODUCTION Data.pertaining to the grade point averages of students involved in disciplinary situations are reported in this chapter. Hypotheses regard- ing both the grade point averages for each term.and the trend in grade point averages prior to and following the term in which the offense was committed were tested. As discussed in Chapter III, Student's "t" was used to test for significant differences between the grade point averages of disciplinary and non-disciplinary students for each of the twelve quarters included for study. Where the identification of trends in grades was sought, the analysis of variance statistic was used. This technique facilitates the comparisons of more than two means at the same time. The hypotheses concerning grade trends before and after the violation took place were tested by comparing the grade point averages for three terms in each instance. Decisions, in both cases, were based upon the .05 level of confidence. PRESENTATION OF DATA AND TESTING OF HYPOTHBSBS Ternzfirade Point.Average Comparisons. The findings of the study by Jackson and.Glark (22:560) suggest that the grade point averages for disciplinary and nonydisciplinary students during the four years under consideration might be different. Hence, the following null hypothesis was.formulated: 56 There are no differences in the grade point averages of disciplinary and non-disciplinary students during the regular academic year. The total population of male students entering Michigan State Univer- sity for the first tine in the fall of 1953 was divided into two groups. The first consisted of all students who were reported to the Dean of Student's office for disciplinary action at any tine during the period included for study. The second was conposed of all those students not placed on report. Comarisons were mde for each tern between the grade point averages of the students from both groups who received urns that term. Table XI presents the grade point averages and I't" value for each of the twelve quarters. Significant differences at the .02 level were discovered in two quarters, at the .01 level in five quarters, and at the .001 level in two quarters. No differences were found in three quarters, two being in the first year of the study. Hherever differences exist the mks of offenders are lower than those of non-offenders. The grade point averages of both groups gradually increase in size from the first to the fourth year with those of the disciplinary students demon- strating a more erratic pattern. The number of students in each classifica- tion steadily decreases over the period of the stuchr. Trends _ig Grade Point Averages. Because it was thought that the grades of disciplinary students might reflect a general condition leading to misconduct, the following null Mothesis was formulated: TABLE XI 57 COMEISCEI (F TERM GRADE POINT AVERAGES (1“ DISCIPLINARY AND NON-DISCIPLINARY STUDENTS ~ Dis- Non-dis- Confi- Quarter w c ipl inary t dence verage Average Value Level Fall, 1953 120 2.16 2216 2.23 1.10 ns Winter, 195k 113 2.11 20h0 2.27 2.36 .02 Spring, 19511 118 2.15 1960 2.27 1.85 NS Fall, 195k 105 2.03 1669 2.29 3.60 .001 Winter, 1955 93 2.15 160h 2.37 3.02 .01 Spring, 1955 91 2.13 1562 2.31 2.79 .01 Fall, 1955 86 2.12 1357 2.25 1.79 us Winter, 1956 86 1.97 1271 2.36 5.22 .001 Spring, 1956 76 2.18 1251 2.ho 2.91 .01 Fall, 1956 77 2.20 1152 2.h3 2.8a .01 Winter, 1957 66 2.28 1110 2.52 2.80 .01 spring, 1957 69 2.39 1113 2.59 2.39 .02 s The tabled value of 't' at the .05 level is 1.96. 58 There are no differences among the grade point averages for the terms prior to and the terms following the quarter in which the offense is committed. lean grade point averages for non-disciplinary students were calculated for each term of the regular academic year. The individual marks of the offenders for the quarter of the offense, two quarters before it, and two quarters after it were subtracted from the non-disciplinary mean. The lean of the differences was determined for each of the five classifications of school terms. Figure 1 presents the mean differences between grades earned by disciplinary and non-disc iplinary students in graphic form. The grade point average of non-disciplinary students for each tern was used to establish the zero base line. Examimtion of the clart reveals that the differences gradually increased from the second quarter before to the quarter of the offense. At this point the mean difference is at a mint-.1 A reduction in the disparity during the first term following the offense was the result of a sudden rise in disciplinary grades to a point above the highest level reached before the offense. The difference during the second quarter following the offense was again increased but not to the ngnitude of tint found in the quarter of the violation. The trends in grades before and after the tern of the offense were analyzed separately. As shown in Table XII, the differences among the f The grade point average of the disciplinary students is lowest at the point where the difference is greatest. 59 FIGURE 1 m DIFFERENCES BETWEEN GRADE POINT AVERAGE EARNED BY DISCIPLINARY AND Nm-DISCIPLINARY STUDENTS Second First Quarter Second First Quarter Quarter of the Quarter Quarter Before Before Offense Before Before I 4-10 + 5 o - - - .................. b ..... d ------- - S -10 -15 e I ‘9 ------ Grade point average of non-disc iplinary students lean difference between grade point averages of disciplinary and non-disciplinary students 60 aean differences for the quarters prior to and including the term of the offense are not significant. TABLE XII ANALYSIS 0“ VARIADCE CF DIFFEREMIES IN GRADE POINT AVERAGES EARNED BY 015cm AND NW—DISCIPLINARY STUDENTS PG! THE QUARTEPB PRIGITOAND DELUDING TIETERMCF THE (FFENSE Two One Quarter Quarters erter of the Before Before Offense I 106. 123. 108. 21x2 52.1713 55.3225 19.1265 fX -19089 "29e75 -35059 Anal sis of Variance Source of SE of — :55; Variation ' of Squares Square F F:05 Between 2 1 . 1006 . 5503 1.37 3.03 Uithin 33h 13113673 .1029 Total 336 135.6679 Data froa the quarter of the offense and the two quarters following it were maimed for a possible trend in grades after the violation. The sane method as that equloyed to study the trend in grades before the offense was used in this analysis. Table XIII reveals that the differences among the mean differences for the terms innediately following the ais- eonduct were not significant at tit .05 level. 61 TABLE XIII ANALYSIS a" VARIADEE CF DIFFERENCES IN GRADE POINT AVERAGES EARNED BY DISZIHINARY AND Nw-DISCIPLINARY STUDENTS PCB THE QUARTERS (1“ AND FOLLOWING THE (FFENSE Two One Quarter Quarters Quarter of the After After Offense I 86. 103. 108. 2x2 15.1810 31.2517 19.1265 ix -23.11 -17.17 -35.59 Analysis 33 Variance Source of Sun of Mean Variation df Sgres Scnxare F F .05 Between 2 1 . 11200 . 7 100 1.99 3.03 Hithin 291 105.0185 .3573 Totals 296 106. 11685 I'm ‘- 'l ~.s ‘s 1‘ 62 SUW‘ARY Three ivpotheses associated with the grade point averages of dis- ciplinary students were examined in this chapter. They were that: (1) no differences exist between the grade point averages of disciplinary and non-disciplinary students for each of the quarters in the study; (2) no differences exist among the grade point averages for the term in which the offense took place and the two quarters prior to it; and ( 3) no differences exist among the grade point averages for the term of the offense and the two quarters following it. Student's I't" test was used to detect significant differences between two means. Where there were sore than two, the analysis of variance technique was used. Statistically significant differences at the .05 level of confidence or less were found between the grades of disciplinary and non-disciplinary students in nine of the twelve quarters. In each case, the marks earned by the offenders were lower than those for non-offenders. No significant differences appeared among the means of differences between the grades of disciplinry and non-disciplinary students during the quarters either prior to or following the term in which the offense was committed. CHAPTER VII SW, CONCLUSIONS, AND IPPLICATIQIS The data were analyzed in the two preceding chapters. In this final ctnpter the study will be sunnarized, pertinent conclusions will be drmgn, and the implications of the findings will be pointed out. The Problem Students demonstrating socially unacceptable behavior have been the concern of college and university officials since the early history of such institutions. The stronger enphasis upon the total personality develOpment of students which is now found in most institutions of higher learning in the United States has deepened the concern about such behavior. It was this growing interest in the misconduct of college men and women which inspired the writer to initiate a research stuw in tint area. A This stuchr dealt with the general problem of the academic adjustment of ale students reported for disciplinary action at Hichigan State University. It was the purpose of this research to investigate the academic progress in certain areas made by these students during the four regular academic years that they would homily be expected to remin in school. A secondary problem was to canine selected characteristics of the disciplimry samle at the time they were admitted. lrQ‘-fi‘.J*s sew-F )6‘. ‘."a 1 I- v ‘ l Li‘ 1.1 in 6h The need for this kind of research was demonstrated by the relatively 3311 number of studies of college discipline which have been reported in the literature and the repeated observation made by writers in this field that the paucity of valid research information is a handicap to dis- ciplinary workers. A major portion of that which is available discusses the administrative aspects of college disciplinary programs. Little has been written about the student who becomes involved in a situation requiring disciplinary action. Hence, an attemt was mde in this study to discover certain facts pertaining to the academic progress of sale disciplinary students which would be useful to counselors and adminis- trators of disciplinary programs in higher education. Methodolog' and Procedures The angle for this study was composed of all nle students admitted to Michigan State University for the first time in the fall of 1953 and stbsequently reported to the Dean of Students' office for disciplinary action during one of the succeeding four regular academic years. This group included 122 men of whom 18 were transfer students from other institutions of higher learning and 1011 were freshmen entering college for the first time. The samle was copared in selected areas with all non-disciplinary students in the papulation. At the time of admission, the characteristics chosen for coqaarison were: (1) age, (2) veteran status, (3) transfer status, (A) preference status at entrance, (5) state residence status, (5) attmdance at Michigan State University summer clinics, (7) size of high school from which they graduated, and (8) performnce on entrance 1 .‘ . g I 53' 65 examimtions. In the area of academic adjustment, the factors chosen for study included: (1) contacts at the Counseling Center, (2) enrollments in the imrovement services, (3) repetitions of courses, ([1) attempts to accelerate courses, (5) changes of curriculum preferences, (6) withdrawals from school; and (7) grade point averages. For the latter activities, coqaarisons were made both within the disciplinary sample and between the disciplinary and non-disciplinary groups. In addition, it was hypothesized that the marks obtained by an lit- as” v—II' . -‘ ' offender might reflect his involvement in the disciplinary situation. The f ,, “a... qm‘ result was an attespt to identify any trends in the grade point averages % of violators by analyzing the mean differences in grades between the disciplinary and non-discipl inary samles for two quarters immediately preceding and following the term in which the offense took place. The grades for the term of the offense were also included in both analyses. Thving defined the broad areas of the stucb', specific hypotheses to be investigated were farmlated. They were: Motheses Concernigg the. Egg 2;: Certain University Services a 3:323 Academic Progress 1333 by El: Disciplimry Stuients gt Hichigan w University. m 933.! Cogarisons. That for each of the years included in this study there would be no difference in the proportion of disciplinary students who: 1. contacted the Counseling Center one or more times during the four years included for study. 66 2. changed preferences one or more times during the four years included for study. 3. withdrew from school one or more times during the four years included for study. h. henrolled in an improvement service one or more times during the first two years included for study. 5. attempted to accelerate one or more courses during the first two years included for study. 6. repeated one or more courses during the first two years included for study. Between Groups Comparisons. That for each of the years included in this study there would be no difference in the prOportion of disciplinary and non-disciplinary students who: ~ I. enrolled in an improvement service one or more times during that year. 2. contacted the Counseling Center one or more times during that year. 3. attempted to accelerate one or more courses during that year. A. repeated one or more courses during that year. 5. changed preferences one or more times during that year. 6. withdrew from school one or more times during that year. gypotheses Concerning the Grade Point Averages 22 Disciplinary Students. That there would be no difference in the grade point averages of: l. disciplinary and non-disciplinary students for any of the twelve school terms included for study. 67 2. disciplinary students for the term in which the offense was committed and the two terms prior to it. 3. disciplinary students for the term in which the offense was committed and the two terms following it. The Findings Analysis of the data revealed significant findings at the .05 level or less in each of the three areas of the study. They are as follows: Findings 22 the Data Pertaining 33.223 Disciplinary Students at the Time 3_f_ B1333 Admission. 1. Significantly fewer disciplinary than non-disciplinary students were transfers from other institutions. 2. Significantly fewer disciplinary than non-disciplinary students were born before 193h. 3. Significantly fewer disciplinary than non-disciplinary students were veterans. 'h. Significantly more disciplinary than non-disciplinary students graduated from.Class A and B high schools instead of Class C, D, or B schools. 5. No significant difference was found between the number of disciplinary and non-disciplinary students with home addresses outside the state of Michigan. 6. No significant difference was found between the number of disciplinary and non-disciplinary students who stated preferences at the time of admission. ‘1 x.‘ 2 ‘J 68 7. No significant difference was found between the number of disciplinary and non-disciplinary students who attended the Michigan State University summer clinics. 8. No significant differences were found between the mean scores of disciplinary and non-disciplinary students obtained on the battery of Michigan State University entrance examinations. Findings -i_x_1 3113 Data Pertaining 32 Academic Progress 3513 the 2:53 33 Certain Universig Services. 1. Significantly more disciplinary than non-disciplinary students contacted the Counseling Center during the second and third years of the study. No significant differences were found for the first and fourth years. 2. Significantly more disciplimry than non-disciplinary students changed preferences during the second and third years of the study. No significant differences were found for the first and fourth years. 3. Significantly fewer disciplinary than non-disciplinary students withdrew from school during the first year of the study. No significant differences were found for the second, third, and fourth years. 11. Significantly more disciplinary than non-disciplimry students enrolled in the iuprovement services during the second year of the study. No significant difference was found during the first year. 5. Significantly fewer disciplinary than non-disciplinary students attempted to accelerate a Basic College course during the second year of the study. No significant difference was found during the first year. 69 6. Significantly more disciplinary than non-disciplinary students repeated courses during the first and second years of the study. Significant Findings in the Data Pertaining to the Grade Point Averages 9_f_ Disciplinary and Non-Disciplinary Students. The grade point averages of disciplinary students were lower than those of nonédisciplinary students for all quarters in the study. The differences were significant for every term except (a) the fall of 1953, (b) the spring of l9Sh, and (c) the fall of 1955. No significant differences were found among the grade point averages of offenders for the two quarters prior to and the two quarters following the term in which the offense was committed. Conclusions The findings of this research appear to justify the following conclusions, subject to the limitations of this stucb': 1. From the data for this study and the literature in the field, it appears that a majority of the students reported for disciplinary action have committed minor offenses which do not deviate greatly from the kind of behavior which is ordinarily acceptable. There is also evidence that a greater portion of these offenses occurred during the spring terms of the regular academic year. 2. Students involved in disciplinary situations during the first, second, third, or fourth year under consideration were not different in their academic progress or use of certain university services. The data also reveals that they did not differ markedly from year to year in the kind of offenses which they commit. 70 3. Age was a factor in the findings regarding disciplinary cases. The offenders were significantly younger than the non—offenders. This was also true when the transfer students, who tend to be older, were examined separately. Further evidence to support this conclusion is found in the fact that the proportion of veterans in the disciplinary ample, most of whom are also older than the average new student, was smaller than would be eXpected. 14. Generally Speaking, the academic adjustment of students in the disciplinary group was not as good as that of the non-disciplinary students. Fraportionally more offenders repeated courses during the first two years. During the second year, fewer attempted to accelerate courses. It was also during this year that significantly more disciplinary students enrolled in one or more of the inprovement services. The significantly greater preportion of violators who charged curriculum preferences and contacted the Counseling Center during the second and third years of the study lends further support to this conclusion. 5. The disciplinary students in this study may be classified as under-achievers. There were no differences between scores obtained by the offenders and non-offenders on the entrance examinations. However, the grades of disciplinary students were lower during each of the twelve quarters under consideration. The differences were significant in nine of the terms. 6. Despite their relatively poor academic adjustment, disciplinary students were no more apt to withdraw from school than were non-disciplinary students. In fact, the number of offenders who withdrew during the first year was significantly less than expected. 71 Implications foerurther Research The following recommendations are made concerning further research in this area: 1. The area of this study dealing with the academic progress and use of certain university services made by disciplinary students should be duplicated using the intensity rather than extensity of participation as a basis of comparison. 2. Future studies in college discipline should attenpt to include interviews with the students as the cases occur in order to verify many of the assuaptions which must be made in interpreting data from.records. 3. Students involved in major and minor offenses should be treated separately in the statistical anarysis. h. Students living in onpcampus and off-campus living units should be treated separately when anafyzing the data. Implications for Discipline Programs The results of this study suggest several implications for the organization and administration of college discipline programs. 1. It would be difficult to identify potential college disciplinary cases at the time of their admission from the data ordinariky obtainable from.the registrar's office. This fact supports the contention held by many administrators that additional information regarding the personality adjustment of students should be available to disciplinary officials. 72 2. Proportionally more disciplinary students made preference changes and contacts at the Counseling Center. These facts pose a major implication for those who will be working with them. It is that thq' will need professional vocational counseling leading to the selection of a suitable college major more than the average student. 3. Closely associated with vocational counseling is the need for sound educational planning for disciplinary students reflected in their underachievement, repetition of courses and use of improvement services. Counseling of this sort could help a violator plan his academic program in such a m that having been involved in a disciplinary situation would result in a positive learning eanerience. h. The results of this stuw point out that disciplinary cases come more often from the population of younger students. It is also true that the younger students are more likely to be housed in one of the on-cmnpus residence halls. To the extent that this is so, additional support is given to the belief that minor students living off-camus should reside in university approved and supervised housim. [ ..i or- iu—s. .f-fifi‘wzfiw'f“ I” '3‘ I 1. Ham", BIBLIQ‘IRAPHY l. Bailey, H. U., ”Student Personnel work-Disciplinary Procedures," In Monroe: En cl edia of Educational Research, New York: Phcmillan 0%., , pp.'I330-33. "“'—"" 2. Benn, C. H., ”The Psychology of Discipline,” Educational 59mm, 3. Borow, Henry, "The Measurement of Academic Adjustment," Journal of the American Association 2f Collegiate Registrars, 22:273-85, Apri 1:7914T. 1:. Clark, S. C. , ”Let's Make the Campus Disciplinary Program Effective,” The Personnel _m_n_d Guidance Journal, 33:393-96, hrch, 1955. S. Clark, 5. C., Hagie, D. G., and Landrus, U. 11., ”Discipline in College Residence Halls," _Thg Personnel 2.2;! Guidance Journal, 30:189-93, December, 1952. 6. Colenn, Claude, "The Hickory Stick," American Association of University Professors Bulletin, 3?:55'7-755, Autumn, I953: 7. Conway, hrgaret, |'The Role of Disciplinary Action in Higher Education," The North Central Association w, 29:351'9, ”m, 1955. 8. Cosand, J. P. , "Admissions Criteria: A Review of the Literature," California Journal 2;: Secondgy Education, 28:12-21, January, 9. Cowley, V. H., I'1'-‘reedom and Discipline," Educational Record, 25:5-22, January, 19%. 10. Cunningham, Ruth, "Group Discipline," National Education Association Journal, 38:3h-5, January, l9h9. ll. DeRidder, L. 14., ”Selected Factors Related to the Academic Achievement of Probationary Students Graduated in 19148 from the College of Literature, Science and Arts of the University of Michigan,“ Unpublished Doctor's Dissertation, 1950. 12. Douglass, H. R., The Relation of High School Pr aration and Certain Other Factors-to Academic-Success at the Ungversit fare on, universifi 31' Eegon PESIicatIonstEIc-ational S's—r!” 3, o. l, 1931. . r, ‘ “a... [n- “r—cr—‘t-wr-rv-rw ”3'91; ' .l ‘v 13. 1h. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 21:. 250 7h Durflinger, G. H., "The Prediction of College Success--A Summary of Recent Findings,” Journal of the American Association 9_f Collegiate Registrars 3719—38-78, October, 191:3. Pessenden, B. I., ”A Case Study Analysis of Factors Contributing to the Academic Deficiency of Selected Michigan State College Students on Probation,“ Unpublished Doctor's Dissertation, 1953. Foley, J. D.,!)iscipline: A Student Counseling Approach,” Educational and Bachelogical Measurement, 7: 569-82, Part Etumn, 1957?- II, Gardner, D. 11., ”Student Personnel Service," (Monograph, Volume 5), In Evalmtion of Hi her Institutions, Chicago: University of Chicago Fess ,—I9 Garrett, H. F., "A Review and Interpretation of Investigations Factors Related to Scholastic Success in Colleges of Arts Sciences and Teachers Colleges,” Journal of Emerimental Education, 18:91-138, November, 1959. of and Gruendorf, It. H., "Education and Discipline,” §_____chool and Society, 57: 569-70, may, 19u3. ihggerty, H. J. and Brumbaugh, A. J. , "The Student in College and University," Th__e North Central Association Quarterly, 1h:201-06, April, 1939. thrris, D., "Factors Affecting College Grades: Review of Literature, 1930-1937," Echelogical Bulletin, 378125-166, 19h0. Ihwkes, Herbert, "Constructive Discipline," Association of American Colleges Bulletin, 114:180-86, April, 1928. Jackson, K. R., and Clark, 5. G., ”Thefts Among College Students,” Lbs Personnel 555! Guidance Journal, 36:557-62, April, 1958. Johnson, P. 0., Statistical Methods in Research, New York: Prentice-Han,fic.,19u9. Lloyd-Jones, Esther, and Smith, hrgaret, A Student Personnel Pro for High er Education, New York: 0., 38'.— Hiner, R. J. , “Therapeutic Handling of Discipline," Educational 3&1 ngchological legsurement, 8:550-61, Part II, 11qu m- Wishing , 19148. ‘1 fi'fiav ;. 26. 27'. 28. 29. 31. 32. 33- 3h. 35. 37. 38. 39. 7S Meller, K. 11., "Problems in the Disciplinary Program,’I The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 311:1:13-16, Phrch, 1955. Meller, K. 11., "Theory for Campus Discipline," The Personnel 29.9. Guidance Journal, 36:302-09, January, 1955. meller, K. H., "Sex Differences in Camus Regulations," The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 32:528-32, Hay, 19514. lational Association of Deans and Advisors of Men, Report of the Third National Survey of Functions of Student Administration for Men in Colleges and Universities of the United States, lurch, 19148. Osborne, R. T. , Sanders, W. B. , and Young, F. 14., "PUPI Patterns of College Disciplinary Cases,“ Journal 2f Counseling Psychology, 3:52-56, Spring, 1955. Peiffer, H. C., and Walker, D. E., "Disciplinary Interview," 2:3 Personnel and Guidance Journal, 35:3147-50, Fall, 1957. Redl, Fritz, ”Discipline and Group Psychology," Journal 93: the National Association of Deans, Volumes lO-lmberfwm. Segal, David, Prediction 25 Success in Colle e, Washington, D. C.: United States Department of Interior, U. 5. Office of Education Bulletin, lo. 15, 19314. Snedecor, G. 11., Statistical Methods, Anes: Iowa State College Hess, Inc., 191:6. - Student Judici , Leadership Training Handbook, Office of the cationai" Director and Men's Inter-Residence Hall Council, Hichigan State University. Travers, R. 11., "Significant Research on the Prediction of Academic Success," In Donahue: The Measurement of Student Ad stnent and Achievement, University of Hicfiigan ass, 19 9, pp 0 - o Truitt, J. 3., "A Stuchr of Student Disciplinary Programs in Ten Selected Universities," Unpublished Doctor's Dissertation, 1955. Ualker, Helen, and Lev, Joseph, Statistical Inference, New York: Henry Holt and Comany, 1953. Uiens, D. J., "Pupil Personnel Uork--Disciplimry Pr0cedures," In Monroe: En§21%edia g Educational Research, New York: The hcnillm 00, , pp. 955-580 1:0. 1:1. h2: h3; Williamson, E. G., "Fusion of Discipline and Counseling in the Educative Process," The Personnel and Guidance Journal , 3h:7u-9, October, 1955' """"‘ """"' 76 Williamson, E. G., ”Preventive ASpects of Disciplinary Counseling," Educational and Psychological Measurement, 16:68-81, Spring, 1956. Williamson, E. G., and Foley, J. D., Counseling 35:3 Discipline, New York: McGraw-Hill Co., 1950. Hilliaason, E. G., Jorve, Warren, and lagerstedt-Knudson, Barbara, What Kinds of College Students Becone Disciplinary Cases?" Educational _a_n_£l Psychological Measurement, 12:608-19, winter, Wrenn, G. C., "Student Discipline in College," Educational and Psychological Measurement, 9:625-33, Part II, Autum, T9119. I i r _‘- e-nmmmL-u— -- ‘ mnh‘M'r’ ' . " I ,1 . "W1 APPENDIX A PROCEDURE FOR HANDLING OF STUDENT DISCIPLINARY SITUATIONS BY ALL-LBJIVERSITY J UDICIARY COPEIVIITTEE 78 During registration Spring Quarter of 1956, the students of Michigan State were offered an Opportunity to vote on an Amendment to their All- University Constitution which made it MANDATORY for all students who violate University Regulations or Public Laws to have their cases heard by the Judiciary Committee of All-University Student Government. The amendment excepted students in need of remedial or rehabilitative services and students who requested permission for his or her situations to be handled by Administrative officials. This permission is secured by writing a letter to the Director of the Men's or Women's Divisions of Student Affairs, but permission is not granted unless Special circumstances warrant an exception. The above mentioned Amendment was passed and is now the standard gperating procedure. The procedure is outlined below for cIari 1ca ion to students. l. Complaint will come to Dean of Students, Director of Men's Division or Director of Women's Division. 2. Student will be called to one of the above offices. The student will be interviewed to ascertain that the student did create a disciplinary situation. 3. Student will be told that his or her situation is to be handled by the All-University Student Judiciary Committee at a specified time and place. h. The Chief Justice of the Court will be notified of students who need to come before the Court and the disciplinary situation they created. 5. Chief Justice, or some other Justice, will come to the men or Women's Division to collect information about the student. 6. Chief Justice will be informed of need for investigation and will have one or more members of the Court investigate the situation. The members of the Dean of Students Office will assist in investigation if asked to do so by the Chief Justice. 7. The student will appear before the Court. Case will be heard in accordance with the All-University Constitution. 8. The disciplinary forms which will include the Court's decision will be forwarded to the Director of the Men or Women's Division of Student Affairs. 9. 10. 79 The student will be notified by mail of the action taken against him or her. The student can then appeal the decision of the Court to the Faculty Committee on Student Conduct, but only with the Dean of Student's consent. . when-..“ :A 'EAAR‘T‘T‘V.‘ dar“-'J" a}? .'-’ ‘I : 3.4.3" '1.- ‘22.“. F5 APPENDIX B STUDENT CONDUCT REPORT FORM STUDENT CONDUCT REPORT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY 1. Date 81 Student St. No. Complaint: Local Address Parent .- ‘1‘ my; r 2. Background: Father Father's Parents you live with? Mother Occupation BOTH High School Year graduated Non-Veteran Veteran Length of wilitary Service k)! . Present Status of Student: Age ROTC Air Force Army School Year a Previous Probations Previous Reports Major Credits carried Credits earned Pts, earned 4. Potentialities of Student: MSU Point Average _‘_ Test Scores A” _#_h._- PrOTTciency i Psychological ReadTng Lost Term Pt. Ave. ' “Eng.;Arlth.'"O. L. I’ T. V. l C. “w a..- i: i Last Term Absences -“_ L Recommended Action or Student: ¥ h Dean of Students Action: APPENDIX C NON-CONFORMIST REPORT FORT/S DEAN OF STUDENTS _ 83 NON-CONFORMISTS REPORT " MK, \\..I Men's Residence Halls T0: EDUChTiONhL DIRECTOR BRODY HALL (Student) #IStudent No.l (Ht-Ill (Room No,l (Datel Academic Gambling Personal Hygiene Anti-Social lmmorelity Poor housekeeping Alcohol Noise Profanity Explosives No respect for authority Meal Ticket Fighting No respect for regulations violation Others: DETAILS: CCILmit Manager Resident Adviser C3 DEAN OF STUDENTS NON-CONFORMISTS REPORT Men's Residence Halls T0: ASSISTANT T0 DEAN OF STUDENTS IN CHARGE OF RESIDENCE HALLS at (Student) ‘IStudent No.) IHeIIl (Room No,l IDtIel Academic Gambling Personal Hygiene Anti-Social lmmorality Door housekeeping Alcohol Noise Profanity Explosives No respect for authority Meal Ticket Fighting No respect for regulations violation Others: DETAILS: C: Unit Manager Resident Adviser APPENDIX D TERM FREQUENCIES (F STUDENTS IN THE POPULATION WHO PARTICIPATE IN VARIOUS ACADEMIC ACTIVITIE 86 mama ammm amwm mmam Noam oesm meow mama mama scam mmam HQHN mesmesbm seemed coconumuud 02 me am mm sea we oma Hem as ea pea em mma mbcuesbm amcmco monoquuna am am em pm om mm mm mm am am am mm m e, u)), m 3 a, m 3 a (m a), a some comm mmewh one: no use secondment eumcmnu 0:3 masousbm xumcwfiawommoucoz wee NNH msa ass mas mas mod 00H pea mofl maa OHM massesbm seamed coconuwunm oz 4 o e as 0a a ma pa 0 as A NH mocoeasm menace (( second on em em am am pm mm mm mm am am am mm m), (a a mw) 3‘ a m 3)) a m e _u Each comm mmemh one: no oco secondhand command on: mbcmeaam acmcaaaaomsa III II)‘ mMHHH>HHU¢ Dazmndod mDOHm<> 2H whdeoHHmdm 0:3 ZOHHSEOnm mmh 2H mhzmobhm n6 wMHozmemmm v55 87 Enue comm moenh unoE no one Hoocom scum suneebnz one massesam aumcnnanomno omen mmmw seam momm emmm comm meow mama.)womm amen omnm omom mucueasm nmsmneepn: 02 One am on mm on om man we am new OOH gen wucmeasm nasaneebne em em pm pm mm mm mm mm am am mm mm m e n (MP. 3 n m e a M))( a u Snub comm means one: no mco Hoocom acne antenna: 0:3 mucuessm ucnnanomnoucoz me man man (wan Nan was nan mmn man nan man awn mbcmessm nmzmneabns 02 on a 2 J m o. fifi o OH Ha m H meducsum ) nmsmnmcwne em pm pm pm pm mm mm mm am am am mm m) (a, e m (a e m 3 n m (a a A.ecouv mmHnH>Hnu< ouzmoaua 2H gonnamHoHnmam 88 eemm Seam Nemm comm seam mmnm opoN meow nmnm seam «mow mmom mscmesbw. bumucoo 02 mn an m: om a: men 4mm Now men can wmm mom mucueaem )) bomucmm am am am -em em mm mm . mm am am am mm (m a (n, m 3 a m (((,e ()n, m a a Snub comm moemh one: no ado nopcmo mdmnomcaoo one embowbcoo 0:3 mbcmpsbm znmcnaanomnoncoz own Own Own mam. man can won nan man man won pen mbcmeasm bomucou oz m m m m m NH 4H Hm ma N 3H 0H mbcuospm I) (II )) bomucom em em pm pm pm mm mm mm am 4m 3m mm ()M)( 3 n m e, a m ))))e a m 3 (n Enuh Comm moans unoz no uco nubcuo mcnfimmcaou och pobombcoo 0:3 menopabm znmcnnanomno {iii A.pco0v mmHHH>HHo< UHEMQ