‘I
1‘ .
e . .
‘ ,\ 2.,

 

An Analysis of. the Relationshl p Between

 

' Academic Achievement and Five DImenslons j ' ‘. " :.~

         
  

   

 

   

    

 
 
  
  
 
   

 
   
  
  
 
 
 
   
 
 
       
    
 

      
 
 

  
  
     
  

  

 
 
   

   
   
  
   
 
  

           
 
 

 
 
    
   
  
       

  
 
 
  

 

  
   
   
   
 
  
   
 
 

 

  
  
   
  
 
   
     
    
 
  

  

    

  
  
  

  

 

 
 

   

 
 
 
 

 
 
  
  

 
 
 

    
 
 

A ..'J-.
' ‘ .vl own“
f" 3'” F
. ' lv 0
. .. ,. ,
; N £139.23”, . 1:. ..,.. 321,-. ._ ape-v
_ . .. ., W— .
I ”f 73* “'LEfiL‘fEW 12,4511?”
'” ... «"5; mn- w 30;; ”he
- mg;- 3." 22:23. . - 1‘”.
- 23:. W?!“
‘ ‘V I“. V r, fli‘
3.71: ,.~:_¢;;x:..::..,:‘:;r”
"T133221? g; ..”.._I..“.;.;..'. ,2
. " ‘53; '31 «gr-10M
”” . 9.2m : - ,- ..
.~. r; m;- an!" ,~ . w .." mt -
"~74 '1 6'3" ' - , '9 W" 7" 2'. 1
5;»: ,gfv'rmf; .. “1.92;: * ,. ..r; “‘3
x " “U3": " 0"r '9???" WM m
. .
/- .’ . n, . ‘ n .' ‘p "’ .s>»:q,::.,,...:f4;
1/" 7‘7 3' u rum '51,“ fl‘m..—+. -113" :ij:
'*.,.L‘.,;1.‘uy«‘n rub . (- M; 4;?! WW ..“...”3‘“
1‘ .‘fi: 2731.); ‘ {:an
4' "5'" m 3.431321 2.3.1":
firmiznflw'. “1”} h with "’9‘: wt.
5: .m.1{f.,-. . m w .. 1:32:33?
- “Wm l - ‘ ‘ rr“ *
: A ‘17": Ir “E {1“ l A u» :
' . l
-' «3&3: ~ ..w . —:
.." '“ .../ “:f' ‘1"; ” ‘ .,.,:x:'w...:”"" ,
"2‘ . ”1! '" gawk—’39" "F...-
‘J ‘ ' .fi.-..,...

       

  
     

  

l
LIBRARY

Michigan State
University ,

lwillwill»:llllglfllllllllmzl~ »/

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

AN ANALYSIS OF TIE) RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT AND FIVE DIMENSIONS OF
SATISFACTION WITH TI‘H‘L‘ COLLEGE ENVIRONME‘IT

presented by

M. Edward Bryan

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

PhoDo degree in

 

Administration And Higher Education

Way/”4nd?” “”4“”

Major professor
/u/
Date %

 

0-7 639

H9

fllfi'i
' 3“ "3.1:?

W'llziazgm

 

 

 

I

 

 

ABSTRACT

E!

AN ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWE
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT AND FIVE DINENSI‘NS
OF SATISFACTION WITH THE CO

M. Edward Bryan

While a great deal of research has been conducted
strivir g to estaolish a relationship oetween emplo ee satis-
faction and job performance in industry and business. little
systematic analysis of student satisfaction as it relates
to academic performance within the college environment has
been published to date. The increasing importance of the
influence of student perceptions on the collegiate environ-
ment combined with the potential :or achieving grea ter
congruence between expect ed perceptions and ac ual exier—
iences of the student populace, would indicate the need for
the systematic investigation of the interactions between
the student and the college environment.

A review of the available literature indicates taa
while college students satisfaction and dissatisfaction is
one of the most meaningful indicators of student attitudes
toward their collegiate e: perience, it i" one of the lea»;

investigated variables in the col.lege setting. Over the

4» A b» It Warw-

 

M. Edward Bryan

past few years researchers have focused on the environmental
climate of the college campus by developing inStruments and
attempting to measure individual needs. environmental press
and student perceptions of the climate. Parallels between
studies involving student satisfaction and employee job

satisfaction would reasonably indicate that a better under—

'3

standing of the satisfactions and dissatisfactions oi

O

students could lead to reasoned change in the college en—
vironment which, in turn. should help students move toward
better adjustment or better work output.

The purpose of this study was to identify the rela-

tionship. if any, between measures of satisfaction with the

college environment. as reflected in the College Student
Satisfaction Questionnaire, and the level of academic

achievement. as reflected in the grade point average. The
study took place at Oregon State University during the
1975~76 sprins term. Students residing in the residence

halls at CSU completed 866 usable responses of the College

. n .. r- ‘1 fl , . ‘ ' " A. ' . 3:. .‘ '. ..,
responses 3a well as a total satistaction score. doth the
".1”? *avw-n j- “. q I-gvld flufl'lj ativon C' .~ :j- f‘c'wvg.n+: on C“:- 'n
b.4b flu-) " 0 4.9.. .-b v n“- J. . ft: C'p"‘1' “.1- -...JM~~U¢- .5 k).-
eacn student responding was obtained.

“”4. 9. ‘. ' ,. ' 4.... ’ .. $.4- ' .i.:
a:.er till} exploring the data grined wi.hin .he

:' " " 1" ‘9 " A ~ .‘ ‘ O ‘ M "O - Q ‘ .- x .- ' -h‘~
l.nits oi the sample, instrument and -eseaicn design. aha

M. Edward Bryan

study concluded that the g.p.a. of the students and their
feelings of satisfaction. though quantifiable. were

independent of each other.

.F

a

'

m;
E
.3

L.

.1.
a
n.

a.“ L

t.
“D

.u

I

AH ANA

No

SIC

Q

"\v- -—.
I H
U‘t'sm

IE

3%
.A

AND

'12.}! 1‘

fi flvTv-Psrr—
v Avnlull'u

I

7
'.

ACADEL

' 7'."

f}. 7" 1
\98‘ 3‘1 ‘

V-
.3
‘0

U

V‘f‘TT :‘C
-§ I
“dun U.

"a r T v
V u‘uu

AIISFAQLICN

S
a:

sryan

Edward "

A.

Tu

P

-&.
e
~or the degree 0

l
.u

0

A

0‘7.

"3 L. en

duca

,.
?“ :4
.. no

' I
p-A
d n

ion an

4-
V

A. drr‘iot iStra

 

ACKNCWLEDGEMENTS

The writer is most grateful to Dr. Eldon Nonnamaker
for his encouragement and assistance throughout the prepara-
tion of this thesis. His patience and support is especially
appreciated.

Special gratitude is extended to Dr. Robert Chick, my
supervisor, for his personal concern evident in his periodic

expressions of interest accompanied by his willingness to

 

help make the time available for the completion of the study.
Additional gratitude is extended to the other members

of the Guidance Committee: Dr. Louis Stamatakos, Dr. Bruce

'0

Coleman and Dr. Norman T. Bell.

Deep appreciation is expressed to Dr. James Simpson
for all the technical assistance with the design of the
study. statistical treatment of data and computer utiliza-
tion which he provided in an aura of concern and encourage-
ment.

The many staff in the Oregon State University resi-
dence halls who helped with the gathering of data are also
recognized for their contribution to this study.

Finally. sincere appreciation is expressed to my
wife Norma whose sense of closure was my constant companion
and whose understanding grew to accommodate the stress
being created as time with the family was eroded y this

endeavor.

 

IAJLS u? QCNTEHIS

Jhapter
I lnIRLDUCTiON
THE PREmISE

T7113 (303113.”

H
H
{1”
P
p

C
m
0-3
W
p

t4
Pi
H
K"
a

"J
:1;
[a

LLTERATURE RELATIAG T0 SATi$“Au‘ION

Components of College Student
Satisfaction

Research helating Student Satis-
faction to Ctner Variables

LITERAT RE RELATED Eb ACADEle
A3HIEVEMENT

LLIEPun'JK: RELArth AJnUEHlC
ACi'ilEa‘V" ..AVLEHT TU 1:30: 14?..qu

dUmmARY CF LIBERAIUAE
General
Student Satisfaction
Academic Achievement
‘esidence

Conclus;

1V

’.A F;
U\ h) 0)

F
.q

k)
\1)

Chapter

'II mETHCDCLCdY

a,
E

E‘

’—

O
3.
Ci
:1

H
[1}
K.
91
5

E".

..j

ST.ATISTICAL TRdAlmimT CF DATA
IV AhAleid OF DATA AND DISCUSSION

rREdEnTAfIUh CF AESUL“S

ADDITthAL DATA AnD DLaCquLCN

V SUfihARY, CCNCLUSIOfiS. DISCUdoICh. In: EREACEJ
AND SIEJULA ATICN AND RECOAMEhDATICBS

SUMmARY

1h:uuL§JhS AND SPEC byAi‘lCn

H

College Student datisfaction
«uestionnaire

Instructions to student

Test Items

AnSwer Sheet

HE} NDIX 5
explanation Letter to stud ents

head Resident Inst uet‘; ons
Instructions for Resident Assistants

V

0) \J -v x!
my a! w -w

L1)
(X)

Chapter

APPENDIX C

Research Participation Agreement Form

APPENDlX D

dequest For Support Of Computing

services

Abstract

Response Letter
Second Request :or Support Of
Jomputing Services

CSU Computer Services Extension Request

“a

Second Response Letter

APrENDIA E
Review Cf Literature On The Relation-
ship of Performance to Satisfaction

APPENDIX F

0\U\

\)

10
11
12

13
14

..L

16

Scattergram of
Scattergram of
Scale Scores
Scattergram of
Scale Scores
Scattergram of
Scattergram of
Scale Scores
Scattergram of
Scale Scores
Scattergram of
Scores
Scattergram of
Total Scores
Scattergram of
Scattergram of
Scores
Scattergram of
Difference -
Scattergram of
Difference

Men -
hen -

men -

Women
Women

Nomen

Freshmen -

Total Scores
Compensation

Recognition

- Total Scores
- Compensation

- Recognition

Total

Sophomores -

Page

112

113
115
116

117
118

122
123

124
12

126
127
128

129

Juniors — Total ScoreslBO

Seniors -

Total

Positive o.r.d.
Total Scores
Negative G.9.A.

— Total Scores

131
132
133

Table

10
ll

12

13

14

LIST C? TABLES

Description

Total Satisfaction And Scale Scores For
866 Subjects

Total Satisfaction Scores For 434 Male
Subjects

Total Satisfaction Scores For #32 Female
Subjects

Scale Scores For 43“ Male Subjects
Scale Scores For 432 Female Subjects

Compensation Scale Scores For Males and
Females

Recognition Scale Scores For Males and
Females

Total Satisfaction Scores By Class
Compensation Scale Scores by Class
Recognition Scale Scores by Class

Total Satisfaction Scores For i 0.5
G.P.A. Variation

Total Satisfaction Scores For Selected
Schools

Compensation Scale Scores For Selected
Schools

Recognition Scale Scores For Selected
Schools

vii

Page

52

5Q

57
59

72

74

76

Figure

l\)

10

11
12
13
14
15

16

LIST

Histogram of

Histogram of

Average

Histogram of

Sex
Scattergram
Scattergram

Scattergram
Scores

Scattergram
Scattergram

Scattergram
Scores

Scattergram
Scores

Scattergram
Scattergram
Scattergram
Scattergram

Scattergram

Total Scores

Scattergram

Total Scores

OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Description

Total Population - Total Score

Total Population - Grade Point

Total Population - School and

of
of
of

of

Page
49

50

71

Total Population - Total Scores 87

Men - Total Scores

Men - Compensation Scale

Men - Recognition Scale Scores
Women - Total Scores

Women - Compensation Scale

Women - Recognition Scale

Freshmen - Total Scores
Sophomores - Total Scores
Juniors - Total Scores
Seniors - Total Scores

Positive G.P.A. Difference -

Negative G.P.A. Difference -

viii

122

123
12“
125

129
130
131

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

A college or university is a complex network of
social structure and processes and in varying degrees it is
a small society of its own. The students who enter a
college atmosphere bring with them a great array of unique
characteristics. These unique individual characteristics
are assimilated with those of the educational institution.
This merger results in a multitude of environmental. ad-
ministrative. faculty and student implications. The
dynamic interplay of student characteristics within the
matrix of the educational institution's forces has always
been an essential ingredient in higher education. Stark
(1976) characterizes this as "an interactive process in
which the student participant plays an important part in
determining the value of the result.”

Today the assimilation of the student into the
college setting brings with it a greater need for the
institution to adapt to its ever-changing clientele. With
the lowering age of majority, the availability of the vote,
greater involvement with institutional governance and
reduction in the parietal rules, it is becoming apparent
that the role of the student is to be an active one in the
shaping of the college experience. Budgetary limitations.

1

 

accountability formulas and dwindling resources make the
assessment of institutional accomplishment and the setting
of institutional priorities especially important from the
perspective of the student being served.

Statements in college catalogs, brochures prepared
for admissions counselors and publicity of various types
speak to the objectives and ideals which the college hopes
to achieve. While some of this is written in a style to
subtly appeal and persuade the potential student to become
a participant in the college setting. the student. once on
campus, finds it difficult to relate everyday experiences
to the ideals expressed. Stark (1976) points out that
"catalogs and viewbooks have long been attacked by research—
ers and commentators who have noted that the information
may not be only incomplete but often wrong and misleading."
(Stark, 1976. p. 60) To date little systematic analysis
of the student's on-going perception of his/her collegiate
experience has been conducted and the potential for
achieving greater congruence between expected perceptions
and actual experiences remain undeveloped.

Given the increasing importance of the influence of
student perceptions on the collegiate environment it be-
comes apparent that there is a need for systematic investi-
gation of the interaction between the student and the

college environment. Further, a shift from the predominance

b)

of descriptive research to a more dynamic level of analysis
involving the input from those most directly being
affected would be helpful in beginning to understand
the interrelationship which exists between the college
environment and the affective domain of the student. This
approach. involving a dynamic analysis of the relationship,
might very well identify the factors to which the
institution might address itself in the development of
improved interaction between administration. faculty and
student.

The affective domain of the student is elusive
but might be observed in terms of its relationship to
measurable components of academic progress. Some possi-
bilities for study might be to utilize the various
indicators of success in college such as honors. number
and type of leadership positions. credit hours accumulated
or grade point averages earned in relation to measures in
the affective domain such as measures of attitude,
interests, values. perceptions. feelings or satisfaction.

College student satisfaction and dissatisfaction.
although one of the most meaningful indicators of student
attitudes toward their collegiate experience, is one of
the least investigated variables in the college setting.
Perhaps the intangible qualities of satisfaction and the

degree to which it can be affected by experiences

extraneous to the area being Studied, limits its application

in traditionally controlled research.

*3
0!.
hi
:(1
I]
{7
{ J
U}

vw '

unile little research has been done concerning
student satisfaction within the realm of academic progress,

a great deal of research has been done in the field of

(f

management in relating h- satisfaction of employees to
turnover, absenteeism, accidents, work adjustment, pro-
ductivity and performance (e.g., Herzberg, Iausner, Peter-

son and Capwell. 1957: Hoppock. l935; Vroom, 1964: Brafieid

and Crockett, 1955). Zerdie (1944) appears to be the

first to utilize the results of research done in the field
of management in research with college students. He

adapted the Job Satisfaction Blank constructed by Hoppock
(1935} only slightly to correSpcnd to the college setting
and used it to predict student satisfaction with their

course of study by comparing their res onses on this

'0

13

instr me.t to their respc ses on the strong literest Blank.
The end result was a correlation of .23. Lhe correlation.

though modest. caused Eerdie to conclude:

"While the results indicate that no
single factor bears a high relation-
ship to a student’s satisfaction with

 

'Ww-j

 

his curriculum. satisfaction is .

significantly related to academic ‘

achievement” (Berdie, l94h). ,
It seems reasonable, therefore, to look further at the
parallels between research on job satisfaction and studies
involving student satisfaction with collegiate experiences.
If the principles and methods derived from years of re-
search on satisfaction of employees in business and
industry has aided employers in seeking to understand and
satisfy the needs of employees in order to bring about
better work adjustment. it is reasonable that a better
understanding of the satisfactions and dissatisfactions of
students could lead to reasoned change in the college
environment which, in turn, should help students move
toward better adjustment or better work output.

For example, research in job satisfaction has
shown a consistent negative relationship between job
satisfaction and job turnover (i.e., the greater the satis-
faction, the less the turnover) Vroom (196“). Similarly,
Starr, Betz and Menne (1972) found a relationship between
measures of satisfaction and college dropouts. In a
sample of 1968 university students given a satisfaction
instrument the year before, a comparison was made between
dropouts and non-dropouts. The dropouts scored signifi-
cantly lower on satisfaction than did the non-dropouts.

If the college student can be viewed as a working

person with some extrinsic compensation (grades, academic
advancement, etc.) instead of monetary remuneration and
if learning can constitute the parallel with the worker's
job, then much that is known about the traditionally
defined "worker“ might also be true of the student.

Davis, Lofquist, and Weiss (1968) have proposed a
theory of work adjustment that incorporates two factors:
satisfactoriness and satisfaction. The theory is based
upon a principle that an individual will seek to achieve
and maintain "correspondence" with the environment. An
individual is viewed as bringing certain skills to a work
environment which enable him/her to respond to the require-
ments of that environment (the satisfactoriness dimension).
Similarly, the rewards of the work environment serve as a
response to the needs of the individual (the satisfaction
dimension). When both these requirements are fulfilled
mutually, the individual and the environment are considered
to be "correspondent."

This theory of work adjustment may also apply to
the total matrix in which a student is immersed. Like a
worker, a student must interact with his work (study-—
learning) environment and achieve a certain level of
"correspondence" where this could be described in terms of
the individual fulfilling the requirements of the college

environment (i.e., meeting minimum grade requirements) as

 

:

well as the college environment fulfilling the needs of

the individual student. Achievement of this "corres—

 

pondence" should produce a more sati fied student willing
to participate in institutional programs and interact

productively as long as this state is operant.

.—3

he purpose of this study was to identify the re-

lationship if any, between measures of satisfaction with

a

the college environment and the level or academic achieve-
ment reflected in the grade point average. The measure of
satisfaction was limited to five aspects within the college
setting and academic achievement was limited to the cumu-
lative grade poi.t average and the grade point average

for the most recent term. 30th major variables were

considered to be independent for the purpose of the study.

The University - Oregon State Sniversity

Residence Halls Twelve on campus fa

accommodating a:
a
of life styles

Resident Assistants RA) - Junior and senior students who
serve as staff members or
approximately sixty Students
on a floor

 

Term - One third of the regular
academic year that marks
the duration of courses and
the grading period

Cumulative Grade Point

Average - All credit hours earned x
grade points 4 credit hours
where the letter grade A =
a grade points

College Student Satis-
faction Questionnaire
(03552)

The test instrument in this
study
Statemgnts Cf Hypothesis

Since the focus of this study was upon the relation-
ship of academic achievemen to student satisfaction
dimensions as measured by the College Student Satisfaction
Questionnaire (Starr, Betz and Menne. 1971) the following
hypotheses were drawn. The hypotheses were stated in the
null form to accommodate the statistical manipulation of
the data.
HYPOTHESIS ONE

There will be no significant positive correlation
between the TOTAL SATISFACTION scores of the entire sample
group of 866 as measured by the College Student SatisfaCtion
Questionnaire and academic achievement as reflected by the
grade point average for the term in which the CSSQ was

administered.

RATICNALE FOR HYPOTHESIS ONE

If. as Hoppock states, the expression of satisfac-
tion "is actually a multitude of satisfactions and
dissatisfactions playing upon each other to produce a
composite attitude" (Hoppock, 1935). then a measure of
total satisfaction which reflects the numerical weight of
five dimension scores, could possibly indicate any general
relationship that exists with these particular dimensions

and the variable. grade point average.

.-POTHESIS TWO

There will be no significant positive correlation
between TOTAL SATISFACTION scores as measured by the C881
when grouped by sex and grade point average and academic
achievement as reflected by the grade point average for
the term in which the CSSQ was administered.
RATIONALE FOR HYPOTHESIS TWO

Because of the preponderance of literature indicat-
ing differences between the sexes in grade average
attainment and because of the possibility of sex differen-
tiated expectations affecting the responses to items on
the CSSQ by one sex more than the other, a need for a
separate test for a relationship between the variables was

indicated.

 

 

lC

HYPCTHESIS THREE

There will be no significant positive correlation
between the term grade point average for either sex and the
scores on the College Student Satisfaction Questionnaire
scales ofCOMFENSATICN. SOCIAL LIFE, WORKING CONDITIONS
RECOGNITION AND QUALITY O“ EDUCATION.
RATIONALE FOR HYPOTHESIS THREE

The availability of separate measures of reactions
to different aspects of the college environment makes it
possible to identify sex differences with respect to these
particular aspects and to analyze these separate measures

in relation to academic achievement as reflected by the

grade point average.

There will be no significant positive correlation
between the 3333 TOTAL SATISFACTION scores of either sex
in each class category (freshman. sophomore. junior or
senior) and academic achievement as reflected in the grade
point average for the term in which the CSSQ was
administered.

RATIONALE FOR HYPOTHESIS FOUR

The traditional categorization by class has the
advantage of comparing students whose duration of academic
experience is similar. while other research is not c n~

elusive (see Martin. 1968. Johnson and Kurpius. 196?:

11

Elton and Bate. 1966) factors affecting freshmen and upper-
class student satisfaction or achievement may vary with

experience in the college setting.

HYPOTHESIS FIVE

There will be no significant positive correlation
between the CSSQ TOTAL SATISFACTION scores and the term
grade point average of sample groups whose term grade
point average varies from the cumulative grade point aver-
age by plus or minus 0.5 or more.
RATIONALE FOR HYPOTHESIS FIVE

Since the literature portrays the grade point
average as a reflection of a combination of intellective
(ability). non-intellective (personality) and individual-
environment interactive factors. a variation in the grade
point average is possibly reflective of important changes
in one or more of these areas. A measure of total satis-
faction could be expected to reflect these important
changes especially in the interaction of the individual
and environment. The degree to which this occurs could be
supportive of the premise that an individual in seeking
to maintain "correspondence" with the environment will
react in measurable terms on a satisfaction instrument

(CSSQ).

12

METHOD OF INVESTIGATION

In this study the analysis of the relationship
between student satisfaction and academic achievement in-
volved 866 of the 3.373 students residing in twelve resi-
dence halls on the campus of Oregon State University during
the 1975-76 spring term. Each student completed a seventy

item satisfaction questionnaire designed to yield a sep—

 

arate scale score for each*ofgfive dimensions of
satisfaction and a composite score for total satisfaction.
Cumulative and term grade point averages were utilized to
determine the sub-groupings to which statistical analysis
was applied.

Residence hall students were utilized exclusively
in order that the data on satisfaction with the college
environment would reflect the experience of students with
a maximum exposure to the college setting and as a means
to limit the influence of unlike living experience upon
the responses to the items in the satisfaction question-
naire. Accordingly, Baker (1966) found that types of
residence do significantly account for differences in
perceptions of the characteristics of the college environ-
ment. Boarding and dormitory students seem to be less
aware of environmental press as compared to those who
reside with their families. He also states that boarding

and dormitory residents are in one sense more dependent

gm

upon the university for their need “at sfaction than are
family residents who are members of a community and are
perhaps in a better position to have their needs satis-

fied. It woul

£

d
halls could reflect upon the college environment with some
consistency in their responses on the questionnaire.
The instrument selected to measure student satis-

faction with the col ege WI; rc-rment was the Colle =:e

w

Student Satisfaction Questicrnai re develOped by Eetz, Starr

Klingensmit; and Xenne in 1971. The autho s ev wolzed the

'1

Jees in bus;ness and indumzt ". The

result is a 70 item, five chOice IIKERT type response

college er vironm.ent which are identified as C MPENSATION

N f‘TAT 7"?“ v ..
S «Add Lira ‘ODKII

OF EDb 'CATION. (Each scale is further defined in Chapter

III.)

similarity between the "worker" striving for concurrence
with demands of t.e job and individual needs while the
student seeks to meet minimum requirements of the college

(i.e., graces) plus the satisfaction of personal needs.

 

seem, therefore, that students in residence

 

 

the use of an instrument developed from a similar frame-
work provides the capability for further testing of this

assumption.

 

«ma-a

Since the code has been applied in other studies

 

which have revealed a relationship between student satis-
faction and certain demographic variables such as sex and

class, the identification of sub-groups in this stidy

 

included these two variables (Bet: et. al., 1970, 1972}.
In addition, sub-groups were formed on the basis of a
similar range in grade point average as a means of compar-
ing the satisfaction responses of groups of individuals
who were comparable in "grade—getting" skills. No attempt

was made to control for differences in grading between

schools or academic disciplines. Similarly. no controls
were exercised in relation to the transfer from one major

to another.

Because the data :or th .e total group (parent popula-
tion) and suc-grou ps (sub-populations) involved ordered
pairs of the two independent variables (satisfaction and
academic acnievement), the statistical treatment included
simple linear regr ession, correlation (r) and ”t" tests.
Also utilized were the standard measures of central tendency
such as means and standard deviation. {is ual plotting

and graphing of selected data were provided for emphasis.

 

3"4T TER I:

Denning (197%; i. preparing the introduction to the
American College Testing Ionorraph élf dealing with college

success and "non-intelleotive correlates" made the

"Very little research in higher
education has dealt with the impact
of colleges, progrars an * methodolo-
gies on irfltelle tual outlooks and
attitudes. Reason for the apparent
lack of interest in evaluating such
impact is unclear. Perhaps persons
interested in Sich outputs think it
is obvious from t1.e ir ocservations
and interview contacts that such
impacts are ccurring or are not
occurring. On the other hand, people
intere“ted in such outputs may merely
not have an evaluation and research
orientation."

nevertheless, some researcners over the la st few
years have dealt with the environmental climate of the
college campus by developing instruments and attempting to
measure individual needs. environmental press and tudent

Wptio .s of that climate. Notable research i. these

'0
(D

areas include the development of the Activities Index (A?)

to measure individual needs and the College Charathristics
Index (00:) t measure environmental press (Pace and Stern,
1958): the So liege and Universitv Environment

+3 1 40‘ ‘. q . Jo n q. ‘ 1‘ ‘ ‘n n,‘
v0 “8-1/29 «.519 uleL“) environmen. 9.8 perceived Lay 3 bUOGhC-S

 

(Pace. 1969); the Transactional Analysis of Personality and
Environment (TAPE) to study various interactions and trans-
actions that occur within a college environment (Pervin.
1967): the Environmental Assessment Technique (EAT) to
define the campus environment in terms of the character-
istics of the student body (Astin and Holland, 1961) and
the Inventory of College Activities (ICA) to focus on "the
observable stimulus properties of the environment and to
identify the specific environmental variables that affect
the students' development" (Astin. 1968).

Very little research deals directly with college
student satisfaction as it relates to academic achievement.
The concept of student satisfaction as a measurable
variable sufficiently reliable for comparison with other
independent variables is relatively recent. The work of
Betz et. al. (1970, 1971. 1972) is particularly signifi-
cant with their evolvement of the College Student Satis-
faction Questionnaire. Others have utilized the student
satisfaction variable in studies relating to

(a) group performance among college students

where satisfaction feedback was given to
members (Shaw and Blum. 1965)

(b) self-esteem as a factor in overall
student satisfaction (Korman. 1967)

(c) ambiguity in the college environment
as it affects student satisfaction
(Korman. 1971), and

(d) intrinsic and extrinsic factors
affecting graduate student
satisfaction (Levine and Weitz.
1965).

Grade point average as a measure of academic
achievement is well established. Considerable disagree-
ment still exists. however. about the specific factors
being reflected in grades and about the comparability
from one discipline to another or from one teacher within
a discipline to another (Lavin. 1965: Astin. 1971). Grade
point average. nevertheless. continues to be utilized as
the best indicator for academic achievement.

The review of literature here is separated into two
sections. The first is on satisfaction as it has been
evolved into an independent variable applicable to
students in higher education. The second section deals
with academic achievement as reflected by the grade point

average with respect to its use as independent variable.
LITERATURE RELATING TO SATISFACTION
GENERAL

The applicability of the measure of satisfaction as
an independent variable in the college environment has its
beginnings enmeshed with a plethora of study and research
related to the individual in the working environment.

Productivity and performance as related to worker

18

satisfaction has been studied for some time and yet. remains
of considerable interest to management researchers and the
corporate world. The study of the worker and job satis-

faction accounts for scores of research reports listed in

.0

the Journal of Applied Psychology Index for the period oi
l965—l97h. These studies deal with the full spectrum of

environmental and psychological factors including reviews

of some long-standing theories such as Herzberg's two

factor theory; the intrinsic versus extrinsic factor

theory; white and blue collar differences: satisfiers versus
dissatisfiers. locus of power concepts, effect of self-
esteem. etc.

For the purpose of this study. the literature review
on satisfaction attempts to relate significant concepts and
their development to suggested parallels between worker
satisfaction and college student satisfaction.

This review begins in the Hoppock era (1935) as the
definition of satisfaction was being stated in both
physiological and psychological terms. That is, it was
proposed by some theorists that achieving satisfaction was
related to the reduction of intraviseral pressure (Berman.
1928). At the same time. others were combining
physiological. psychological and environmental factors as
stimuli to which the human organism would respond in an

attempt to restore a balance which was the state of

C
.1

.G
e
m
u
S
S
a
S
a
w

'+
..U

0

C
0..
t

C
a. .

.1
+9

 

to total

d

ieve

to be aoh

never

was

degree

05‘

J-
U

he concep

q-
9

ducing

Av

intr

.

Hoopock

on,

o
‘
uh

iscuss

.C

..L
*9

C

a

r.

S

f-‘
.uJ.

of sa

.3
t

as an

is

‘

undesirao

Q

ete satisfaction would be to
as

who

man
e

a

q

1
.L*
4-“

w is
3853103 C-
nt

3..

C o.
.15 .n.u
T. he
C

a m
a. C
S w.
.s. P.
.v

a S
S u

I 9
U S
m 3
.1 e
«.u 1L
nu. Du

 

e
18

have some-

urge to
leave

a.

V0

UM‘J

.W. o;
..u 35 a
nun“:
n3 3; lg
w. nu..l

1
. ok,

noppc

.-

(

+../
1
$9 ix}
‘9‘
a. o
1.0.
n.)
.1. «(.1
.mu 3

0 w. a... d .3 +9 7.

any

was

t sfacticn

o
‘
J-

83

goo

K
C
3
C.
C.

3”

3
..c

C

.1;

3.

I:

S
.l

.
OQI‘

.l

.1.

C

i .
S
: l

1
A

y a mu-

1

g
0
J.

actua

.l

a

Q
\o

‘

o produc

*
'v

each other

e

UUOD

‘

OCUSQG

1‘
;

wor‘

‘H
4.0

<4
«4/
Q ._

1L

9
+v

n

0“.

sulted

re

on and

0
4L

-act

1‘
L

ents O

l

he camper

\

‘-
V

l

: a"
~b‘

K wh

W

‘1'
Llplt

LJ

,

I

fi-F‘w‘ 3‘0
KI‘ L. "a-

S?A

’"T‘N.*
cCJ Jar;

3

.w.

.-
I‘.
'4...

'3 T " l
L) Li133 b\

"J

1ffl'.’ (\3'
.'. ‘.'.I A .. ~13

‘ v-u '
‘ .q‘
t.)

int
.54.

‘9
\
\J‘

JCS

straw
D
Ll wqu

f"'
'1

'0
u-I
s

the

.l
a:

e
+a

 

 

 

20

with college students in his attempt to measure satisfac-
tion with curriculum. While Berdie's interest was to
predict student satisfaction from the use of the STRONG
INTEREST BLANK,his use of an instrument developed in rela-
tion to the work situation produced some results which
lends some credibility to the suggested parallel between
satisfaction of the worker and the college student.

In 1999 the theory of transactional analysis emerged
to explain human behavior in terms of the interactions or
transactions between the individual and the environment
(Dewey and Bentley. 1939). The interaction approach was
found to be useful in areas outside the academic setting
such as interpersonal attraction (Newcomb. 1956). occupa-
tional choice and satisfaction (Super, 1963). adaptation
to cultural patterns (Jahova, 1961), and psychopathology
(Kelly. 1966). Within the academic setting. performance
has been related to an interaction between student person-
ality and demands of the curriculum (Malleson, 1959;
Snyder, 1966), and type of exam (Claunch. 196“). Based upon
the theory of transactional analysis, Pervin (1967)
developed the Transactional Analysis of Personality and
Environment (TAPE) instrument and applied it in an approach
called "semantic differential" to study the student-
environment interaction and to test the hypothesis that
there is a significant relationship between a student's

V“

satisfaction with college and a perceived SELF~COLtnGE

l—z'*w—l

21

similarity. Perceived SELF-CCLLEGE similarity was found to
be related to ratings of satisfaction with the college en-
vironment on both forms of the T.PE (Pervin. 196?).

The need for congruency between the individual and
the environment was summarized in 1957 by Cronbach in an
often quoted statement:

"The organism which adapts well under
one condition would not survive under
another. If for each environment,
there is a beSt organism. for every
organism there is a best environment."

(Cronbach. 1957. p. 679)

From the perspective of the student dro_out as an adaptive

W

organism, Pervin and ‘bin studied the dropout with respect

to "fit" of the individual to the environment. The T PE was

q

used to ascertain the SELF-IDEAL-SEL: discrepancy and the
3 similarity. MeaSures of satisfaction were
obtained and identified as academic satisfaction. non-
academic satisfaction and general satisfaction. The
incongruency between the student's perception of self and
the college environment was identified as a factor in
dropping out thereby supporting the hypothesis of a
relationship between a perceived SELF-CCLLEGE similarity
and satisfaction.

Instrumentality theory developed by Peak in 1955
provides the hypothesis that a person's attitude toward an
outcome depends upon one's perce.tions of relationships

between the outcome and the attainment of various other

22

consequences toward which one feels differing degrees of

liking and disliking (Peak. 1955). Consistent with this

statement are the findings of Starr. Betz and Menne (1972)

that students dropping out of college in their sample

reflected significant differences from non-dropouts on

the Compensation Scale of the CSSQ. This scale indicates

the amount of satisfaction with the amount of input rela-

tive to the desired academic and personal outcomes.

Graen applied instrumentality theory in an experi-

mental work situation and concluded that if organizations

can be designed or
work personalities
work organizations

reciprocal (Graen.

restructured to be responsive to the
of individuals. employee's reSponses to
may be understandable. predictable and

1969).

Rudolph Moos wrote of a similar application of

knowledge about student reaction to the college environment

when he said:

"The student's impression about the
quality of the college experience
may well be a latent resource for
determining the direction of appro-
priate change in the total
environment of the college campus.
There is a need, however. to
identify the factors that influence
the student's perceptions and relate
them specifically to areas in need
of change." (Moos, 197%)

23
CC; 'PCNENTS O? CCL LEG E STUDENT SATISFACTION

If the suggested parallel between "worker" satis-
faction and "student" satisfaction is to hold some
credibility, then the components of satisfaction in the
work si tuat ion and the college setting should reflect some
similarities. Hoppock (1935) reported a full range of
investiD ami ns that identified factors related to satis-
faction on the job. Within those investigations reported.
Hersey (1932) identified several factors associated with
adjustment and congruence in the job situation that appear
to have some applicability to student satisfaction in the
college environ nme nt. They are:

a congenial job

sound working conditions
security

satisfactory remuneration
justice

equality

independence
understanding and efficient supervision

.\,-\r—‘, \

AAA»
v“/\zv\/V\4v

amnrgmcmocrm

fa

While there appears to be no direct evolvement of these
factors into measures of college student satisfaction. they
do suggest a parallel to the factors admittedly derived
from management research by Betz, Menne. Starr and
Klingensmith in their development of the 3854. (Betz.
et al. 1971)

In the research that has been reported in the

literature to date. the selection of factors in student

satisiaction has been oase ed on logical considerations

24

rather than from research evidence. Berdie (1994) measured

"curriculum satisfaction." .ervin (1967) and Pervin and
Rubin (1967) divided overall satisfaction into academic sat-
isfaction. non-academic satisfaction and general satisfac-
tion. Eerdie. Pilapil and Im (1968) measured the satisfac-
tion of graduating seniors on nine logically derived factors.

curriculum

instructors

social life

professional counseling

faculty advising

opportunities for cultural development
health service

living quarters. and

the college in general

/\’\A/\’\/\r\r\,\
\L) CD \) O\Kf\ (T\.d N F“
\_/V\_/\JVVVV\./

Levine and Neitz (1968) used the process of factor
analysis to evolve graduate student satisiaction components
in relation to assistantsnips (jobs). These factors were:

general satisfaction

intellectual sti.ulation

the assistantship job

the physical environment and setting

constraints

social future

intellectual stimulation and freedom
to pursue intellectual interests

AA’\/~ AAA
\) 0\\I\ 3W (0 H
\IVVVVV\/

Betz. Klingensmith and Menne (1970) applied factor
analysis to six dimensions of college student satisfaction
logically derived from job satisfaction research. Unique
variables associated with the college setting were also
considered and included. Those six dimensions were:
Policies and procedures

) working conditions
) Compensation

AA/\
KAN P’

 

 

f\)
\l\

) Quality of Education
) Social Life
) Recognition

(U
(5
(6
The results of administering their instrument to under-
graduate students in a variety of living groups was to
substantiate the use of al the dimer sions in measuring
college student sati 'sfaction except the one dealing with
policiesa nd procedures.

The interve nin g years have produced little addition-

al research on factors in college student satisfaction
beyond the develop nt of internal consistency. reliability

and validity in one instrument (the CSJQ) for measuring
this variable by these same researchers (Betz. Klingens mith
and fienne). The most recent form of the CSS; was used in
this study of academic achievement and college student
satisfaction.
RESEARJR RELATING STUDENT
STICN TC CTEER YARIAB' S
Astin (1973) concluded that
"dormitory living in contrast to
living at home, increases the
student's chances of completing
college and raises the general
level of student satisfaction
with the undergraduate college
experience."
Netusil and Hallenbeck {1975) concluded that place
Of residence affects the level of student satisfaction

With working conditions. Similarly, detz. Klingensmith and

 

26

Menne (1970) conclude a relationship between satisfaction
with working conditions and place of residence but they
also found a relationship between residence and CSSQ Scale
Scores for Social Life. Compensation and Quality of
Education. They stated:

"Perhaps the most interesting finding

is that type of residence seems to be

related to satisfaction with academic

aspects of college as well as with

working conditions and social life"

(Betz. Klingensmith and Menne. 1970).

The sex of the student was found to affect the level
of student satisfaction with social life in the Netusil and
Hallenbeck study (1975) but this was not supported by Betz.
Klingensmith and Menne (1970). In their study, the level of
student satisfaction was not affected by sex difference.

Working with an earlier form of the CSSQ. Stuartz
(1971) found that adult women (21 years and older) were
generally more satisfied than younger women. Her study
suggests that significant age differences may exist in
student Satisfaction with the quality of education. policy
and procedures and in overall satisfaction.

A longitudinal study involving freshmen and their
satisfaction with the college environment revealed an
inverse relationship between experience and familiarity
with the college setting and satisfaction with college.

No relationship was found to exist between initial satis-

faction with college and academic achievement at the

end of the year. (martin, 1968)

In a cross-sectional and longitudinal Study of
students' perceptions of their college environment. Johnson
and Kurpius (l967) found that juniors held lower expecta-

of the intellectual climate at the University of

if
..1
O
I3
0)

South Dakota than do freshmen.

Eeal and Niliiams (l968) found that freshmen men
were more satisfied with their college experience when
they were assigned into residence hall living areas with
upperclass students. These researchers found that these
freshmen men had developed greater satisfaction in relation
to

} school and study.
their families,

campus ifiliations. and
, toward finances.

-'\ - \_-'

I‘- “

f.\l’.\"-
5:110 0'90

Freshmen women assigned with upperclass women showed no
significant difference with respect to these factors.
however.

Since the research reports with respect to the
demographic variables of age. sex, academic classification

and place of residence in relationship to student satis-

faction are not numerous and since present reports offer
conflicting results. additional research is needed to
document significant directions in these relationships.

 

 

LITERATURE RELATED TC ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

It may be argued that the use of grade point average
as a measure of academic achievement is much too narrow
and descriptive of only a few of the factors found to be
related to academic success. For instance, Schroeder and
Sledge (1966) list several factors which were found to be
related to academic achievement including interest and
motivation which. they say. has an overwhelming positive
relationship to achievement in scholastic work. Other
factors listed by these writers are: middle class atti—
tudes and values: personal and social characteristics.
and even anxiety in small amounts: Both socialability
and anxiety. in moderation. have been found to contribute
to academic achievement (Schroeder and Sledge. 1966).
While these factors. and possibly many others. are recog-
nized for their value in understanding the broad
complexities of academic achievement. their measurement
in quantifiable terms has not gained common acceptance as
has the grade point average. As pointed out by Lavin
(1965) however. those using the grade point average often
reflect them as absolute measures with little reference to
the other variables involved in their composition. The
grade point average was used here both as a mechanism for
grouping like achievers and for statistical comparison

with satisfaction scores equally complex in their

 

reflective capability.
In the current literature. prediction of academic

achievement is associated with factors described as:

(a) intellective and abilit‘ factors. (b) non-intellective

and personality characteristics. and (c) interaction
between a student's personality and the social environment
of the school or college. The importance to researchers
of non-intellective factors as well as the recognition of
the effect of interaction with the school environment is
related to the ifficulty of predicting academic success
from intellective and ability factors alone. With respect
to this. iavin states:

"Early research on the prediction
of academic performance focused
primarily on intellective and
ability factors as predictors.
Recently there has been the gradual
recognition that some students
perform better and some students
perform worse than predicted by
ability tests. The search for
causes of these variations in
academic performance led first to
the consideration of 'non-
intellective' or personality
characteristics. Even more recent-
ly the search has led to the
recognition that the interaction
between aspects of the student’s
personality and his social environ-
ment (school or college; is
important." (Levin, 1965)

1,..' ‘1 .°‘ 4.... '
ame:-can co-1exes Nltn respect to matching

individuals with colleges) leaves one ccnvi-ced that the

 

30

interaction of personality with the school environment as
a further refinement to the ability to predict academic
achievement still requires considerable research before
the full range of factors and their effects on academic
success are known.

The personality and school interaction aspect of
academic achievement is included here for a perspective
showing its recent rise to importance and for the purpose
of introducing the legitimacy of the study of college
student satisfaction measures with respect to academic
achievement. College student satisfaction is reflective,
at least. of the student's point of view of the inter-
active process with the school environment within the
limits of the instrument used.

while the majority of research on academic achieve-
ment has been done on predictive factors, the primary
interest in this study was to identify the degree to
which the process of acquiring grades was accompanied by
feelings of satisfaction related to selected aspects of
the environment. This review, therefore. concentrates on
factors that have been associated with academic achievement
which support the rationale for the sub—groupings of
subjects in this study.

It is clear from the studies of both Astin (1971),

and Levin (l965) that the use of grade point averages in

31

grouping subjects is not an accurate reflection of ability
but rather the result of the interplay of numerous
intellective. non-intelleotive and personality factors.
These groupings may reflect numerous factors among which
are underachievers and overachievers as well as low and
high achievers working at their ability levels (Lavin.
1965, p. 28). There is also some evidence suggesting that
shy and withdrawn students may be found among the higher
academic performance groups. Bloomberg found that college
students showing high academic performance are somewhat
more introverted (shy and withdrawn) than student wit.
lower performance (Bloomberg. 1955).

Lavin (1965. p. 21) points out that grade point
averages of students in the sciences and technical field
may differ markedly from those in the humanities or Other
fields even though the innate ability levels are compar-
able. He suggests that where prediction of performance
is desired, groupings should reflect curricular patterns.

The literature reflects agreement with respect to
differences between the sexes in academic performance
measures. From the findings of six studies, Lavin (1965,
p. 130) reports that the level of academic performance of
females is higher than that for males. He notes that
the correlation between intelligence and performance is

Higher for females than for males. That is. the

 

32

performance of females is more nearly equal to their
measured ability than is true for males. Astin (1971)
reports that literally hundreds of studies have shown that
high school girls get higher grades than boys. From a
national sample of 36,531 it was shown that women do tend
to get better grades during their freshman year in

college (Astin, 1971, p. b). Control for variations in
academic performance according to sex is well supported in

the literatu-e.
LITERATURE RELATING ACADEMIC ACHIEYEIENT TC RESIDELCE

Because the subjects in this study were exclusively
residence hall students, a few studies reporting the
influence of the place of residence, or lack of. upon
academic achievement provides an added perspective with
which to view the results of this study.

Astin (1973). in summarizing the data from a longi-
tudinal study on the effects of dormitory living
involving 5091 students. concluded

"that living in a dormitory. compared
to living at home had positive bene-
fits on the student‘s educational
course. Dormitory residents were
less likely than commuters to drop
out and more likely than commuters

to attain the baccalaureate in

four years. to apply for admission to
graduate school. and to carry a high
grade point average."

however. in a study involving students in four

 

 

 

 

off-campus.

ps 0

v

68.
1

0
q Q

‘} Li

0

0
\

OI“

o

s

.b V
‘7‘”
-J

VC

D
I

y‘
-

when ad

age.

’no-

a"er

.
V

‘--J

r'! ~r

a

a

1

-.

C
TI]

3.

u-
H
.‘.
x
U.

Q

schOias

.&
A

.l

e
C

9
r

a:

a. i
.‘L

Q“

q-
9

freshmen men

.4»

C
C,
1.

 

:3

3

CHI.

2.

me

.a.
7.2
.«a

e

n
a.
4..
: .
at.
r...

r
~_5

i.

a:

33.

at
l

._4

«I.

a:

‘4

G

O

-.-~vv
‘JL‘

' a

bl
‘ufi

y-x

V's“. H
- -o. .a.‘ ‘45.: O

'7
I

e

\
'- §

3.04;.

OZ“

«ea

0'
D.

C .
‘ \r 4"
to}-.. 7 .1. “Jr

4.

a

S

S
0““

.4, i.
n

11

3
T
h
a.
.3
nu
-. o

«a...

Z...

“1"..." '1‘ *v-
t/ wan-btll... JV
- u

a;
my
r.”
C
+ J
pv
r:

«O .A

0..

i

..0‘1'
V

\J

.\"1 M‘

.1 4X. - ..AJ.

Q a. '39

an;

fir
/

C.

0“

.7.

 

 

3“

agree that the living arrangements of students influence
academic outcomes in college. however. Fairchild (1963)
has commented on various residence arrangements among
upperclassmen and freshmen and indicates that meager
knowledge exists regarding the academic impact of such

residence patterns.
summRY OF LITERATURE
GENERAL

Although the possibility of a relationship was men-
tioned by Berdie in 19b4, the study of student satisfaction
as it relates directly to academic achievement among college
students appears to be very scarce in the literature.

On the other hand. the study of job satisfaction as

it relates to job performance and all the factors (on the
job and off) affecting the worker's productivity has been
studied thoroughly since the mid-nineteen-thirties.
Numerous theories about the relationship of job satisfac-
tion to job performance have evolved and all continue to
be tested in research studies including Herzberg's two
factor theory of motivators and hygienics. Scores of such
studies appear. for instance, in the Journal of Applied
Psychology Index for the period 196“ to 197“. (See Appendix
E for additional discussion on theories relating to per-

formance and satisfaction.)

 

 

STUDENT SATISFACTION

The application of the study and research on
worker satisfaction to the college environment and student
satisfaction began with Berdie's adaptation of the Hoppock
Job Satisfaction Blank in his attempt to predict student
satisfaction with curriculum choice. The issue lay dormant
for several years although some researchers reported
student satisfaction results from survey type question-
naires without reference to worker satisfaction studies or
parallels. Not until the late sixties. however. did signi-
ficant development occur in the identification of factors
(dimensions) in student satisfaction. These dimensions
were logically derived by Betz. Klingensmith and Menne
(1970) from the writing on worker satisfaction and from
the knowledge of unique characteristics of the college en—
vironment. As factor analysis was applied and refinements
in the groupings of items occurred. the resulting question-
naire was administered to students in several reported
studies with some success in relating satisfaction to
dropping out of college, to place of residence, to sex
differences and to age. Reference to academic achievemen
and satisfaction is inferred in discussions of congruency
between the student and the college environment but few

studies are reported.

j

30

ACADEIIC ACHIEVEMENT

The use of academic achievement as reflected by the

grade point average as an independent variable has consider-

 

able precedent although the majority of research is
concerned with the accuracy in the prediction of academic
achievement particularly in the transition of high school
graduates to college. Currently the theory associated with

the prediction of academic achievement recognizes the

 

influence of three types of factors: (1) intellective and
ability. (2) non-intellective or personality character-
istics. and (3) the interaction between aspects of the
student's personality and the school environment. The most
recent of these factors to emerge is that of the personality
interaction with the social environment. This coincides
with the present study. If the accuracy of prediction of
grades is contingent upon the student's interaction with the
school environment. then some measures of satisfaction with
selected aspects of the college environment may be related
to academic success.

Grouping of college students according to procedures
supported by research on measuring and analyzing academic
achievement data suggests that all except those associated
with sex differences may require qualifying explanations
and control of extraneous variables. For example. a group-

ing by grade average reflects only the result of numerous

 

intellective. non-intellective. and personality factors.
That is. grade point average is often not reflective of
ability. Similarly. grade point average has been shown to
lack comparability between certain disciplines and curricula.
Grouping according to sex is well supported in the liter-
ature as women characteristically achieve higher grades

than men and perform more consistently according to their

abilities.

RESIDENCE

As residence of the subjects in this study is limit-
ed to residence halls, several studies relating residence
factors to academic achievement were reported. Some authors
describe residence halls as having certain advantages with
respect to academic achievement while others find little
significant difference when scholastic aptitude and ability
are controlled in the comparisons. Overall. residence halls
and their affect upon academic achievement requires further

study before unanimous agreement is to be reached.

CONCLUSION

From the literature it appears that the interest
in student satisfaction is shared by relatively few
researchers who have found their instruments for measuring

this variable somewhat limited. The development of th

 

K.)
(1‘

C.S.S.Q. with its modest but hopeful standardization data
provides the opportunity of testing the relationship of

a large array of variables to student satisfaction.

CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY

SUBJECTS

The subjects in this study consisted of 952 of the
3373 students residing in the residence halls at Oregon
State University during the 1975-76 spring term. Approxi-
mately seventeen students from each of the fifty-six
residence hall floors participated in the completion of the
College Student Satisfaction Questionnaire although eighty-
six answer sheets were unusable resulting in 866 in the
sample. Care was taken to assure a near even distribution
of men and women while no controls were exercised to select
on the basis of age. class. school or other variables. The
element of control on the sex of the subjects resulted in a
_stratified sample of #32 women and #34 men. The accidental
sampling of the subjects by class reflected the involvement
of 369 freshmen. 265 sophomores. 135 juniors. 91 seni rs and
6 others. This sample compares to the total group of resi-

dence hall students as reflected in the following table:

Class % in Residence Hallg % in Sample
Freshmen 53 43
Sophomores 22 30
Juniors l3 16
Seniors 7 10
Others 5 l

The sample reflects a slightly lower number of

r h
' ‘5
(D
U)
3‘
'3
(D
:3
in
9.

higher number of upperclassmen. The discrepancy in

the

.,
I;

one

o"
‘

itsion o

I
3.713

.0

0

81071

onis

173

i

rcup and

g

c Q 1
“‘3' .
..‘A‘fi

0“

1L

8.3

-v
-I
.-
-/

V‘

LA.

I
-«

X14718.

CFC

a.

a
S

.3.

release a:

L

.5“
J‘J

:.

a. .-

”.9

a
‘
‘— -

a

‘dogos

Aunys

.1

u
- I"

”0—:
Us.“

 

e
a:

C3113-

.
.-«-o--
9.. .-

D l
.-v

To
a.
O.
a l
7..

S

‘-
C

5..
1‘
*1
l
T.

a...
pa
0“

0.
A.
0-

a.
3.

..C

«C

..
«D
..l

c;

3

“five
dot-

one

Q.

O.u1~.

e

e‘~
«9L

ysys
O

+
d

a:
ma“.

2...
1*
a
5 Q
h so
lo
.Q
.0. n
C 1
a.» «D
.G .J
H .i
e
7.. ms.
3.
.C r
a
t n
..g .T.
n”. O
n.
1. S
..L
..L -flu
FJ
«.l
.4. A.
n4
9 .4
u.n
0L. 0..
a, a...”
. l
3.. l
a,“ ..l
.ua Au.
.1.
J .l
n” v.
2..
a).
I/ ‘4
3 as.
3 a.
C .3
a n...
r f.
3.. 3

A_r~.\ +‘~y‘
x.‘..aI «\AA.

b;
.

.
a is
i a
qL. my.
atl‘ o‘m
Wu C
3 .1
V... «U
m.. r
O a.
C O.
“H3 '
an m...
.144
u. n.
fir, Dv
5.1.
T. w.
obi
3..
fl“ ram.
1;. n
C ..l
I; f.
-.l a
m.
3
a... .
C.
..n . l
m. r...
..m 0
T“ 04
n1
3 an.
. l A”
3:.
.J a.
a.”
a.
.. P.
r-.. a.
.l e.
v n
stud use
.l
rw. “.
m. aw

i

2‘"
~.A.

9 797172;;

Q

7“.

7"

A... IJ“...

'3

—r*—J

 

q

The physical conditions 0:

s:
the student's college life. such as the cleanli-
ness and comfort of his place of residence.
adequacy of study areas on campus. quality of
neal 3, facilities for lounging be ween classes;

Recognition: Attitudes and beh viors of faculty
and students indicating acceptance of the student
as a worthwhile individual;

Quality of 3ducatio.: he various conditions
related to the individual' 5 intellectual an d
vocational development. such as the competence
and helpfulness of faculty a.d staff. including
advisers and counselors. and the adequacy of
curriculum re quirements, teaching methods, an
assign.ents.

Tne .ollege Student Satisfaction Questionnaire is

modeled after a job satisfaction measure. The fiinnesota
Satisfaction ;uestionnaire ifieiss, Davis. England and
Lofquist 1967). each of the five scale scores is based on
the s in of fourteen items. The total satis fa ction" score
me'enty items.

all
Internal consistency reliabilities range from .78 to .84

similarly. the authors report validity St”dleS that
relate to satisfaction of college students in much the same
way as job satisfaction relates to worker satisfaction and
turnover. That is. in a study of 1968 students attending
Iowa State 7niversity in the 1963— 09 school year. it was
learned that the non-dropouts wver most satisfied. followed
bv tue non-aca emi c dropouts. and, at the lowest satisfaction

level were the academic dropouts.

 

42

ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

Measures of academic achievement were obtained
through the official records of the Registrar. Both the
cumulative grade point average and the spring term grade
point average were acquired for each participating student
in this study. Official designation of class was also
taken from the Registrar’s records. Specifically. the
designation for freshmen coincided with up to bk accumulated
quarter hours; up to 89 for sophomores; up to 134 for
juniors and those exceeding 135 qUarter hours were designat-
ed as seniors. The category of "other" in this study

referred to graduate students and non-degree participants.

PROCEDURES
(a) APPROVALS

At Oregon State University all research dealing
with human subjects is reviewed by a special committee
prior to actual research. Following the approval of the
proposal of the writer‘s Guidance Committee at Michigan
State University. the research plan was submitted to the
Human Subjects Committee at Oregon State University for their
review. Upon that approval. a formal request was submitted
to the Registrar for clearance to use academic information
to be taken directly from the official records of Oregon
State University. In this case. the Registrar was interested
in the ability of the research plan to safeguard confidential

information. As agreements had been signed by participating

‘:
\A)

students with th understanding that only social security
numbers would be utilized as identifiers. the Registrar

gave approval for the use of the academic data (See APPENDIX
C for the RESEARZH PARTISIPATING AGREEIEUT and RESISTnAR

APPRCVAL 7orn}.

(b) CCLLECTICN C? DATA tn SATISFACTICK

the Zollege Student Satisfaction Questionnaire
was handed to residence hall students on their floor by the
ReSident Assistants. Twenty students were contacted on each
of the fifty-six floors except in the case of four ”half-
floors" where only ten individuals were asked to participate.
Jormally each residence hall flcor contains approximately
Sixty individuals but in a group of four halls. the first

a haléfloor contai.ing only thirty individuals.

*6
H
0
C)
'1
..u
In

Each participant signed and returned an agreement (APPENDIX 3)
prior to accepting the College Student Satisfaction Question-
naire booklet 333 APPENDIX A). Follow-up for the return of
the test instrument was done through the use of the room
location on the agreement. A special instruction sheet in
the test booklet advised the student to restrict personal
identification on the machine scorable answer sheet to the
social security number in the special grid.

The distribution of the 3532 occurred between the

third and eighth week c: the spring term after the Jericd

I

of orientation to classes and prior to "dead week” and

"‘ W
‘J ‘1‘ JKIV ‘

a
u-vn‘
O§~n~a

‘(‘

~D
a.

0..
a:

oe'v}-

. .

J”..
J

‘ ‘
437.0

El

3.3328 C ‘18

a

M“
*.-o~4-

S

.e.

“vs
I.

‘-

coo--

.. ’,‘

I

a;

e

o v
3

_ n
q‘ ‘4

o‘..

a.
C.

3,

emé

fl
0.

9.

.4.

rs
,1‘4 s.-

ura‘
a
‘14..-.

Y

a

.718.

F3718

1.

v .
\

a.
.C

Q»

:I.

a.

A;
a;

n"

00-4

3

‘1;

fi-fir‘!

:.

9.

fig
.1;

9.

Cu
«C
Vfl.“

.1.

Au
r
C.

,s;

*
’"O
VAAV

“'q°
'4.-v

‘D
1..
..

j

6-.
‘J

‘flé
D.
.o
a
O:
m.

a

d

A4

\

3.

t .4

A.
i.
l

C.
a

h Qt"
.ee "duh."

(‘u
‘
u

a:
r

d-
J

c..~ ‘4

o..—

J.

2.

u‘J
.
,

~a—
‘J
7

cvw'fiv
l‘-~—'

A).

V

'J

2.

 

i J

a.“
‘4.

H (LO‘;.

4

«Dov—‘9“. w—O‘y
V;.*“

o 4 a “:fit? ‘Q \
.‘XU.H..../~a‘._ J a“.

.O

‘

”‘T‘ ‘
.Jd-o'1 be.

“2“" 0‘: or
«O- O A

Q O-
‘40“

/l\

‘
..L‘

O
‘

cecame ava

Q

ed cards

t. 333; scale punch

-he

As

i.
C

3

produce

.1&

yo
5 9

ity numbe

..-

an.

we CUIU

\

y
at.

individual.

the

CO
0V A

Di

/hv

<1

3,

3.

‘-
U

-ne

fore.

there

study,

’ Pd
rhv
Cu

N

.XTIC:€

L

5‘... 24

\~. “9"
u

A

c
a

on.
o;

w.
9

av

.NN

.W
-

ems O

o
. .b
a. 4

all

~J
n
.l
+u
C
D.
Ml

9.
r.

.3
a.
r
3
C.
O.

D.

was

V"
Lie

ta

and a

 

lzed

*-

‘
' v
t

W3

I

were

33

.1.

0.
al.
5.

.l

r

no maj r 7a

4-.
w

only

average

W Fl 8

)

11v.
\-

S

i
c”‘
3..
p a
T
*4
3

3
.a.

 

Y = a t o 'n
where c = slope of the regre53ion line
and a = the point of the Y intercep-

Linear correlation coefficients (r) reflected the
results of correlatin the variations in the observed
value of Y with the variations in the reported values of
X. The linear correlation coefficient formula is stated

as

 

a
SI.
(0
U]
r)
J
< f
:3
(D
(
SD
0’
H
\D

‘1
O
'1
’3
}.J
:3
rt
:3
(D
(7
O
0
FY
0‘
(<
(‘J
03‘
m
0
Pd
0
O’\
\O
V
O

ficance.
To further verify the significance of the linear
correlation coefiioients. "t” values were computed and

placed in the tables of data. The "t" value formula took

the form of

 

Significance for the data in this studi was reported at

:5.

the .05 level and at t

e . 1 level where "t" values met

-‘

the test 0: significance at the appropriate number 0?

5

degrees of freedom.

“*b‘l

~-uvuv

..J

4

.0-

-
4.3 - .‘5

'fi . .
4-..‘L-

on

.0-

.)
vs

‘n'“
‘1‘.”

.
.

‘..‘.'1J..-~..
‘ A o-
.14..

“a
h r-

o‘

a.

9

as

”9

U

cfi-r

9
V

,«

O...‘)

'0-

o
‘4

.
’ ..—

c v

.a
C
3
.;
Au

f0 '
u 3 "
.- A '

‘

. .

s.) wood

f‘

rt

c
.

..qJ.

Ha;-
;.Q

o

BLaCLC

.-

vs

«.3
3
w.
h.
C
3

2.

3

o—H
Va)

.5 A
v .I

’2’. q
C...“

03.

C.

7"“-
’A‘\oo

CH

*‘nw

Uto‘

'13“

(3

\

fl

3C:

'3') 33

J.

u
‘

Mv‘
-.obfi’

.A—
1 '3‘

6‘ 4'-

o

..2
fi

5

‘2'"
'f'C)

(T)

u.A...

‘o..

a—

17“..)

If?

F‘

I
\
-4 ..-)

he”

s
n n

I

.

.1

pi.“
.5!
V

A

H

A

933

or

_ I
t a... 9 e W w.”
. 3 C d .F. C Q
. a Y. m .1 . 3 r 3 t l l
1” .0. a H O r t r C l ._ o
a. . .J m D. e u :3 a. g 3 3 :._
.L t C .. _ .3 Au u. a. I.» r w.“ v. .1 S
a . S S ..6 a v“ : l l 1 i a. C n4 .. . 3 .3 .1.
w. n .w” a «in u .L a. ..v 3d :2 W w... .l ..c ”a
e S a .. i t Z O D. C .l C .l C O .3 C.
..L .C t E W a. Q a t .3 h _:. a l .L t h C
t .2 .u d a h r O l a a... C ..l t .1 a
«a .v «(A Q; 3% +v S “A M. D. s}; .1. .1. *v 0 Ia w“

T. a . 9.. S 3 E m.“ 7.0 :3 U E W a o l r .1 3 t
.l C v... 3 o. .L .1 C e .l e R h 7 T. n
C e i .1 r n .1 a t c. e .n u e S t e t F n .1
C. I. n t C. I .1 i .L. l c C .Q t E. 1... O a C
C O S r .3 C c 12 u. C a . ... d 1 C C. 3.

a. .. . C a. T 3 F 3 . m.” m a a... a. r C .l
.3 .3 +4 C u. E C. a. fir . J a w. 3. a. o... . a... C a,
a C ”a a a, w. 0 ‘ l .. O o, . .l O u. r oi .1 d
F :. .3 D. a. S i l 2 .2 ..I. n... C r.” a a e. 3
TERI” z. .‘~ ..:H 1 Q. ‘1‘ .(u 1‘ . -_ o «v 1.4 .w.. 3" 3 %~ m.
H. r 3 t .r... .2 u r 1 a. a S h . .. e t ..J A r.

a. . . .l c a C t e u... r... -.zv r .. a n o, 3.

h n u 3 t Y. .e a i w n n 3 S a n a .; C .C n
C .._ . z. 3 2 .8 . i O n: .. h r 3 O U. d O .l S .L
.1 a. 2 C z. f. a. T C 73 l C 1 i D. u. ”J 3
v. 2 c. a. .2 w e r... e. C e c. . 1 0 u e a l
.3 r T a. 2.. f. a. a . l 3 .1 3 F a J 3 O r: .1 m ..... J

E o. .2 C t X t .2 f a 3 .. 3 A... n.-. a . C . .fl .1 a n ..I.
.1 .. .. .. .0 S O _ . 3 e C T .3 .C . 3 3 C S .l S
e 3 3 .. s. a .r. 3 H .. a . u C i r a «a. n 3
i. e... a f. 1 r 1, 3 O F u .. l t .3. F n,
3 ..u R e 0.. Z. . c. o, . _ .l .l 3 .1 a e . ,C 0 A... C
3.. C :. T C H. 3 3 ..v. ..u 3 . . , .. a. O n. 7r .. R 3
. i t... a. .. 3 .- Q 3 .... C . J i . .2 3 S e 7 . a. .l
9. rt; w. L w. r” «.J I.” w +4 e i. mu .3 . ... :g r w; 2
a. C a. Z a. 3 n. 3 a C. 7. .1 R “a u o, t v- a.
w. .2 S O z. r 3 . 3 ..u r 2 .1 Z .1 .l V a. 7. C o. ..J
S .A r». s . .\ a v .3 q * C .q. ”I. .7” AV 0 1 . 11* m.” Cu ~ A
S a, 1 . . 3 a. .. .4 : , r . . C a. .l n S u .l C .:
3 S. ..u . . 2.. u. a” .. .4 .. , ... n .I T C C .L 3 wt. a. .1. ‘n... u.
a... . . a. r ... D. . 4 .. .3. . . a, a: .H “A .n.” 2 z.
2 F . q C Q. . . 3 2 -v i 3 O .f r C t ..J t
2 a»; . . C 2 A e. .1 .. :. . a n... 7.. t. 3 .4 0 C n 3 3
a. u. .t 5 n. G . J 3. A... .1. ..e t. A.” o (A x: a a a:
m. a: 3 . ..u ..u t 3 f. . _ A... .3 E 1 o, C C 9
7. T. 2. .1 a. a. .o A... :n .L. 3.... ..L r. o, l n F
u. .. fl 9 .s l e .. t F H. .. a C . f. 3 M C
t. _ . f . . 3. u v 0 3 C r 2 t F a, .l 9
. _ _ . C t . . i O z. 1 3 _ . .... e 3 e a. t F
T . i. a r” 9. . a. O r .2 o. , 5 S. t 7 1L .3 3 +v J o.
.A ..q C a. .u .v .f. r a a +b 8 .C W.
:. w A... a. . . a 2 a l C as h
..D aw e . . "J a. .3 a. C C. t w... . c, e r“ .T. r VJ
. . Du fly .3 at. :3 +4 #6.. 4. 4A “ Ga Au... 1“ .1. ~u A4
_ . h a a. . . a. a2 .1 o. e .1 t . f r e... 3 r.
.... . i . c u a .2 e n 2. .1. O u 2 e. O. H .l t
.D L” C. _.. a. r C w. ... a +. D. :. Q/ r S .l d 3

w'.‘
'-
_ J
_.
x.
.-
q

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

O.
,
.__.....__.___._. ---.
N r—-————— .———...———-——_—_.. '
‘.
---_ ‘
~ q
,.
__.___._ _.
_______.——--____.. -_. .. ._ .-.__.._-__.__. ._.-__
f‘
‘\
_—_._——_.—-._—— --_._ .
.
arfl—HF—H—‘_— __....__- ___._.. -_
. D
., _._._—__.._ __--— __._. ~
_.-._..___..__—_.
..u—i—H- -_.__...__._ ..__._ ___ _. _—
- ——_O — -__> --- - .- _ _n ‘_-—-__- _ _— -.I' - —-‘ —-—.~~ --————*-._ -——- *—-————.~ '—
.
.4 _—- __-..________.~._ .
‘F—__ .._. .. __.._ _‘
o.
_. .——.——_..——_._.._____.- ._ . _..__.____-__.__._ _._. _...._....- . ._
. _. _. __._...--~_ _ _..._- --_.__—- . _---______.-_...-...
___.___.._._...-._. -- -._..
-,_._. . -___.._...-_.._.-_._-_..__—.__...__ j
‘ . ,-
r .___._. --. _-_. -._._._...-._— _...
!"— -—
...__...__.__.__ .
'Q' ‘
.. - _ "
,—.._-...,
n
t- ’
“w...
.h-
I
|\
“——
—— A)
n. .
o
..... H
'3'
.
C
n _.
a
0 ur
r—O
. .
{N
....
I
u)
,0
0,3"
.
C)
.C‘
H ~~
-
O
C)
I
o C
I. L A ‘ A A A A A A A A L A
v v— v— v
o '3 '1 c r . " "’ " ‘ ' G '2 '73
' -\
I. " fl 3 ,. .41 c} h .J o 'r ‘7 \4 H
d

(J

/

"'1
/l

‘1

J u

I

V
0

11’:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

g
l
.
‘
Q.

«5. ..fl -._ Y
u no u v‘
,— ,‘ ._ ,.
\_l....I 4...; -1

‘* 0
«a
A
'I
_.J\)

 

..~

‘_.

0‘.-

n...

«.5
A:
A ~

a u

5:82";

‘/

v--
y.

a,

C
J.

:A
w”
~L

.V.
as

'n"
V~o.

s

Ff

H

dob

‘-

C.

a.

3.
2A
C
. a.

2»
ac
r

C
S

3

I

~

-4
A-

I

‘vnw‘

SJ
9
2

2.
I“

1.
h;

“A
«V

1...‘
3.
.4
w.
0.

.fi.

3,
*4
w.
9..

2.

a.

A erA
4

_‘v-

"

O“’l.-\d

u

f‘

.OV‘r.‘

J.-

C

‘ ‘

r v

‘aas‘ir-O-
‘~\~IAAA 4

"1

Q

4

r ‘r‘

a,

0“

vx “Q

.L
"-Jco"‘
~II . 9“

;

sst “
..C

p

-‘
3
_, u

r
v

”I“ I‘
A A

h

\v

"/t I)

4’ '-

II

73

a.
.3
1.“
~v

‘Hl

..‘IA

‘45
9.. .

I

..1 4-.¢.
.

A¢A*J

’3 V5 f“

l

A

«5-5

0

.~-—‘
<‘n -

\4

Tvsf)”
1‘: ’A

Y.

r“:
'1.“

+ .
b

HQ>®H AC. OM»...
Ho>¢m$zi pm

:m.~
«4 #tfitr —. ..x.

(J
cm.~
oz~cx
9

cos“ :

6:3
>-m0wpuwasgn

ammo.
.xmnc.
m_fio.-
m 3:: . I
a {1-3 a .

$352 .
::#:>
L

ALV nacowcfly;:ov :cfiaa_¢g;cu Ldozflg :H

ZOMUSM>QQ Cpxnzwgw M an

SC . 3:

P‘ ~ 0%...~

Hid:

”HOLCL?
V ‘-\.o\.

:33...‘

.\ .J'.I.III’.|0 I! ’ ‘

34:42.

finrxofl. ac.

pa pcaawgmzmww4¢
H$>ma WC. a: azacflmw:mfifl *

ucfluflsnvm
copsasov mauveosn cox Lou negoun vadon 6:3 cowuowg

zcmgnostu go mgw~£2v

\
,

:cdpfic&ocux

waxJHg #devu ynhg4zucn.

:cwwfin~rg;ow

firvflHNZerfludhw flytuo;
.J.\....,‘. -- .w .,M.U
3;: 1 :

vaHM>
.H...L .U ELM”? ZWMW
mwuxn #mpoe

 

..-

e o. e w‘ «I
h .2 9 l 9 w, 3 S n h
t S 3 r O. . d O 9 a n E.
n r . a . m D. .1 2 n I. w u
h C a n S a u v . A. .1 .L e O
i o . .1 9 C S E S 0 O ,, \ l .- . t .n h
.l S t E S .2. u t R r P h. l m . C
w l .l 9 C . n .l a pa 3. S F x .4 .1 l I
S u d C . a .1; d 9 C. 9 9 A S a . C
v 9 S n r 9 a.” 9 9 d u r. 9 S .1. an 9. 9 . a... 9
l C 9 O n. e V ..U fiofiu r mu 0 .l .n Ta 3 r «O r a... d . :1.
e d r C 9 D. .1. . n a 9 9 t r t n m a . . 9 9 D. f
S n C t m. 9 r t t S E. d 9 l .1. 9 V t . 9
r d t r: t .13 h 9 C 9 S 9 - d .1 x... .P. 9 3. :c T
9 n a n r a S A w V 9 .3 .L 9 . 7 S u 0 9 J r. l 9
.r. a h i g n O _r. ,. x a l I n 4 : l n t h C S O
u t K a . a C. .o f i a . u C S D. + . . C l c a t
i S r . ..q t 9 r ..u. m 9. S i u A . O a
8 HI C .3 :5 t u ...g C r C .0 . o. 3 T. O .Q .‘L S . 3 F
S :b O .N 8,. n 2 A . u .l a . a r as r .1 u r 9 C - 9 9 a
9 a .4. .l a ..q a J O S O l f :5 .C 3 . r b F e
.l r e .2 O X C D. 3 3.. 3 f .3 S C 8 z. a C O C.
r 9 a. O r n z. . . : 3... a r E. R S 9 V n . C C S.
a V a .n a f .n n 9 t a w 8 9 n O a h 0 e D. 5 S S a
V a m D. C l z. a. 2 d n r 9 t .1 C C q. F b . O u
.1 C. n C a. 9 9 . a r .,. C D. w 5 . u. l h
9 t 9 .3 n 7...; . ”J r m .l . u 0 e U W ”.4 a 34
f n .O S 9 a z. 3 .5 9 a .o C h 0 a S . Q, l n 9 S t i
i .. . n u. 9 3 n V . J S t r r S ..v. a . r h e O .h
l 0 d O C .l 9 d d 9 i a... .C "J .1 . 1w 9 t l t
D. l i r t O 9 9 n... n 9 .3 O l S 2 l t a O
l u t 2. z. n w r a .2... ..H .L t . O 1 Y . t m n t
a 9 O a l t: C O t .. a t a L. O .n a a
:J z. .3 C .. a. . . 3.. a. S X a C. .-. 3., . 3 1 t f t e o. W
..3 C a 9 :. 3 .2 H u 9 h 3 C 3 n .L i O i . n T. O
O F S r 3 9 S 3 9 C A z. . 3 n a O w r t l
S .b 9 . f . .. n 2 z. .3 z. 1 :9 .L 9 C +2 9 Jo
S 9 h .. 0 V. 2 a .h. 3 r h .n r . n d V O 2 m
h r l S O n .1... S .3 9 r W . . C P W 3 3 2 9 o, e t .L 3
t o. P z. ... ..v. 3 3 A, S a. C .9 u c. .l C W S w.
.1 .n” e 9 . . a .C a n” a. C w m” a m C .1 O :9 a : .
W 7b m u. .L d a. .. 3 o. 3 9 .L ..g 1 C O t C .l l .n C o.
.l O n S 9 r 9 9 D. a h l r 9 n r .2 9 .1 r 9
u .n S .; .1 z 9 r r u C m . H ¢. .1 r 9 f f r - t C C
O n4 i C .C F O C .C F .1. 9 O ... 9 F ,3 a n n
z. .1 - a. 1. .- .n .4 C C r n ”.J 9 T 3 9 l .H 9 . O O n l .L a
t C Y a C .; a. n C S g a .3 t C L r l .L a C C a 9 7
C .L 2 4 . a; 2; .C 3 a. a. . C r r. d
a . . t u ..u 3 3.. t. 3 .n o . O. n 9 .l O a
‘1 n n ”J . . . 8 m. S C u . O a. a... S
S 9 e l a 9 3 R 9 S a: .1 9 .1 .1 n S
.1 m t r . .2 1. fl . n h 0 r t w n S r g
t n S a D. L H i . . o o S a, a g 9 e n
a .1 .1. . _ . .C T. t a. r w“ a; 3 .1 .Q t z.
S a S .1 .5 l C n 9 9 ; . 9 9 S + v t D.
. v u 3 u 2. w l 9 3 .3 m: r r O a u
f t C .1 O 0 v . O : . 2 E. m r O +... C. D. O
.l a C a t C n: h h .1 n u L O C O .J r
S ”.4. S .. L n D. C S u H” a 7:4

ecmoHaflcmHfi

mozfic> =g; c: u x: pzaoggwcufln avsflx> a a: k :odpaa>ma cumchpn p gm
cs. mumc.- cs.:n 00.nom so 22.3,Jm.n

o«. m:::. hm.nx mm.mom sv c:.m-cc.m

\gm‘ .H NM: A . To.“ A. €0.30». {(4 2... . mICm . m

("4

Cm . _ #0.:H . 70L; TWJVJMCO. To; 3:10.1CO.
«mm. H ~,_rnv.z T~O.hwa .u~.«.:.w fi,~ ?m\.g..0c .H
Or. c\;-.- c:.~*~ 3x.fi;u~ fl; ~;~.H-mxw.a

H 0:.OIOC.O

“uzdmu> .Jza.~> mat megAXJQ M Mmflwur~op“.~
...p .; gauge .<.;.+
:33: Spa?

 

It'l't‘u'ill .l‘i: (I. II“ 7! .l'nl ll] I'll I'll; f 'l.- 1' I:

mvzfls> :a..fi::u ¢pv macawofluuo
:03 :owua.vuuou Lac:w; cm mcfla-nox m~adowanflwaan dogmascv cca wfln>pwpz~
.<.;.u Save 09 ucvaocc< amazogu muozmczn a_:£ :r: as mmucon cowuoagmwpan fiance

rd mg,_ Mflgq.~_

z. . u f r e .n
d S i O a .... F t
e C 3 . a... t a .. a r
m l . . E. g n S h _ . e O t
a l” n O t T. 9 n . C. u a. C
e m .1. e i .L n l r a v C. 3 e
t. e n w d O. t e a a . a T 3 e . 5 .J
nob no. mu. 3 ”A .. d 9‘ L T. 3 .u. C. .u 0v
a r C l u D. 3 l C u n T e
U. f h 7.: r e C 1 1 3 . . u x v 6 O 8 .f
C a g r S f :3 . .n r .; 0 .1 e .
3 e m r 3 O A e O t r: C t t ..n. 8
z. S 2 r e O n, 7 _ u 3 r C .L E. 9 C .1
.3 5 e h C 2 .4 ... S C ... . S 3 .G t
f n f t t .1. C L O a. 5. a. l 0 ad a
.l C a. 2. .n. +v .3 h” 9‘ W . a. r. u. r w“)
.. C. V. n O .; T C ..r C a 3.. a
T R "J .C : . h n W C d -9 C .. . t T.
e O a co :2 .1. m. a. W 3, O n m X C.
v. F l d 3 a n e w O . t n o. a r e 9
e H C. a. C C :. S C n O . ‘ 3 O 3 C G S d
W S C. C h 2. t n. a l l 3 z. C .1 I ‘
O . .l w; a. +9 I. a” a o. .. a a“ :2 ‘v Aw «I r t
.2 a d C .J l O 9 C T C . 1 3 .1 a, 6 J
. r .3 a P .; ... a. .2 a. 12 l .L R .n _n
v D. r E ”A r”. C o. o. r“, , fi 8 :. XIV t G
F . a. S 3 :. ... .2 V. a .L o. F .._ z. .1 «a
e 33 s * 3 n.” A; a. r” +v ..“ O r... -n-“ n. “u 3 a.” 0.. a”
t i n. a . O 3 a. c: u .R w. t C S, 9 l
3 l m l a. .1 . 9 .1 r t t 3 .. C e r 1.
.3 l a .L a S l O 3 9 3 3,. r S u w 0 O
.3 C 3 5. w. ”A . C .L h i 3 I. E f . J
n” z. e a. ‘L rd 9. l 3 a. i. a: r. a. D. a,
e t a a. .2 C c. n” 3 T .L H. 2. z. 0 .C .5 Q .3
e n z n . C a .3 o. “A e t 7):”
3 9 S r ”A O 1 z. 8 c. t V F 1. l a. P. a C
.3 o. O n C t . . h r O ”A e . .. 3 r
e .l ‘1. .1 a. a a. .3 h ... 7: C 3 V .1 .1 o. n
.3 .1 n. O .n” 1. .1. e .l i S e o. w t V C
e n. S Q. C t o. a. H S . T l a a
a . .1 3 a. w r . -. C S a T. G l S
l I r r O t n T .1 a. . C a. o, r e t 9.
3. fl». C ‘ L 3. I. O wfi ov ‘“ .4 W”. V . .ru n“ 0 Ta 0.. W. h.” r
w .2 C 2 C .J h 3 . .r. t i 3 7w .2 r71. 0
t 3 S e r d . e m w r.) .4 i t. T O O C
S .l k“ 9 e 3. ~. g. 3 ..n 3 W 3 H.” u C U. S
A w 3 u.. a. D. .9 R T a. I. u. 7. 3 C e a. .
. ~ p.v 1. - *4 c "Q flv . a mo wi~ .f“
o, 1. . . O u .m .n. a. 1* . . s. a, C a g
. s A a . . O S .f. ,3 O O _. . l .3 O . .
d T .. . a . S . 9 l 3 a. e A 8 C. 3
9 e .A e 2 F 1 . . n 1 3 .8 S 7. E
V m.” 7. “4% S S F C t e .n .i
e e 3 w ,3 r w d e e r. r l T
.1 . . r 0 .-w 9 O n r t .2 «A a. a 1 C
.n t _ . e l 9 u l e O t t T V m l C.
C O 1.. V e l e 9 r 3 a .. . C e 9 u v .
a u 3 a .3 . G .3 _r. S 3. w T ”A f n ”A

-
‘4

'Q

!r*

R V
‘Lds_ .‘

t
l

I! C

.arx
5.4

.aL

.4 so
J'J

— -~v-
“a. b g,
‘.

c

Q...
~—'
‘ h

'~

l
J.‘-.

—. .01 ,‘ ..
~J b J -. .-
" "f‘ \y---

F.”
thud v
.‘Q'
wa‘ o
r‘

.‘Y.'
.-A.-Va"—”
~97
A._‘_
"'1‘ ’5'
-I1H-;4

O

VJ
-n

o
‘

Hn0?~‘
.J

‘Y’T‘Tj?r‘
0-4

«9.

J

C

‘...‘u _
w-

‘ f‘

J
J

a

.4
‘A

pzaoflgflcmwn mozam> zp: Lz “*a
:ampaw>92 Upaszmun w 3% ucaoflgmcufln mmSHd> L c: u *

il'l'"l.|llc1t|l¢ Iiv‘l‘ll’t.l. Iv'lln lull I Ii Ila--. I'I‘dr 17-..! I I III...- I'II .‘I‘l\ I‘luIill-I ‘ulll'lllnlf .-'|l!. .. III}, 'IfVIIII'Q"l'IIQIiIIII|"I l.lll.

:2. coco. $5.0m :o.mam m: oo.:-om.m

Hm. Amuc.- x~.cm #~.ocm nfia o:.m-co.m

2m. ¢omo.- oc.mm an.~aa mam oo.m-om.m

2m. wane. aH.Cn . mg.:gm mo o:.m-oo.m

as: chofi. mgn.m: »:~.HH,H m;w ”A .H-cm. H

03. .mmOO. NM)?” 32.36?» C c:. #300.“

,fi ..r}-r -4.- ,.- ,-.::- -:-¢: A ¢o.o;cm.o
-::l ‘ -;-1 J : - L- H $3.9:oo.o

_i 1% 3...- - .- I ,D- ‘ :9» : w -m...L.:.$ i, - ; -:. -.i .-:..mfl..muv,m_
.‘g .; #:.c9 .m.;.c

Cc“... ELSE

mczflfiw> :a..fizgd ALHV mp~2fimowmmmy
loo cowpsfizphov Ldocw; Cm ficflAA no: >-£owuwwpd n COMGQEOO tzw maa>L®uCH
.<.&.c 8&0? Op mcmtgooo¢ COQSOLC wuooflzsn O~dE¢L am: we mwhcon COwPoammHumw aduofi

r a;:<9

KuCC.T

nI/
“Aux

muwcmwowuuvoo cognamfigou 5323.; :4. xcwaflzmox
awkwasoo meownnzn oama :n: no; muoon caduceumflpzn Ampoe Uza

:chxw>n<fl

I! .II II'

-§C .
m. 6.33 .
«Chtfi.

.WAVWAJ o

13;.

CLCUZMHHW H 33

I.-l'l.|u IIIIII

mc._m

%A.:

.l' all‘ll. ‘II. III I

Hm>m~ Ho.
.mr»o_ ac.

|l|ll|l.u .-

«41.3an
$9. Cr.

Cu. .«1‘.
37.3:
fix}

H:

m;Lccn
FHd..~....

3 $1333.

ad
”a

.d..L ..U 5LT? Z

«J
L

“fizwcfl

24 WC,» a. Na #
42~AUTHHC, . m

{u by
0"" .."-4

L" U)

(A H». fi»

09—- or"

n! Dll \I I" I I! nil 01’ ‘llil. | 'll. ill All. . a '.J

:ompcaumwpdn Hmpow

:cmpflfizzxm,wc muwadsw

compxuzvgzav

| ill. I! i. 1.. I'll Illi.

..“..H H .HM.L..~« :dubfi

fiends? :P: UCG Ahv
“H2 zfiaaowpmfipa n
mmhoom mdeon Gnmu

.MJ
,3

..c
. L

«a

‘stv-qv’..
L.~

bu..---

,—

3:1
..Hu

an

3..
oxfi

A
a

7:
ofi~

10'-
.AIW

no-
V’s

r\
9
-

w

11'! C

O
‘

Q
1
A. L

.3?
1 ~

4.

3
....

‘ .
e
w.
w.
(.4
by

g .
by

I

r

3
a.
E

..A
0v

7%.

7‘
1.

.L
a;

4.
.he

0‘-

9.

AI‘

0"”

0
~
'Ioh-wno

w I-‘V'P\‘
.931-.. \ro‘

‘,;—.
.0- .16

*foov-O-I..""

«K.

‘3

.0
o

i;

u
1

.- - a . v
I I
o . V o .

rho?-
‘-J.‘-

on-”
d 4
.\4V

G.

‘0.
Y.

c ‘1‘

'01:

p-
U

\

21

tion

3

Ga

.1.

my

.1.

0“

;.7~r~ "."T“-" 1‘,
.ngLJx‘-AJ utJ

fs “ +3.0
U. .—

J...-

0‘1.

an)»; 1

.\./

o:

a v
S

v
1

\IICI

-
-

'v“
‘

"-C".
. .g ~
A'.. ..J.‘~J

C

,5
.« v
ab
Dy
. Wd
9.
w.

3
0Q.

S
i.

318?}.

9
-Or

,
scape

.ua

9.

t
3

A...

.sL

ow.- 7'" /‘
(_g, - ..

:C.

W

“t-I-VP~nv
'JJ“.~L- w.

.«¢o
0-...ov

.3...

Ho>ofl Ho. pm yzmoauflzmflm ma :9: u m.
H0>mH Ho. pm pcmofiawcwflm mH p n *

,fl....i ;- -5! 3m“; - -i we ... m... , x L, 33% ------.i-- .. a? E Lawn?

Hr. ergo. mo.s m:.m: cowuc;:vm mo hpfladzw

m : . 2:...5. a N... .s m s . 2.. :03 in.» ‘9;

05. c;::.- ,ua.: c~._*m mzcmuflflzzyw mcmxpcfi,

aw 0m.g omcc.: :m.A_ mr.u: ouwg Atwoow
¢¢Hm.n :mpsa. :n.r mr.a4m :oflg.5::£a:ou
ui-.i ,- l .H, 1 gm . ,- I - mg?“ -- i: :-..m.._,.w.-.m,gml.m
:53...“ mm: M 3

mucoflomgawoo :ompmavppou Ldazmg :m
Caucasoo npomflczn ofixsv; am: he; spoon

m

"wo~d~dw> ..u._ fi;_a AL.J
mcmufism¢x .<.;.c 5L0? :umfi hafiaoflwnfluaun

:oHuomewadn dapoa 12a nvbcon chon WWflQ

ugn¢9

CO

.3
n
a

.l
r.
.‘*

9V
4 .
no

9.

es and

3 sex

or do:

.“
‘

1
833;?

\ a

a—

s ‘1'
.tQ.‘1--‘~.\

"

-"--s
I.
a- n—l

a

corre

,-.'

--x..'

HH-‘ArV-o—Mv
He .
.. .thu.

V

n 4-
to

8X EH:

*n‘

9.5

-‘y‘o

how

9“

III. ‘ A- v—g
‘

I

--1—I~~

and

were

1.

.1‘

r‘*

S

0'

1.

I.

:_

...
*0
*e

1..

r

9
p

a;

a;
..a.

fi .

‘

w.

i.

~%

0
y- Q

‘.-

-

aCCCfltl

3

0‘.

OCS.

.“
u.—

3

O“

a .3
.1

«Q

v
.

3”,.
.s ~
9 .

0‘
\..

:J

(O
..t
n.

“T
1.

.
.15-...‘JA

"7.7"",

rfiu‘ao,‘ *- f .-
' .14 . .1 " J
\1. A- _J.I§J .‘ .'._ ‘_'.

f‘f'
J

u)

C
‘ 1‘
Ln:

rrougd

s:

m: ..d x, g k. a
os~d> p *

mo . 020 H . an .x. Dr . S 3: mm. was?“
mm. emHH.- mx.c «$.03 :w mmAHw
co.:-cm.m
mm.a mw:a.- ma.s om.o: nafl nurxaem
mm. oomc. m:.s oo.c: o$ moans
O: . MI 00 . m
as. xaso. om.m cm.c: 3mm magaevm
c:.~ cmoa. 3:.m m~.c: :va mufldfi

Ae>m4 no. 4c ucxoflpmzmfim m
:cmdxa>oa sgmncagn I _n H¢>m;.mc. Us gcxofifi:::m m

Iu‘II II I ['I|. t1) III I l(.'lll

 

 

I ll.‘ flu-01" } II A I‘III Ibll l.Il I

 

.I

on. amnc.I mc.m mm.c: cc mad:5mg
armcfi. mm.m co.cm cma moan;
n.:.mIOC.
oo.a ~49: . mw.o «Xian mm nmtflwcmoz
:m. asno. m«.s gn.sn 0H mmaae
oo.eucm.a
mm. ccco.- mm.x :c.~: c nmgasma
3A. mono. cz.c cm.¢m c modaz
om. . . .. .. . . ., Ci.~uco.a
a ma-g=om
c muflxz

c7.c-co.c

(‘1

$3.04

(N

. .II IDII.| I. .I I'll... Ii]. . ll! . ’1 II .I le.|. III! ’I 1"? ‘rl I al.|II I IIIII Il‘.ul .III‘IIIII f II,,IJII III} 'II'I’II!|'I [I'll-III.

92~AH> szflqw> zmd M::~3om. : m-sfi.ov-_
P rH 3H "Um... .Mu..._..MJ.
£333 Fae?

-t - ... oIPII fI.a III... I I I I i I I1 IIII I IIIQIII .l ldl' All-III I .l I VIII] ulnhIII II IIIVI...‘III|II.1 If..I’l III! l'fcuIIII (Iii I .‘I’Il‘l I.--

95?; ..p: 93 TC
acadpwaouhou Awazflg cw xzfluazuo: zdgnsflgmfiuaen Uzpdascu can mflx>paucfl .<.;.3 5,29
0» xcwohooc< 033:0ho moaasc; an: 3:5 mafia: 3m: pom mmpcom tdaom :onwcmcomx

m m;:<e

.19....

-ba

I .3 _ C n.
_ 1 S a .1 t r e
I. . F e e r f n 0 e r fl.
0 e .2 A I t r: .1 E r ...I. h e 5..
.r. I u e r e O S “I. e :5 _IJ .n 1 t
n” a A O . -1 n t S C t .l .3 3,, .3 .3
C n .1 y: .3 a a n l 1 v . a .1 3.
C e .1 + . .1 .I. 9 a e In 1 I 1 a S h .0. O C
II. In +v Wu C *a *I4 W» TV C In; ”M Pv. e S 0 Tu ..—
. "I“ a. t a .1 S r 3 e H w... n l e .1 7. l o.
.H C e d l C r C. C .I... w E e .1 a a. a .1 S l a .1
1.2.: a .1. e r C n n h 9 n a .J 3 n
C. a r C r .1 X 2 C S 9 C e l .n I a. n l h a... 3:
u C 3 7%.... r a. an o. C .I . T 3 9.1 m. T «I 3.. C 8 F .._
e 3 a .3 C .C a. 3 .1 a. u a m“ a . e f n t n... 3
S e ..n C 3 S I C C C. O 9 V d O a ..I.
.. Au .3 r "I-.. a r. U. r r W I 5... AI. .v C :1. O
F n n C R a. :5 .3 .C C a. v3 3 a. C O 3 W a. .1 S S H
e 3 a .1 .R r... .1 C n .1 l O +. a. R e
.n C n C m.“ a S a. a. S S .1 .1 a. a. In 0 T. C r 3
t ..L . .I: 2 r S .1 C. u e e .C V E r t C C C
.1 S S T 2 e S a S S O m S e o. I l O C n
a. n. F d e C t r. . 1 3 .1 O a I. 8 .1 . W a.“ ..1 E. “I. S .1
F D E t u C C a 9 r C a .3 r .3 O m n r J
a. .I . .. . .I I a e .I. .1. .C a. a. r a a, .i n; .C S .l 1
O I F. C o. .1 t .1 n .I C 1.. .J .3 C u. w C t S e a. t a. -I.
a. a. 3.. a. 3 f. “I“ 3 w.” r I U. .n f; r 7.1 I
S ”J S 7. I n. 4.. .. u a. C a. T. .I. a. S a. 3 Tu W... O 3 m 1 3
9 w. a. 9.. .1 n“ r. t Ir“ .2. S “I. r C e r n): o. a a 9
r 3 w. a. w. .4 a. ..1 I O +. fv 3 C C C C O n 9 D. I; X” «L
O .5 C a. O S 1. .1 S .1 1 3 e C .1 1 .0 o. v. u a r. a
C a. .2 .1 I. I. c. 3 2 T T .f. t ,3 a. a 8 Mn J m
S C 3 S C r .1 .1 A... C 3 e O 3 C S A. ..In 9 I. 9
q. r 1 e .1 S S C n. C i f . 1 3 n l . a t S .1 .L .1
”I. C O I. T a. a, T .1 f. . a, W A; a, mu .1. ..a
. V ... t a... .3 I a. C H1 z. 3.. C A C .3 F a, . u .3 .L _n.. 1.. ”I. w.
._ 3 n “H F n. .1 3 R ..J. .i r” a. C 1.. r .3 I C t a O
fl. «.0 “A D. D. . A, 0. I4. ‘4 0 Aw I‘. NJ 5.. I. In” .. h». h . U «C.
. 4 a 4 C T n. S 1 S C u .1 .2 .3 w 3 r T C I T, A
I... t. o. a n. .1” S 3 a. C a” t O h 0., IL. m. I.
C . u. .1. C ... . S 2 a .1 F t l a n3 n G d e .l C 9
..Q S o. C U . C I .I” z. I. .1 V O u T. a. .L F 3 If I. m; V
. . In“ 9.1 C . q S . . n” C T .I. .l w. a: a. ..J .. r. o. r o. 7. n:
a. 3 r .n” .1 . u a . e .1 o. r” a. 9 VI. 3 a. a v. r: I. DI 9 l
... a O C O T. 9.. 3 Tu .. C. C .C C S a h“ T. p. . . .R
5 o. n a 8.: an .5 3 ~.. C .2 e c. . 3 t a .1 a. 3 ix t S
7. 7. S l C .2 O 2.. .3 n .1 d d .1. 3 3
. d . C s. .1 C C r ,. t D a . I t q... n +. 3
.3 . 1 r C. t 1 C F .1 .1 S e t .1 .1 u l
A . . f C r .2 . . I... C I. n .L h n e C .. b C
m . In C. C r n V t 3 E S a. e F S
3 a . a . e a a a .1. o. t 9 .H II.” I h
C e A 1 t . n a I S h S w G 3 C
. a l 3 r. a n t C S t .l a I 8 a
In S C. .1 0 w n .. 1 .1 e O S .J o. u .. d 9
a. e 2 S o. O .1 1 . t r U. n l a
p C 5.: a a R h .R O a a a. Y. O n ._ u . r t
r. . a S .3 .- _ t S D. C 3 w h C O a A E. a

64

relationship between student satisfaction and grade point
average is evident in the data of TABLE , other reasons
should be explored for females indicating higher mean total
scores with higher mean grade point averages than did males.

Additional data shown in TABLE 9 concerning the
CSSQ scale for CCEPENSATION for subjects grouped by class
revealed a correlation of .2444 which is significant at the
.01 level for 144 freshmen males. A term g.p.a. for this
group was 2.49 and was accompanied with a mean scale score
of 41.21. One possible interpretation is that the freshmen
males in this study were reasonably well satisfied with the
amount of study required for grade attainment and were not
adversely affected in other endeavors.

Also in TABLE 9. junior females and senior males
reflected correlations of .3434 and .2627 which are signifi-
cant at the .05 level. The mean scale scores for
COMPENSATION were 41.87 and 40.43 indicating a similar level
of satisfaction with freshmen males. The sample size for
these two groups, however. were too small to permit broad
conclusions.

TABLE 10 is presented as follow-up data on the
discussion of RECOGNITION scale scores in HYPCTHESIS THREE
where a relationship was found between term g.p.a. and
RECOGNITION scale scores for the 434 males in the study.

When grouped by class (as indicated in TABLE 10). male

no.

3 .
m :03 . t

7.
0 $3.—

u

new

ALV masowowm;vov :cmgx_mgpou axozfl4 :H mcfipflznex magao
was una#u z: ceasopt waaxscz Hr: ccx me~a£ an: L0; mapcon

0033.
mpvrng.

a :No .
.«q 50C .

r\~«a.\.4 fly 0
8 ~33?

530.3 . I
ANCR. A o

L

oéwa
.0:

.CC

0 «JAN

nogoun

vfiaoq.
:aoi

~3>m4 Me. an pcmCmecmHn wH 03Hx> :p: :u
.~m>¢~.129. um prszflHH2£w‘. mm vzggtn.~ x
v. _ .n NM. mm-_3§21
he.“ re nmPNJ
q -

20.: mag nnfivawm
I ,~ 0 d Au J. .
MK. A: CAT‘H WC fly ....
mufHocrucazun
W.A_ . fiu mu .wsu muMu m Mdfl_dhy,L
7:.m 33~ maaduw
cwezmvpm
.4. m.u 7h mmfiw u
~SM~$LL ML“.
:M~:.; mp*:gugfid

mm»: NM” M» ..u ..
Hgmflpdpn CanQEou
ofinom cofluwzmooox

3a $43<9

C
a.
a-

ce. That

V‘
.~$ L

9
C
.1.
a .
:..

7..”
n‘l*

S

a.

1.:

{TF'Y‘A'
‘U‘ 0

-'\-v
-. -\~~v

0."

V

7111'!

,...
v."

i

J-J

‘\

73“”"V" T‘V'
HV'UJ“'. ..
Oog’fl.‘ uf‘vvvfl"- “

ya
00“ v-..“

H

e m 9

Q.

a...
T

o-‘

..u. *v

n

.w.

a
r.C. v.‘
I-.. V

any
aux

“d

V‘

males 3

,4
J O J

"3

“$33.“...l'o
47-, v- I

t.

8

§

4

*‘n

.1.

S

..‘ .P‘l

O

b

v“!
‘
L.
*.L U

I
‘

33713151

3-.
s)

'3.

r”

o
‘

vary

a:

.l
O
C.

.
sLJ.

‘1

1

4-
U

n

“y;)’

o

v

.

("W/\“V‘
,‘

‘

LLI‘

t'
J

,r;
).
0

H

C
A. 0

ran

as.
NM.
m.4
oc.a
so.~
: ou.~

mafia»

ttw

:oflpmaoppoo page“; cm mcwpdznmx xaflsofipmflpcan

I: l ‘l‘ul Ill-Ill I III? I].

 

cofludfl>vo upmvcmpn :

fixéo . t
OOOH.

ncmH.-

éfloa.

A. On A o I

smxaxd .

1.4!" -.llllll

93Hd>
firm

oo.om
sc.ca
ma.mm
no.0n
an.:m
33.nm

Illlll \111'. .I il-Vlnll .II I .IIII‘II ‘lt'l III.“

3)
r»

mc.aom
mm.ncm
oa.mo~
am.oou
om.cHN
wo.com
mrflpouw”

Afiufifla
C 5 My ..L

‘1' lllll I-‘O|

acmOHmflcme ma msfim>
pzdodyficmwm 3M msaw>

mm.~
oo.a

Hm.m
mr.m
.<.L.u

SL9?
:dvm

Illvl'lllll. ll i’il IIJL‘I'I lit. I'll-II lull" ’IIII“. I'll: ’ll’lrll‘lu'lall‘ll'! "I'llllll'u’

0® n.o a

..u: OWN 3*
..rH: 0: n‘

'1‘!!!

a: m.o I mmamfivm
mm v.0 . moans
so~ w.o w Ada
00 m.o H mmflaemm
:2 v.0 H mmdmi

I‘ll. III. II. Illvllalllll.‘

T

I'l'lallllllu it'll Ill!) lll:l|ls~

maze; .J

mmzam» :9: u2¢ Apv mycwfloflaumoo
mumano .<.H.u w>wumasssov<

Eon; m.o w dwdpm> .<.;.3 Eume omozz mwoomnsm mo mmuoon CofluOMumwpwm Hmeoe

Ha mq3<e

a. ‘W" \wv NVA~37
gal-Vow

\fi’“ ‘
01--“- ..‘J ..-I\rlo‘

U

‘

an. o
C -
‘0‘“

4”
A

‘0
0%..

O.
-
.¢~

 

 

3“ .Q d a.
. O a 3 T e 8 O
\I/ C t .n r m M 3n .n r
S e V. .. ,. + V O ..4. A t a l
9 .C .3 mm .. ..b n. . a. . T. e G
1 +u e a, .l C «I C a.“ TL 9 g D. V
m d .0 h h e O .n N A” .n u L. z.
.n t e a . . S V. D. 3. y e 3 R t i a .L.
a. 1 t C n t S O n a .t E Z :J
a: r 3 AI 0 .1 e O C r C \l D. r .l a.) no. Pv
. t C O .1 S r .n .1. r 9 2 . . O l O, n. .
n C. u t F C t a ‘ . (\ Tu a. .l 3 .- .

iv a D. e S a 8 .Q S U a t A.) «I
7. C u e .C l ..J Tv . .. S S .. \J a u--. . Q
.L S ‘Q ..N C e 2-. .. . o. .1. .l ..u (-2 «q ..

P. .1 .. .. + v o. T .. W .n.. r V... a. ..y [K a o. 3 +4

2. S C a. 3. u t t t ... ..L d . O C 1.
n a . . .3 S a S S : ”I. d S i G
O :3 W 3 a e t p z. 2 ..w T. n e a; n mu. z...
y .. . fi u. 3. f h C n d C 3 a u. 0 C O C
«.9 Cu H a .x. H. «U «u D. O H; Pu . a .l «U ..A n .1~
.1. . 4 .3 v. .. u .1 3 3. 1* .3 .. t .n .3 C 2.
1 9 S 3 3 .. . V. n D t n O E a C ,M C p .
r 8 ~ . a.“ a. . k V .1. .4 .1 a. C .x 2 «Q r S 1. T; o.
S. a R .4 O i h S .3 . .i . ._ .... 3 o, O
. .. u .1. k.” 1 L *b .m- fij C {\ a; 3. .3 r o. .3
r: S O , . .. . . .L .; a. a . S r . m e F m
C U. U... .- ... .3 W O X a; .4 C ..u C C n”
E C 7. .1. l ..I. .1 n 9 .n c... .. 3 C C C H... 3
z. .2 o. S 1. .H . . 3 H. H. o, o, .l
.1. t .n F i 3 O 3 a... ._. r I, 9 l a .2 C
t a l m . O x. C .L ..J . . p. Q 4 3 e O 3
u . A . . l. 3 .l U C +9 . .2 .3. W {x ... S - I.
. Q J 3 t C a. w. ..L S . _ a.
« r 2 F C 6 S C C .3 n .r. S - S e n, O F
m r . H C a .3 z. 4 u a. .1 .I ‘1. .. v 9 .3 r O r
A n 9 ..u c. .1 t w. a. 2 a; p. O .4 I T. O Q 3
.. C h I. 3 ._ .L 2. .L A. C I .1 C C 3
C t . . ..“ :. - a“ t V c. 3 C Hm u. L. 3 ..4
3 a. .. 3 .. t H C ». ... t 3 C .L 3 .1 a,
3 . _. r a a C E . . .3 h C S 7. r T. a. h
T e 3 . . 1 S E .1 .1 e o. c. C 4. S L h . .
.1 C l : a. m” f. .L .2 9 3 .. u a. .J C : C
E t a, ,7. 3 .1 T. F t F n. ..,. 3 F; a; 1.. n. p.
H u. ..u X 0 a e a. r .4 9 l a 3 n O
. a. o. 9 q... r C. .2 .1 w 7. S .2 3 fl 1.. .;
o a- h ... . . c T . . .H E a, r. o,
fl Z .. u. a S 3 .7 C . M r. .4. 3 C
a e l h n 1. l n .L .f H: n; I a. w.
u n C . h w s. O a. C O . , . .n .6 n. l L.
t C . . . . T. .. .. C ... 3 3 .x/ .. h m a C
r“ t a. a. 3 .C t t o :. fiJ a 3 ... .l
r w. a .r. 7.: 8 ~ .. C a C S 3 (\ e «I
9 e O .3 e a. .1 u S .. . 9 n... V. S . w a . .1
.2 C z. 1. 1. i u 4 .. H. l . e n
f» .u ua/ Ov \h” «ch 3. o‘. ’5 a. .aJ Pv a fiJ i h *1 . W. 7.”)
:. .L my .a” C C -M t k“ C “A a. u ..1. AL 0 .1
.3 3 . . v a C u S t C. 3 r... a . . v“ a; f S

5.0130230

ERICIOEN $5031.:A

- u,.. - -
531.»-3 A63;933 c4:

1H4c533\v3:0

SDLBIZS AbULIfIn

 

33

S.cU 7663;:

 

2v)
,_

 

 

m
‘

 

e4

 

ACUnaUHd

 

 

:38

SOZnQLLSE jACH

AbLSBbOJ

 

m 7
EL

 

 

 

41

NOILULrCE

 

r-~

 

69
'1 es

 

 

 

f

fist.
SC
SC
3

3

C

U

‘)

L011

10
O

3CHO01

k

E

-‘)\'/

8

(WM)

1.1.

LCiIOC‘

.‘,(
I.

f

—‘

1“

C I

I

F’OF‘UHYH

 

 

 

 

 

Hm>ma m . pm pcmowmflcmam ma 03Hm> :p:
coHpmH>m2 Ugmccmpn n n Hm>wa me. am pcmofimflcmwm aw mzad> p *M
ma. mwac. om.om :n.cam ms.m oo mmHmE®@
on. mnmo. :m.mm oc.wcm oo.w om mmama
mpp¢ Hmpmnfig
mm.~ mmafl.- ne.am om.mcm ac.m so mmamsmm
HO.H :mam. ::.mm Hm.ooa H®.N :m m®~£fi
oocmflom
£08.. m-~--...om we..-:m ER a 35%
. c mmam:
momeOcocm vso:
ma. mmflo. oa.fim mn.wmm om.m mH meansmm
m3. none. am.mm mfi.ocm mx.m :HH mmaaa
wcmpwozflmcm
4 ca. mom“. oc.wm mm.a_m mm.m me mmHGEmL
,, wH.~ moza.- :m.mm or.com mc.m on mmfiag
mmocflmsm
m3~w> 03~n> 39 mapoon .¢.;.r z m~oogow
u L HcQCE Emma. Ucuomdmm
219$ :das

m®-Hm> ..J 3
czw nay metamowmumoo coaudamggoo pamcwq :H mcwuazmwm haddoHpmewpm Uopmanw
Hoocom uza xwm ou mcmcpooo< cwazcgc mgowmnzm Lox meocn cowpommmfivmm #5909

NA 3.5 <9

-CTAL

‘11

\

0 0:38?

1
4.8“

I
‘

Q

y.
..A

was exceeded

9

p

L

O

‘\
v

C S

A
:1

Me

M

-S

C
‘

‘ k

n to.
vs. ~*WIP'~-
‘ ‘

OVA-\-o.

av
~~
-u-.

‘
Foo db.
.1

V

-

a1

fig '1’ a“. 17‘. m.-
on--°:n‘d‘-'v0‘

S

‘
1
—~

selected schco

.3
6.»

o‘~

/
o.

a,

1.

a.

r
h
*9

..L

1;

«My
.1.

0“
*v

3
a:

.a.

..v

S

 

n

.‘L

oi.

~;.

T.

n
.l

Seudy.

F.

tne draWLHg o

D.

o‘l-J

scale
he

Inv- A s\'
‘ .L \JA‘
3-1 +
A J

Lt

sated W‘

o
q

SOC

.R

a-

‘J

scores a

0“

study

‘v-x‘vf'.‘ I. A“.c
“MIXL‘L ;1 scale

”-4
n- u.

0“
*4
a

D.
T

t

r.

.l

C
03*

onom

icant

#3
A

.1

3b
.1
S

n

lg.“

4-3-. fl .A
V. ‘

-on SCOTS

Jo!
-\
vb~

a

u C
‘ v‘. ‘ ’. .
u/ ic-A'ufi-‘Jasw

D

an..- 4-‘
.

‘.
./9
a1;
v.1. .LF'J.‘. 4..

.-. J-
Lav

fie

Hm>mH Ho. Hm>oa no. em undoflmflzwwm mH mzam> :p: *** A

 

 

 

pm wzaoflmflcmflw ma ozam> :p: axmt Hm>oa Ho. pm pcaonflsmHm mH wzam> p **
cofluaw>ma unaccmpm n n fio>ma mo. pa pcmommflcwflm ma osam> p *
mn.H mmma. om.m mo.H: mn.m co mmamsmm
we. mwma. oa.w N.H: ww.m on mwamx
mppd Hapmnflq
rtamo.m *mwflm.- Ha.m no.4: Ac.m so mmmdsmm
..emc.m ..mmom. om.o mm.o: Hm.m :m mmams
mocofloo
....mcwm ..amesw ems“ mmpmm smhm as necesse
0 amps:
mOHEOCOOm $50.1
Hm. mn.o~ mm.c oo.n: cm.u my mmHmEmm
om.a. m\;#~. mm.m~ MN..A: mm.nw siflfi wmasew
mzcfigmocflmcm
on.~ chow. mo.e cr.c: om.m a; message
ca. Hamo.- mo.m oo.m: mo.x so amen:
mmmcfimzc
czam> ozfia> n mccoow .¢.;.c z mfioozon
u L mgacn Esme cmuoofimn
came cam..."

['31li ‘l'n'fl. ’IOIIP l'lf.‘ .II'I'IIIUIIrI‘II TP] 1"? $1.}; III-ill)

mos~m> :9:
can Auv muzeflommmmoo compsdmhhco Laws“; :M wzwaazmwx zfiflxomummwapm cwcxaeoo
Hoonon cc: xmn o» wcwcpoco¢ amazes: weomnpzm Lo; mmuoom mason codemcmano

m A mam <9

z

n7

* v
.E4
:1.

“I;
S

e
+v
3

rs.
‘3

.\L

*Fat

v00“

data

rovides

n '
I ‘ V‘

..t

““M-

OJ
0.

a
3

T

ov—v-‘fim
..h --vo

“
U
4‘

"f
JV

7.07318

hool of

3c

4-,.‘9
v

+b
3

t

C
1..
«v.
o...

x.

0“

S
a

.t

.n“
+v

‘

.3

H4.
9
+ v

Q.
A. A.

e
r

'3 80 8:53

.‘
y‘.‘

f 1~
~9,c

of

3.
z.

..‘
Tv
Au

a.-.

a.

Vl-Qtla‘

9

a" 1
033.4.

k “7“!“rflevv-f-vrov
tboe :4-;JVJ9._--‘v¢‘

on

Q

fine

.1

+9

.1-

S
a.
C

A
a

a.
r

c.

..
z.
.1

‘I

h
A.

Q.

.3
0“

S
D.

c.1-

ATV
.1.

on.

9
4
Au

3
.l

e
r
0.
ML.

Q

«fig

5.,

0"-

Q‘.
A;
h

?

Hw>ma me. an acmmeHcmwm ma 03Hm> :p: **

 

 

 

 

20wpa~>oo chancaun u on Hm>ma mo. #6 pcmoflyficmfim ma mZAd> p *
:m.fl nmm~.- m~.m mm.om mm.m oo mmamsme
NH.H send. m~.o 03.0: cm.m om amass
maps flmcmnfiq
so. onmo.- om.m ow.oz Ho.n so maHmEm;
.*oa.m .omem. mm.m cu.mm Hm.m an amass
cosmmcm“
mWMm .mmsmw mm.w mecm cauw rm mmsesmg
o moflqq
moMEOCOom ago:
no. Hum .- «a.x :§.m: om.m ma moansmz
co. smoo. cc.m cm.c: m:.m sfifi mo.n:
m2wpcmzwmcm
C . e - .
fix mo.~ :m m. em.n 30.9m w5.« mo mmsm239
CO. QQCC. QC.m :$.Om m@.m C0 m¢HflT
mnczmmzm
32Ha> csfia> 2n nucoun .<.c.u z mfioogcm
p L 3.109 EL;;_ Cmgomfivw

cat? :53:

IIIIIS'I.I nIIIIIIrtI’ I..- .u. I.“ [‘1'

mmdg HAN > ..H ..
0cm Auv macawoflamoou :owvmawppoo pcvcflg :H mzwuazmwz magwowumwumpm dopdaeou

fl

floozom 62w xmm 0a mcwcnooo< amazocc maomnnzn Lo: woLoom mfimom :cHuwcmooom

:H m42<9

Q

-a r I C r(
Jog-1. -uts \

H." ' "l ‘ ' '~ ’. ' ‘ ' ' -'-
DUO'h'to‘ofia' Jk-o‘KILav'JAVL‘h-i o J‘QJVHJJtt—o‘. -.‘::‘
m‘LJ 515‘! v...£$--K.d Al‘aJ XJVLflu'. ..u‘LJi‘L "LU.

(b

88

o

Qw‘"

b.00-r
O

+ 9
Cs. 0.

*\
Brae

upon academic achievement

5

ers ha 'e socg-h. tc

satis; action 30

303

tf‘D
ow

perf

O

l

G
w

'_.J

V8

‘h
'05

have been per :0

+
b

H

studen s n wi
Lkrcdd
Ni.h
her research
menne.

*\f~
ubuo.

(I)

leg

(déuéio

Questionnaire

In this study tne Goo. was utili

ment to qu titat ivel, measure

students at cregon state University on

'c.::-' ctr- ' ' ' "r:
‘I l'orUL‘Qd-.&'va.' HU‘J-n‘.J LIL--—l'

J ~~. -' 7" '1'.-- .
45' 11...; J'¢d-;-UU o .‘1

and anLLBI

college 8

worker with
situati
ni.

ubD JAIL-32‘

atarr and

eut oatisfac

zed as

the satisfaction of

r!" ." “'."'nf'I-\g-‘
donning obnu-ilcuo,

a'1. ' _' In- ‘ " . .h: ‘
Lu PAL; grill-1112M; Iivl“

.-, ‘-‘ .
to ‘ ,Q \
.‘suL‘ U a“

g.Ԥ)

‘interest in

w-

b

udents

respect

on. few attempts

:5

Va
UL

0

man 8 O

- a

n 31 COlie

(b

e

ma

‘AJBIoN
the curriculum
out little was
Klingensmith

tion

the instru-

800

the five scales of

'.'1-1«4 "V‘I'r'
Afivbbuiilvu

SCOPE was

—. ‘\)

01

derived from the sum of the scale scores.

The design of the study made it possible to statisti-
cally compare the satisfaction scores with the grade point
average for the term in which the 3554 was administered.

The various sub-populations selected from the total sample
for statistical comparison were males and females. roups
of academic class. groups by g.p.a. level. and groups
whose term g.p.a. varied 1 0.5 from the accumulative grade

point average.
SCNQLUSICHS

Five null hypotheses were tested and the results
were as follows:
HYPCTEESIS CHE

There will be no significant positive correlation
between the TDTas SeildEajTiuv scores of the entire sample
group of 866 as measured by the College Student Satisfaction
Questionnaire and academic achievement as reflected by the
grade point average for the term in which the 035; was
administered.
RESEARCH CCNCLUSiOfl FCR hYPCTfiESIS ONE

When taken as one group the 866 students provided
TOTAL SATISFACTION scores that did not correlate significant-
1y with the term grade point average. however, the scale
8Cores for GOMEENSATICN correlated significantly at the .01

‘Level while the scale scores for RECOGhIleN correlated

 

 

with g.p.a. at the .05 level. Iievertheless, hypothesis One

was not rejected by the analysis of the data.

HYPOTE~~IS ENC

There will be no significant positive cor relation
between TOTAL SATISFAV ION scores as measured by the CSSQ
when grouped by sex and grade point average and academic
achievement as reflected by the grade point average for
the term in which the 3354 was administered.
RESEARC h CONCLUSION FOR EXPOTHESZS TdC

’71-
-

he divisio of th

(0

total sample group into groups
by sex and further divided into groups according to
similar grade point averages provided an apparent pattern
of in .creasir g mean scores from the low g.p.a. group to the
high g.p.a. group of males, but only suggested a like
pattern in the female groups. iio significant correlations
between g.p.a. and TCTAL SATISF.AC ION scores were found

for eit her sex. Therefore, hypothesis Two was accepted.

hYPOT37“I$ THREE

There will be no significant positive correlation
between the term grade point average for either sex and
the scores on the College Student Satisfaction Questionnair
Scales of COMPENSATION, SOCIAL LIFE. NORKZNG CCPiDI TICNS
RECOGNITTCN AND iUALlTY OF EDUCATION.
RESEARC'Z :uwrusiw FOR h'fE’OTHESio THREE

In analyzing each of the five scale scores on the

 

 

CSSQ for both males and females. significant linear correla-
tion coefficients evolved for males on the CLEPENSATICN and
RECOQQITIGS scales and for females only in relation to the
COMPENSATION scale scores. 30 significant correlations
were found for either sex on the scales of SOCl AL LI? 2
HCRKING CCND ICNs and ;UALITY O? EDU CATIQV.

Therefore. the null hypothesis was rejected for the
SSS; scales of 663:2}; '.:sa AK and RE‘O GIxITICN for males and
for COEPENSATZON for females. The null hypothesis was
accepted. however. for the 6534 scales of S VCIAL LIFE. NORK—
ING CCNDITIQKS and sU.'ITY V? EDUCA 13% for both males and

females.

There will be no significant positive correlation
between the 355: TOTAL SATISFAdTldi scores of either sex
in each class category (freshman. sophomore. junior or
senior) and academic achievement as reflected in the grade
point average for the term in which the C384 was
administered.

RED ‘ EA nCH CONSLUS 10% FOR hYPOTHEbIS FOUR

As students were grouped according to academic class
and further grouped by sex within the class. TOTAL SATIS-
FACTION scores failed to correlate significantly with the
term grade point average for any particular class or sex

Within the class. It was apparent. however. that females

 

 

 

..J

(L:

did consistently earn higher grades than did males in the
same class.
As a result of the analysis of the data the null

hypothesis was accepted.

(1)

KYPOTHESIS FIV
There will be no significant positive correlation
between the 355; TCTAL SAIISFACTIGH scores and the term
grade point average of sample groups whose term grade
point average varies from the cumulative grade point aver-
age by plus or minus 0.5 or more.
RESEARCH CCNJLU$ICfi F13 hIrCTHLSIJ FIVE
Extracting those students whose term g.p.a. varied
plus or minus 0.5 from their accumulative grade point average
and analyzing the relationship of the g.p.a. to TOTAL SATIS-
FASTICN revealed no significant correlations. The general
level of satisfaction reflected in TCTAL SATISFACIIQQ
scores were not dissimilar to those of the entire sample
group. Therefore. the null hypothesis was accepted.
Additional data compiled for males and females in
selected schools of Business. Engineering. Home Economics.
Science and Liberal Arts reflected only one correlation at
low level significance (P <.O5) for females in Home
Economics with respect to TCTAL SATISF.CTZ@4 scores. Means
for these scores. however. ranged from l99.31 to 225.72

1ndicating conside-able variation from one sex to another

(I)
f)

within a particular school and also from school to school.
Significant correlations did appear on the CChPENSATIQN
scale for home Economic females and all students in Science.
The CGhPEhSATIdN scores for females in Science. however.
were negatively correlated with grade point average.
RECOGNITICN scale scores for science males were signifi-
cant at the .05 level. The uniqueness in these data.

however. may be due to local conditions and dynamics.

v-va-flfloocf‘v so
u- UVuQu-C“

The lack of signific nt correlations. between term
grade point averages and -CTl; sliio
33; irrespective of sub-pop latiors tested. raises f" mda-
mental questions about a number of components in this study
including the relative importance of grades as satisfiers
among college students. Before conclusions are drawn. how-

ever. it is necessarv to recognize that the measures of

accurac of the perception may have been influenced by

numerous factors varying from individual to individual

students. while intenti onal as a means of co . olling the
influence of different stvles of livi.g upon the results.
may have succeeded in identifying students whose sense of
well-being and satisfaction with the college environment was

random sample of tne

0Q
11
«b
w
d
\D
' 1
c t
f)
{‘0
.3
.3
r .I
as
,i
c t
.3
{D
4
CD
0
(D
(I)
I?
t t
’3
£3
(D
O
f 5
{n

general student oooulation. Supporting this possibility is

the normative table in the Jssx JAJCAL (starr. et. al.. 1971}

-. xt‘vf‘r.‘r‘enr “

whi h indicates a mean PC AL enlisslci-ufl score for 2.287

()1
4:

public university students of 203.83 compared to 208.h9
for the 866 students in this study. Similarly. the
variability of the scores as reflected by the standard
deviation was less in this study (3l.75) compared to 32.13
on the normative table for the 2237 students. The more
intense interaction occurring in residence halls may also

5

have been a factor in diverting :eelings about

d

he import-
ance of grades in relation to other factors in the reward
system operative in the residence halls at the time the
CSSQ was administered.

In addition to the limiting factors in the design of
the study. the separate scales in the 553d provides the
basis for inferring a slight but significant relationship
between the g.p.a. and certain components of total satis-
faction particularly CCnFERdA.IQH and RECOGNITIQi while
other components of satisfaction reflected no significant
relationship to the g.p.a. One might conclude that as a
student is asked specifically about his feelings associated
directly with the instructional functions. a more definite
relationship between these feelings and grade point average
emerges.

Given the above qualifications. the data presented here
gives little support to the supposition that the grade point
average plays an important role in a student's assessment of

I

personal ”satisfactoriness" (Javis. Lofquist and Neiss, 1968)

(A!
U\

for remaining in the college environmer t particularly after
the minimum g.p.a. is attained. Rather. the data implies
that satisfaction in the co lege environment is related to
other factors irrespective of the grades being achieved.

If the theory 0; ”-orres pondence.’ discussed earlier in this

paper. is applicable to the college student and is dependent

environme.t. then. at test. this researcher could only
suggest that each student develops a personal standard with
which to evaluate academic per: ormance rather than accept
any absolute standards inferred in the 0.0-4.0 system of
grading. one is led to i.ier that as the personal standard
for grades is met. other factors in the college environment

play a more important role in feelings of satisfactio

O

Vhile there is no data in this study which identify those

*3

factors. demographic data and other measures oi social and
academic achievement compared to osS- result might be
.elpful in devel opigg a profile of the satisfied student.
The capability to manipulate the data in this study
by computer has been thoroughly utilized in order that no
possio lity would be overlooked for identifying a sub-
population w? ere strong cor rrelations would appear. The
computer was used for extending the analysis and computing
linear corr Ml tion coezficients through all the CSSQ scales

for each sub population includin” sex. class, school.

g.p.a. group and accumulative g.p.a. variation group in the
research for a relationship between g.p.a. and student
satisfaction. The data have been fully explored within

the limits of the sample. the in trument and the design

of the study resulting in the conclusion that the g.p.a.

f students and their feelings of satisfaction. though
quantifiable. re independent of each other.

This conclusion is graphically presented in Figure 4
on the following page and in other selected scattergrams of
the raw data in Appendix F. Each subject's satisfaction
score is placed above the ”x“ axis in relation to the term
g.p.a. on the "y" axis. 2he number of subjects (N) in
each scattergram is identical with the number of symbols
(+) placed on the page. This number corresponds to the
data presented earlier in tabular form. The scattergrams
in Figure 4 through Figure lo (figures 5 through Figure 16
are in Appendix 3) present the data for the total population.
for the sub groups of men and women. for all subjects by
class and for all subjects whose term g.p.a. v ried from
the accumulative g.p.a. by 1 0.5 or more. As will be seen.
the most consistent pattern is a heavy vertical concentra-
tion around the mean of the satisfaction scores with very
little visual discernable distribution on a 45° diagonal
which would represent high correlation between the two

variables.

s enema;
umoom Janos ; zoueqapdoa ranch

vspamlnbmmilommlflo Wiouutvlowwidomwigmml:bmmuTeumtrisfiltammris M158 .. ow 19%. r em L o o

 

 

O
O O
iromo
O
O O
. a
C
e - 0 . O 0 5 DO.“
0
O O O A
\
.
. .0 e .
O 00 o O O. O t DWI-u
O 0 O O.
O
c o o o
z a. O o
O to o 900 0.099 09 O o
o o o. o o o
c o o O O 0
c o o 0 o
. ' O . Q 0 ’c O- . O 9... O L ODoN
o 90 0‘ o 00 o 1.0 O O
7 . . .. . . .
O o o -u o ' 0
«Hg 0 O .0 O I O 0 '0. O . . A
o 0 o 00 \o. O 0
O 0’ O 0 0.0.... d 0 Q ‘ s n
0 e a 0 o o
s o o o no 0 0
O O 00... 0 o C 0‘ 0.. '0 ' O O O
O O . o I O o
0 o. I. o .0 o II u C A 00 N
o c o o o o .. o. o
0 o. 0’ \ co 0‘. u o O“ 0.0 o o
to O o ' ~00 n t o ’ o o o o
O. . - 0.0-Ao'oo-.. .0 one. .0 O
o O O O o O / 0.0.x. 9 O 0
o O O O t o o o 0 O
o O O o .0 o. of ‘
o e to 00 o o be) e. I.- ll. 0 e 6 o O o
.0 O o .00 :|..On| II... 0'. 0-00 06 0 O 8.“-
o
. . . . .4 o.\ .a . . . . .
o o .00 o .o o .l . \ . 09 no 00
o a I o
‘ O 0’. 0 000K 0 O O 0 Q
o a 0 0
0 o 0 o neon \ O 0 O Q 0 O
'0 S o o o 0-. O ' o o
o
.0 f I ‘ o ’0 0
0 o o o
90 o o e \ o O o o 0 O
o a o o o. o .0 Po. 0 o 43.”
00 o o. 0.0 O
c on c .0 0. o o o o \ o
O O O ‘ o O 0‘ O o 0
O O o o O .0 I O
O O o o o o oo
0 0 o . O to 0 .00 O 0.0 O o O O
o co 0 o C o 9‘ a oo o o O
0 o 0' to
0.. 0
O O O O

o o o O 009 09. 0-..... .9 o 0. o o >8.V

IN BEE: GEES AN D .3 E’ESULATI CN

Overall satisfaction with the university environment
as measured by the 353. in this study did not demonstrate a
significantly correlated relationship to the grade point
average of these residence hall students. however. CCmPENSA-
IION and RECOGNLTICfi Scale Scores (Table l) as components in
the measure of the total level of satisfaCtion revealed a
relationship suggesting a link connecting the affective
domain of the student to academic achievement. Also. the
progression of the means of the TCTAL SATISFACTION Scores
for the male students in this sample from 199.50 to 208.50
in conjunction with grade groupings from 1.00-1.49 to
3.50-4.00 (Table 2) suggests a relationship although the
same consistent progression of the mean TOTAL SCORES for

s not evident. The mean of the TOTAL

*4.

females in Ta Li 3
SCCRES for females in the 1.00-1.49 grade group was 200.0
and rose to 2l8.94 for the 3.50-4.00 grade group. Variation
at the 2.00-2.U9 grade group and immediately above for
females suggests that other dynamics may have been operative.
Nevertheless. a basis has been established for further
analysis of performance and satisfaction among college
students.

As the results of any research study are contemplated.

the strength and accuracy of any of the measures are

susceptible to scrutiny. In this case. the use of the CsSd

69

to measure the level of satisfaction with the college en-
vironment and the use of the grade point average to measure
achievement and performance in the college setting are no
less suspect. The 3584 is an inStrument designed to be
administered to the broad range of college student person-
alities in all types of living situations. Some of the
items may have seemed somewhat foreign to the residence
hall students in this study but the rate of completed
returns and the absence of written remarks on the answer
sheets and test booklets reveal no particular difficulty.

The distribution of 866 Ttla; 330825 in

'IJ

igure l approach
the semblance of a normal distribution and suggests no
apparent skewness or roblems. In addition. a comparison of
the responses from selected floors within the residence
halls seem to verify intuitive expectations of the satis-
faction level. That is. the 083: generally reflected the
satisfaction levels that were intuitively expected. Ques-
tions relative to the use of the grade point average as a
measure of academic performance and achievement have been
addressed in the literature review and nothing in this study
adds or detracts from the credibility of grade point
average as a measure.

The premise stated earlier i. this study suggested
that an individual will seek to achieve and maintain

"correspondence" with the environment through responding

90

to the requirements of that environment while individual
needs are being fulfilled. This reciprocal relationship
when mutually satisfied provides the setting for continuing
in the ”correSpondence" state. It is believed by this
writer that the students in this study are generally in a
state of "correspondence" with Oregon State University
though a number of individuals may be found to be
exceptions where their "satisfactoriness" is in question or
their needs unsatisfied. Generally. however. requirements
of the university setting are minimal and the intrinsic
rewards so great and varie tha. the individual can feel
relatively satisfied overall even though the personal g.p.a.
varies extensively from the ability level or hovers around
the minimal level. To accurately relate satisfaction to
achievement levels of college students. one would need to
build broad profiles in all endeavors and measure achieve-
ment on all facets of the profile. Then. satisfaction and
performance might possibly show a relationship. It appears
that college student attitudes are no less complex than
those of the worker in business and industry. Similarly.
the complexity of the intrinsic and extrinsic satisfiers

are as pronounced in the *.iversity setting as elsewhere.

“J

uture research on relating performance to satisfaction in
the university setting as well as in business and industry

would aid understanding of the factors involved.

 

9i

SEC ‘2 END. '3: (“NS

flhile the grade point average as one measure of

\

academic ach m‘e Jement has not been proven to be related to
overall student satisfaction as reflected by the CSSQ. the
question of student performance in the college setting
versus satisfaction with the environment as a parallel to
worker performance versus satisfaction in tr e industrial
setting is Still to be confronted. Uhat may be needed with
future analyses of Student satisfaction is a more complete

and accurate profile of the student including values.

oals and other measures

:5
d
(D
'1
(0
U)
cf
U)
9)
O
..J
’-
’Jo
(t
?
to
U)
m
()
(9
’4
K;
r.’
(1'
’4
(D
U)
N

of academic performance. Jtilizing the profile. the
relationship of satisfaction to performance in several

areas of endeavor could be analyzed. The degree of satis—

J
('1’

faction with respect to low and high levels on he compon»
ents of the student profile could lead to a better under—
standing of the reward system to which the student is
attuned.

As this study was restricted to students who were
livi ng in residence halls. a similar study of students in

various types of living situations might provide clarifi-

cation about the i..pact of the living environment upon the

grade a Ier age and upon the general level of sati “fa tion.
The presence or absence of greater variability in either

g.p.a. or TG“.lL SlDZSFACTICN scores would sugg Ms a degree

92

of sample bias in this study affecting the relationship
sought. iossibly the greatest potential in the use of the
355; in acquiring data applicable to environmental manipu-
lation for college Students would be the pre and post test
technique. «hen administered prior to an educational change
in procedure or routine "nd then again, as the time was

appropriate. an analysis of the variation in res one

(D
U)

'[j

t

‘ O m " 5 z -u : _v I‘ ‘ fl “ ' N * \ :
could be most eni-gnten-ng and nelpzul i: the :eelln

F.)

0

UN
U)

students became a part of the dynamics for further change
and improvement. ihe pre nd post test technique might

also be applied to groups of students similar to the 200

in this study weose term g.p.a. Jaried : 3.5 from the
accumulative g.p.a. She follow-up after receipt of the

grades might be very revealing particu‘arly i1 some of the

'

students were rot appropriately reading the cues during

‘ .

racing period.

d

ue

LN

dhatever the application of the results in this
study to future research. the searcn Lust continue for a

. ' J" 4-. :on' .-
‘awnt satlslaCulon W-bn :06

O
’0’
t

' I
(L
O
D

0)
ct
f

more accurate pr

..0.

° \
13L

COLiegé environment. LHLS 13 C

W

O

u f higher education

O
Q

is to oe adaptive to an ever-changing clientele whose
numbers may dwindle when administrative responsiveness is

self-serving or improperly focused.

‘I

“H

"M;CGR.;\L'

nv“vv
dLa-I

>¢

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.. . . 1 Q, e f
. S1J e . o n 6 c: 9 O h V. S . .
C t a. t S 2 O 0/ e C t t .1 S C}
o n u e n t 5 l 1‘ n «I. ..L .1 m0 ..u 8
3 80 l 1 9n 8 1% ea WS p V: SI
.03 1 al me . D. . on dn r r. ly e.
- u 0 . ta sml u l C... .1 r . te 8 ae r0
n t .. CS nn sno 0e 1 suu. 1.th nl 88
O S .4 e e C a. O V r g n n e e O 2 e .1 H t a .l t l
t 5 n5: mi 8r ger is rJ2 mnru e --u n
g n .l e nt Si .. l u n . .lUCl : .l g
n o . 1. 0a av... 910 cu t 2 r ..s 7
.1 l 91 r C no C C J n 0 n . 2 e e w t .. l 2
~60 C O i u 180, n C 83 e S 2 Din - e k a
S . n”: no Vi a l e e m .68 XthN d? n -
a8 .1 a n E . .. e .C .C C . h .I u 8 .. e C O O .5.
34,: V .. m n e _C n .5 . .L n n l S O t F 7 t r e m... .1...
3/ .1.) r a a. 2 e e X S a . 2 .1 S p n a a e O t 3,
l lr CC 802 ml 2. 9 .13 ll , A at dw a...
. e P. .1 .n . n 1. O T 31:.-. D. 3 n 16 S S t .. e C
t . "3m r r ti 7 0 Cl 3 U . T T. 9 ad t 8.1 an. O .
ML. 3 r «u. e e a 1. v. C O 91.7; (J O r e .3 Q. o nmwu m Du "J v
9 3 O .J C. T.. . a. n 2 .L h E. a 1. C H W n l .n 8 m m.
mu... +93 4.. .1. C r V e 3 e 0.00 C 3 t e m g 0 . d O
at if. C 7 u - nrv lgnl aJ em .. lnnnv .8 nl
O a m .1. O O, n C .4 e u c l a b n... l 9 5,71 P: P. a O
r C r 3 m C l O . C 5 S a. o - - f C c, .1. 3 n r . h
.1 u 0 7- e 1.4 .1 e a C S l 3 O . O. F n n S u C . u l S C
V d d 9 d 2 .. t . h e l t 91 T. l .1 n a S O .1 1.. d 7 C Y
n... l 1 S a .l m. m .1 pm n n h V O 3 3:1. t e A} k 3
e .1 C F 3 d e O n C e n . C e S n S a - C l .13.
n O a a C o. .l U”. G C C C O .1 m“. an e T .. Ely m 11. 0 1;
CO .0 _fr 1:. .ti ans“... te C e snn r or - Sar.
~ t r s 2. m... - .C r. t C r C V . .1 .12. mi 9 O S D. . .l e
o. 1 C 0 vi a_ . R a) ..J 3 C C e - .1 013 t O a S d .I F C d .;
1L .1 3 C .1 T e .nu/C .. a C 9 Ti 7 .C .l/C a t .l n4 U n a. t n a.
l C C. e +.. 3 9 r C d1 .C mu 3 a. r. hw o. .r.. 3/ 1‘ n n .; O tT. . l n._ p C
C n m?“ C d r e a l n d f l r C l e O n. l 125 3 C. e 3 2
C n .L L _ _ .1 t a a E e e . . C. a r... .3 .1 di n. a 9A
0 l .1 E t .. l S t l - t u I" 3 n r} d o. C k
e: e 3 o. r. T t 1A w. .. a. 9 n C 89. .l. 8 EL. 3 . a1 n r n... .1 «I
.n h n r 1 .. u n E C e C h - e 7 .1 C r. h. e; .. 3 n a u e L C
T n .1; C C. u. K s. e C ..: u . n... S m T. O T 3 . l O h V. S L
a .L .1 F T” l 0.1%: t a. - V... r. P. B C 8.. C r . F. C 1.
C t i C 3 C 4.71. 3 l n 7.-.; d O a. E o, r a . 9 a . a
..l . 3 . Cv. . S .p. R n .31, . e 8 e . .J H” . U. 9.. pd r a n4 J W. F T. n.
N r v. C .1. e ..d e 3 a n F . . u d... n L t C 3.. l .1 QC 9 r a. r
e u l w 8 H C CE u h .1 3 J d 7. l X 3 .3 . d t . J
.m .d .88 .SS .600 .tCJ . S .n C iifee C an RC
AA AB 58"... Aa? AtJB Lsa/K Lat. 33; thR? a: J
z. .. ..
I O D U 9 O O .- ..plv De
3 n 3 n n d d r - a .1
.1 .1. .1 .1 .1 T F 9 l d d
fv f. t t +9 .5. .1 .1.“ a n r
S S S S S a a a e e e
A 1.. A” «A A D. 3 3 3.. D. .24

is

V8318"

‘3

hi
sychcloz‘

a C
2;
‘ _A

 

 

\0
‘

and In. I. J. Graduating
n with the University.
't dinnesota, Bureau of

 

Berdie. R. P.. Pilapil. 3..
seniors' satisfactio
Tinneapolis: Univer
Institutional Eesear

Eerman. L. The glands rezul ati n2 cerscnal
fiacmillan, revised edition. 1923. p

it . New York:
p. 3&1.

Betz, F. L. An investigation of job satisfact1on as a
..oderator variable in predicting job success.
Journal of V0 ational Eenavior. l9?l. Vol. 1.

 

123’12/

Betz. E. 1., Klinge nsmitn, J. 3.. and Yenne, J. N. The
measurement and ar alysis of college student
satisfaction. Cea31renent and Evallation in

 

Quieaoee. 1970 . 701. 3. 110 113.

 

 

 

Betz. E. L., Ienne. J. 3., Starr, A. K., and' filingensmi tn.
J. E. A dimen81oral anal‘sis of college student
satisfaction. E:asurerent and Evaluation in
Guidance, 1971. Yol. a, 99-105.

Betz. E. L., Starr. A. 1.. and Ienne. J. H. An assessment

f college student satisfaction in ten public and
orivate colleges and universities. Journal of
College Student Personnel, l072 (September). Vol.
13. 456-u61.

'cn of error analysis for
rk: Rchaw Hill Inc..

 

\

Bhatnagar, R. g. A study of some 2? 3 variables as
factors of academic achievement. Journal of
Abolied Psychology, 1969, 53.107-lll.

 

 

Bloomberg, M. Toe prediction of scholastic success
through tne use of a fo rc ced- cnoi ce problems- ~and~
attitude inventory. Dissertation Abstracts,
1955. p. 2560.

Bodelson, G. R. Ehv ronmental perceptions of fr eshxan
college stu e ts as related to selecteda ability

' t l vel Doctoral disser tation.

e s.
an a Jnivers ity. 216 Numb. Leaves.

Brayfield, A. 1., and Crockett. N. 3. Employee attitude
and employee performance. Psychological Bulletin.
1955. Vol. 52. 39o-u24.

 

 

 

Califf. S. N. Perception of college environment of
achiev Iing and non-achieving freshmen. Doctoral
disserta ti on. Claremont, Jlaremont Jraduate School
at University Senter, l26 Xumb. Leaves, 1967.
(Iicrofiln.)

Chao. L. L. Statistics methods and analysis. New York:
WCGraw Hill. Inc.. l9o9.

Shicker in ng, A. J. Jo.mu:1ng versus resident students.

San Francisco: sey-Eaass, l974.

Chickeri ng. A. 5. Qhe experience of the college Question—

naire. Saratoga Springs, New York, 1970.

Slaunch. N. Zognitive and motivational characteristics

 

associated with concrete and abstract levels of
conceptual complexity. Unpublisned doctoral
dissertation. Princeton University, 196%.

Crew, 3. L.. and Siblette, J. Academic peri or..ance of
fresnr ten males as a function of residence hall
nousin . Journal of dolleee Student Personnel.
1965. V01. o. 1‘7-‘77.

'nes of scientific
ologist. 1957. 12,

Cross, u “tide nt development.
meeting of the
sociation (SCth

2l pp.

3. satisfaction and the oolle ege experience ."
E. fiedge .2 .) Psychological problem 0. college
Y1

Davie. J
I .
m few raven. Con.ecticut: {ale University

 

Dawis. , D. J. \ theory
) .Iinnesota
1

'on, 1908, p. 23.

1, A ?. Knowing and the known.

Draper. N gressicna ana lysis. New York:

 

 

Dressel. P. 1., and Lehmann, I. J. Impact of higher
educatic on Student attitudes. values and critical
t.inl1n, aoilities. Educational Records, 1965,

Jo . as, 253-253.

Elton, 3. F.. and Bate, a. 3. The effect of housing
policy on grad p01nt average. Journal of College
Personnel, 1966 (darch). 73-77.

 

Evaluating residence halls through tri-
. Journal of College St ident Personnel.
196? Vol. 3, lTl-l7o.

 

 

 

 

 

"eder. Daniel. Factors which afiect achievement and its
production at the college level. JOJrnal f
American Asscc1ation of College Registrars. 1340.
l5. lO7-ll7.

Green, George E. Instrumentality theory of work motiva-
tion: some experitental results and suggested
modifications. Journal of Applied Psychology,
Monograph. £01. 53. April l909.

Guanther, J. 3. Zoncepts of statistical inference.

New Yor< :Sraw dill, lac;.

cersey, 4. ;. .orkers' emotions in shop and home.

:n‘ladelon a. University of Pennsylvania Press,
p

 

 

 

nerzberg, 3., iausner, 3., Peterson. T. 3.. and Capwell,
D. F. loo att1tudes- review of research and
op1n1on. Pittsourg' Psychological Ser rvioes, 195?.

Hoppock, R. Job satisfaction. New York and London:
{arper and brothers, 1935.

Hountras. Peter T.. and Brandt, Kenneth 3. Relation of
Stude nt residence to academic performance ‘1
college. Jo rnal of Educational Res earoh 63, 3,
April 1970, 0. 351-354.

cahoua, 1. A social-psychological approach to the study
of cultire. human Relations, 1991, 14, 23-30.

 

Jenoks, C. 3.. and Reisman, D. In Sanford. Nevitt (Ed.)
Patterns of residential education: a case study
in the American college. New York: John Jiley.
1962.

v

Johnson. R. N.. and Kurpius. D. J. A cross-sectional
and longitudin 1 study of tudents ' perceptions of
their college environment.8 The Journal of College

Student Personnel. 1967. "(01. b 19 -203.

Keith. J. A. The relationship of the congruency of
environmental press and student need system to

 

reported personal satisfac Jicn an d academic

success. Dissert ti n Abstracts.19o5. 25, 7031.
{ellv, J. G. Ecological constra1n Js on ne.tal health

ser/1ces. Anerican Psycholoci stl 1953, 21. 535-539.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(orman. Abraham K. Environmental amoiguity and locus
of control as interactive influe ences on
satisfaction. Journal 0 prplie d Psychology. 1971.
55" 333-3 ’3'

Kornan. Abraham K. Relevance of personal nee ed satis-
faction for o”erall satisfaction as a function
of self-esteem. Journal of Applied Ps ychology.
1967. 51. 533-533.

uterba k. 3. 3., and Yielhacer. D. 2. Need - press and

expectation press indices as predictors of college
achievement. Educational and Psychological
leasirenent. lQoé, Vol. 26, 955- -972

Landis. 1. L. Dissonance between student and college
xariables related to success and satisfaction.
Dissertation Aostracts, 196Q, 25, 1047.

Lavin. David E. The prediction of academic perfornance.
Russell Sage Foundation. 18W Vork. 1905.

Lenning. Cscar T. et al. The many faces of college success

and their non-intellective correlates. The
published literature through the decade of the
1xties. ionograohgjlfg American College Testing

fl
rosram, Iowa City, Iowa. 1974, 554pp.

7')-

 

Levine. E. L.. 1nd Jeitz. J. Job satisfaction among
graduate students intrins1c versus extrinsic
variailes.'5 Jriurnal of Applied :svpholggy. 1903,
.01. 5:, 271

Locke. E. A. Job satisfaction and job performance. a
theoretical analysis. Crganizational Behavior
and human :erIcrnance. 1970, 5, Ada-500.

 

 

Lunnebourg -atrici a. Longitudinal criteria for college
achievement predicted from aptitude achievement
a interest measures. Educational Assessment
JenJer Reccrt. flash ington Universit , Beattle.
CC‘+CS‘3r. 1375.

Malleson. 3. Cperational research in the university.
British Iedical Journal, 1959. 1. 1031-1035.

 

 

fartin. 2. 9. Freshmen satisfaction with college.
Journal of Sollese Student Personnel.
2'01. 9’ 362-3530

Viles. .. E.. P . and Craft. J A "Three models

titudes" in Pau l P gors. Sharles
. .faln, 1;anagement 0 Human Resources
31raw-hill, 1961). pp. 48-49.

0
3
u‘
q
r
-‘

 

 

 

loos. Eudclpr h. Eval1at1ng treatment en vironr ents:
A seeial-ecolog1cal approach. New for rs, N1 ley. 1974.
furray. n. A. Explorations in person nalitv. New York:
foord Ini ersity1 re 85. l938.

D. A cor.textual ar alysis of academic failure.
e School Review, 1153 (Autumn), Vol. 71, 290- 298.

 

 

 

 

Netu31l. A. J.. and dallenback. D. A. Assessing percep-
tions of college satisfaction. Nationa‘1 Association
of Jtudent Personnel Admini1strators Journa 1975
(3cring;, No. 9. 253-258.

Newcomo. T. 1. "Student peer-group influence." In
Personality faCtors on the college car .cus. The
hogg Four .da aticn for Mental Heal Jh, The University
of Texas, AuStin. Texas. 1962. (p. 55).

Vewcono, T. X. The prec ct on interp rsonal attraction.
American E l: 181 75‘586.

 

Newcomc, T. I.. and Eeldman. d. .. "'The input of colleges
upon their studerts." 1 report to the Carnegie
Foundation for the Advancement 0: Teaching 1968.

9?

Pace, 3. R. Sollege and university environment scales
technical manual (2nd edition). Princeton. New
Jersey. Educational Testing Services, l9c9.

Pace, C. 3.. and Stern, G. 3. An approach to the measure-
ment of psychological characteristics of college
environs .ents. Journal of Edu ational Psychology,
1953, i'ol. 49, 259-277.

itude and activation. In I. R. Jones (Ed.)
ka 37mpcsiln on Votivation, Lincoln.

 

. tt
Hebras _#
University of Mbraska Eress, 1955.

Pervin. L. n. A twenty college study of student and
college interaction using TAPE (Transactional
Analysis of Personality and Environment):
rati ow.a e, reliability an validity. Jo irnal of
Educatioral Psychology. 1967. Vol. 58, 290-302.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PQFVLH. L. A. Perfornance and satisfaction as a function
of individual environment fit. Es cholcgical
Bulletin, 19:3, 09, 50-58.

PerVin. L. A. Satisfaction and perceived self-enVironment
similarity: a semantic differential study oi
student-college interaction. Journal of Personality,
1907. 35, 223-534.

PEFVLH. L. A., and :ubin, D. 3. Student classification
with co‘l ege and the college dropout: a trans-
actional approach. Journal of Social Psychology,
1927, .01. 72. 285-295.

Porter, L.. and Law er. a. E. Eanagerial attitudes and
performance. ’Fomewood, Illinois: Irwin. 19o85
p. 197.

Prusox, R. 3., and Halsh, h. 3. College students residence
and academic achievement. The Journal of College
Student Personnel. 19o“ (Marchj, Vol. 4, lBO-lde.

Qaab, d. E. Congruence and dissonance between need and
press in determining satisfaction or dissatisfaction
in the university environment. Dissertation
Abstracts, l?63, 9b, 5. 1723.

Qand, L. T. Effect on college choice satisfaction 0:
matching students and colleges. Personnel and
Guidance Journal, Lflfid, Vol. al. 34—33.

 

Reeves. T. G. The relationship between accuracy of per—
ception of environment and ach _‘evement, attrition,
satisfaction with the environment and sex of
first semester freshmen. Doctoral dissertation,
Commerce, East Texas State University, 1968,

152 Numb. Leaves. (nicrofilm.)

Roberts, 3. 3. "Academic Performance of Eff-Campus
Freshmen fien at Cregon State University."
"npublished Peport,1963-64.

H p‘
H

es, 2. c., and cl anlenship, L. V.

ional leadership sat is- facti on and pro-
- i .- a comparative anaalysis. Academy of
Eanaset nt qurn»l, 1968, 11:4, 4Cl- Ulh.

 

Rec“, R. T. . study of the constancy of responses to the
items on the Strong vocational interest blank.
Psychological Bulletin. 1934.31, 705-708.

 

tiveness of

e social

2. E. (Eds. ).
Proceedings
Ga inesville

D
c f
(D
Q.
d
(J
(I)
(D
(D
I“; O

r l

ction with the

arge , 3., and h

on a d Iental‘
J e

f—“IT‘
{1"
w

1-
k-‘KD m 0
O f" F’H";
*3 cf he r4 we

in
”J (D

actors
s. Journal of
.. r7 . '

college student
3 s *

Group performance
and the group‘s
Journal of
I

[11

ohaw, Marv;n

§
>—
m::
110) O '-
cfow
Q
:1
i—‘x 0
" H,
c
$1)
U)
:5
+ 0

'D
,3. (D

9933’.

lOl

Smallwood, F. 3., an Klas, aL. D. A comparison of
acade emic, per onal, nd soc1a1 e fects of four
different types of university residential environ-

 

ments. The Journal f College and University
Student nousing. 1973 (Fall), Vol. lll, Ho. 2.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Snyder, B. R. Adaptation, education ar d emotional growth.
In L. A. Perrin. L. E. Reik. and A. Dalrymple
LEds.), The Sollege Dropout and the Utilization
of Talent, Erinceton: Princeton Jniversity Press,
1900, pp. 155-175.

Standing. G. 3.. and Parker, 3. A. The colleg character-
istics index as a measure of entering students
preconceptions of college life. .he Journal of
3oliege Student Personnel. 1964, Vol. 6, 2-6.

Stark. J. 3. Providing consumer protection for students,
in flew :irections For Higher Education, Jossey-
Bass, Inc., Vol. 1!, Spring 1975.

Starr. A. 2.. Eetz. E. L., ed Menne, J. N. College
student satisfaction questionnaire manual.

Ames, icwa- Sentral -owa assoCLates, Incorporated,
1971.

Starr. A. :., Eetz, E. L.. and flenne. J. u. Differences
in college student satisfaction: academic dropouts,
nonacademic dropouts and nondropouts. Journal of
counseling Fsycholggy, 1972, Vol. 19. 918—322.

Stern, 3. 3. Congruence and dissonance in the ecology of
college 8 udents. Student Medicine, 1960, 8,
304‘33‘90

Stern, 3. 3. Feonl- i. context. measuring perso.-
environment congruence in education and industry.
New York: «118‘. 19°C.

Stern, G. 3. "Environments for 1earni.g." 1n Nevitt
3rnford (Ed.), The Ameri can Coll lege, New York:
.iley, 1902.

Stone, L. A., and Foster, J. M. lcademic achievement as a
functi of psychological needs. :ersonnel and
3uidance Journal, 1954, 43, 52 50 .

 

in
lege,

1

.L

n

A

Student
an so

10118

e

g
V

‘-

llee
rect
Sons,

‘

a
‘

IJO
Amer

0

.‘fi
J.
e

iley and

“.

 

fferences in college
7%

A

1

nal 0
220—222.
J

d
lege:

 

age
oour
2

'

1

\J

A.

tr 1‘
.0

 

 

 

‘

tudent sat
rsonnel, 197‘.

 

H
D
'—
.-
.

simmersk-

l“

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o o. O -
. _t a .4 S
12 y n r 6 .1 ‘i o
6 _ t e O 0/ +t f a e -
9 e .1 m V1 .i a O r. C 7.
.1 d v S e _ h S On?b
e e r o "I w 0 r o D. .-L S n» 0/
. - e .l e 0 e e .. e t a .D a r r1.
id na h..v7 .l- .u e tn? Ch 68
r r .l C a .l O, h C l n e no .3 r pf -
o a d n a t n1 C 5 .l .1 d O u e h
9C n? 0U a . W. un fC dFD
.n“ “a. an «o n co . . .nh .+t rt no Au .-o nu ..i ca
t ..I C e . u t 0., C n 8...... a o T
n e .l n .. a n 5 r . .. e S . S a
to Cl $209 93. a2 k me . 1.4 380
Di n a n l .l r d1 8 7 r n a: i. s 0.4 e m H
et a: . plutu u so, C 093 ..Jll .030
C a m 7 m... a B .t - o, l v. r l r l h . a r q...”
n n r -w. ma. v.1 S "J r .1. 1.. Tb a 3 Q1 r01
Oi 0?. olncg .: - w ”.00 find; g h”
C m a: +9 3 r U 0 n d C an. o e n C T a O l O C
_ a “icTu zicas.l nTl a 3 Mn 9 p. i. ocw r
a. X e r V Z. S l a C n S _ e 1:» .. F; t 3
13 3.... . n A e .2 O. l n h 3.3 a a .1 e a.
p. claj e . S as C :l . C to n finilflt, linu s
S e e l 3 l n S V. t .. n. S .l C 9 ll 9
C ass Eésoou 9.3 a n no “.wit .1 r - Oh”?
n .l. e .. n n C rt. 3 3 .l e C 3 t I.» C t
.. a C m l l i. C D. u .l t 3.... o. a 9 C- .l ..
t. r 1 C n. u. . O 1: .1 W 1 m... .. C n4 O. W A...
n t nu. A. 3, .1. no ”a +v O. a.» G. Pu .r. i. no G. nu l C r.
a.n 4. xi .lluw.n sen” n é. Onno. v.3 _Qno
1.3 3 .n. .1 9 e e n. :5 3 i O :9 r. m o 3 9 1
D C . :.¥7:.Q if; r”? x. 8.19.. Avril“ nuw.7
C e .l .a O a .4 l +. .l O m. 9 t 1.3 3 C T 0 e n.
1.6 . n e .a. 9 C O a tJ .l all .p. O 1.0 h
aoe Luw:i 3 n?o .ox. so Au radond llr.i fizio.
n. a. . .r. t 16 ..a .1 a. n O .l a; a a. O a ..o .. 4
so... .u . ac n..nu a. . Au 4d n. oi o..:. . no aoérn .i nu
.C O r Us“ a. .1 l 3 . a... n a .R u. r” C. u 3 e C o.
«4 o... C r. t C v. . u C r .... .r. T a 3 .1. n1 r C .3
w. r» 1. .4 0. 3.4 ”V O D. . J a... m. 1. n. I A. fit. a... 9A
a. . O t h E S . C 3 .11., a... I. e 3.... .
A... b... D“ C e d n e «4 . +. .9“ . rm ..n k” P. w. 9;
f? a 4. na n ..l .r Va. .. 93. nd Tia.
axo -o.o. .oacon -1.4 S 3 Anna. .oo. +VVe
“4 V. w. 3 #3 «J l .l 9. wt. .- C . e 3 fl . ... .s. .1 .115.
e .l 3 t F 1.” I T _ . C J. C .l a 3. t 1. . .i t.

W t. 3 n” . h. e .19?) 3 r n4 9. e n C D .4 3.1 .
.8 3.43 39mm... 30.3 a . “£3.39 .33 ulc
flint. .13.- m... .1... 3 Wvuwi . a. I. 3 an._... .90.}... . 36.x”-..
9 r o. n” 3

- 2 F .l a - v -

r w. 3 +v 1. m4. r S o
9 e a. S .K O 3 C .C
“v. +v y :5 Av Pu .VL n ‘0
U ..4 h .J F a a e
3 3 r. n. T "I 0.. an N.

ional

9
nt- 4-
Ouxd. U

~ r
J

in

udies

4..
U

ta 5

~

g

 

471W

'-

O

 

\fi&

8
.6
e

«I.

1 4

S

..-
V

uden

t

‘ N
«O U

ORS

. “H+V\‘_U"\*
D a. %‘9 J-

-.O

-

3
9..
*4
r.
4..

9
T ..

DO NOT WRITE ON THIS BOOKLET.

Fonz-18 - 1971 {33‘ Esion

By Ellen L. Bet: and John W. Menne

Iowa State Unwersaty
and John E. Klingensmith
Arizona State University

©Copyright, 1971

Central Iowa Associates, Inc.

Cambridge, Iowa

6-
b

”eel

A

now you
th and who

1
L

o

888.

A

.
Q

d.
:Lq

~

6
ote

Q.
U

*1

g
l‘vu-

”coo—v
\r U!
V.

vou are satisfied w

i satisfactions an

AA.U fl Li‘-

' ‘-..o-u-o~

Ln
hlnys

o glve you a chance

‘ -

enema

V

O-
up
6

FOR

DEXCE HA

fly.” ‘9

‘JI-v ‘

what

A

o
..tll-J

0315
I?" -

6

Ad

o
v
I

§

““r‘v
“Lu;
...-
v
‘u'
VI
'
"A
.‘

 

 

o

«..cmrrn

 

-tate
not

w

'1

 

YOU are

Sreaon

‘
b

O

H .v
r r a
e e h e
"a b t t
s m a
n ”w e t d
a ..U C CO e
a .5
e n C. n 4..
.C C S 0 w.
t .l . on. C
t e ru. 8 3
9. no .hu w. v. a»
O C T. m C d
0.. ‘u‘
44:; n 0 +b "J
J. as; 91 C u &v
r t O .1
n... n 7 e .C 3
e 3.3 a r
C .Q .1 t e
.n . . .4. S V
FF .1! fl. Aolb VU u‘fi
.QL a Any n v.“
v. S .L e 7C
.0 .0 D. m
r r O 9 e
a. O v. C T. .3
Tu. "fl \fiu a t
D. e t
u e .C .n 2g no.
h .«A ‘9 0
PC ow r. n1
U ad on 7- t
.b r a C
a. e .3 0.
n d r. r 2 v.
w. nu .o 9. ... .0
Q .C a. r...
w; an .
e "I. ..A ~ ‘ .v
on; ‘ A a.“ ‘4‘ a
v” f. 1. 4. H
v. C .. v. H. L
”9. 9.. i. .u
T n . .1 U ..u
v. .‘o $ C &,
.oaq v m 7. .1
.1 . . C . .d
F. o; . A 0. Q U:
H. «4 3 Tu .. . . o
C r” o. I. F
n. 4 n. . A ‘ . A n.
.1. w. I. ,1 pa «on
r.” .s‘ C (or. 14
o . 0v 3. AV Po —
”a. flu Pu .rL 1 w ..
l . . a. ..p u.
3 p. E .5
3 no . a Y‘ W. .4 n.
j G J . K .L
C 2 r. a a. a. .
“A r1 to V. uh ”1. m. 54
Q r O n C ... r“
O 3 3. C C .4 .. C
no. I o; ‘L 3.; n1 w.“
e C 2 7 e
n.. .ru H . n .0 . ”a .v
.. .. C a. 7. H. a
"A .d r“ .4 .. r“ m. oo
_ . nu »U n. .. A. r” no
:A a “o. F.” a
.3 .3 p. w. o. H: a.
r ow s... a. an n. .5 an
3 C 3 r. .. u. .2. . . o.
A. D— .. F. ‘L . .h h v
a. .u S C .u C ..“ z. n
L. 3 . . C .. ., S. .. ...

.. ’J. .14

~Y°f—‘
:\:{\_.-l,1 ‘

—\

a

 

m:ress:.ons
1 ‘f‘
L650 0
hvrx fi*\\v(w
.ij .‘l;.l.;
a.“ .‘
\Izl .LrOH-s

THE
:5. LL! 0
n0
-. .3
‘ :A'

LJLIQQI'XAA.)¢

¢--U

more .
"‘1:

v
I

.-

O

1

'1

.LL.
LJ

ro
A-
v—y' v‘
.\‘~.~

«
A

o

H..\.
o

- '-

“Thfinm*fi
Ly

‘ (‘2’!
\deup

 

..“

.‘-.
.12D,
‘ .. 'vuY-f‘
01"- J.|.’
.“..

‘
I-

.WAM’K"
wk;

3.“.L

.
w‘ v
d
a
g

I" .
L

I‘A'
“4" .L . L'.

‘I

" O

Vuln.

' t3

‘

“9,1

..1
LJ’\A A‘-

v

' ) I"
ls(-‘-
~‘\
.
\I.)
‘1
Ay"(!1
QOv‘-
...
. ‘l'rl
A \h.g

\. p
A u)
'1?”

it"?

A

‘ 1

7‘)
fJ

,. no.

'1...)flr.‘
0!

(343

n
l

r
l

‘r‘ 99.)
‘1-0 but-
‘
7‘\
A'v
_r
A. .
zoom.

)'§

\‘J

r.-

4-...

 

——“’"'—_'

1135
Page 1
Key 1 means: I am VERY DISSATISFIED.
2 means: I am SOMEWHAT DISSATISFIED
3 means: I am SATISFIED, no more, no less.
4 means: I am QUITE SATISFIED.
5 means: I am VERY SATISFIED.

 

INDICATE HOW SATISFIED YOU ARE WITH:

 

1. The opportunity to make close friends here.

2. The amount of work required in most classes.

3. The way teachers talk to you when you ask for help.

5. The competence of most of the teachers in their own fields.

5. The amount of study it takes to get a passin grade.

0. The chances of getting a comfortable place to live.

7. The chance you have of doing well if you work hard.

8. The amount of personal attention students get from teachers.

9. The chance "to be heard" when you have a complaint about a grade.
10. The-friendliness of most students.

ll. The help that you can get when you have personal problems.

12. The availability of goon places to live near the campus.

13. The ability of most advisers in helping students develop their course plans.
14. The cleanliness of the housing that is available for students here.
15. The chance to take courses that fulfill your goals for personal growth.
16. The kinds of things that determine your grade.

17. The preparation students are getting for their future careers.

18. The chance to have privacy when you want it.

19. The chance to work on projects with members of the opposite sex.
20. Teachers' expectations as to the amount that students should study.
21. The availability of good places to study.

22. The fairness of most teachers in assigning grades.

23. The interest that advisors take in the progress of their students.

24. The places provided for students to relax between classes.

10C)

Page 2
E51 1 means: I am VERY DISSATISFIED.
2 means: I am SOMEWHAT DISSATISFIED.
3 means: I am SATISFIED, no more, no less.
A means: I am QU TE SATISFIED.
5 means: I am VERY SATISFIED.

 

IXDICATE HOV SATISFIED YOU ARE WITH:

25. The social events that are provided for students here.

26. Teachers' concern for students' needs and interests.

27. The chance to get scheduled into the courses of your choice.

t8. The activities and clubs you can join.

29. The di ficulty of most courses.

30. The chance to get help in deciding what your major should be.

. The chance to get acquainted with other students outside of class.

32. The availability of your advisor when you need him.

L.)
La.)
0

The chances to go out and have a good time.

34. The pressure to study.

35. The chance of getting a grade which reflects the effort you put into studying.
36. The quality of the education students get here.

37. The number of D's and F's that are given to students.

38. The concern here for the comfort of students outside of classes.

39. The things you can do to have fun here.

40. The chance for a student to develop his best abilities.

£1. The chance of having a date here.

42. The chances of getting acquainted with the teachers in your major area.
43. The chance to explore important ideas.

44. The quality of the material emphasized in the courses.

45. The chance of getting into the courses you want to take.

46. The noise level at home when you are trying to study.

47. The amount of time you must spend studying.

48. The availability of comfortable places to lounge.

 

—i—wm

 

 

l0 7
Page 3

£91 1 means: I am VERY DISSATISFIED.

2 means: I am SCMEWHAT DISSATISFIED.

3 means: I am SATISFIED, no more, no less.

4 means: I am QUITE SATISFIED.

5 means: I am VERY SATISFIED.
INDICATE HOW SATISFIED YOU ARE WITH:
59. The chances for men and women to get acquainted.
50. The counseling that is provided for students here.
51. The chance to prepare well for your vocation.
52. The chance to live where you want to.
53. The chance you have for a "fair break" here if you work hard.
54. The friendliness of most faculty members.
55. The chances to meet people with the same interests as you have.
56. 3hat you learn in relation to the amount of time you spend in school.
57. The choice of dates you have here.
58. The amount of study you have to do in order to qualify someday for a

job you want.
59. The kinds of things you can do for fun without a lot of planning ahead.
66. The willingness of teachers to talk with students outside of class time.
1. The places where you can go just to rest during the day.
62. The campus events that are provided for students here.
63. The practice you get in thinking and reasoning.
64. Your opportunity here to determine your own pattern of intellectual develOpment.
65. The chance to participate in class discussions about the course material.
66. The activities that are provided to help you meet someone ycu might like to date.
67. The sequence of courses and prerequisites for your major.
63. The availabili y of quiet study areas for students.
69. The chance you have to substitute courses in your major when you think
it is advisable.

70. The appropriateness of the requirements for your major.

}_

 

 

'0.“ I'D O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A ”A”; ___ ____..___ __._H _ l - ._._ _ _ - - __ ___- _._l l4'a'” -- ,_ __ . C L'AYQ “.-"”- _.._____._
0 our: __ _ __ ,. ,c __ __ -. ._ -_ r taut '! _ __ _ c _, -____ I 91' Lou __ , _ _____ '. Igl'u ___,___,__.
. —]—7 -' --- - ~ ' *' - - — ' - -- — -- — —- —-- - — d-~-——-—~—— —-— ”-0.— 0“- f—.--'——- -— ---—-'—--—--—I
‘,I 'Q Q a. . .. . u g ' c v 1 0 * ‘ I '4 p . a- n- y i [2 ‘. - ‘ o - A o ‘ O O
.- --.—’-—.—.——-< - - «~— —- ——v» - --‘H --—.—-——--———— H H- --- ——-——--- a—m—H—fl
I I
I '0 I v - . . n a J v F O u C an . n , u - o icy ‘ is: '. _ ~ 5 ' ‘ ‘ . ‘ -|
Ir—: —————-—- v - —- - -—- - ---II I -I—-‘-—————————- —— - ------ O
i . t. O u o .- . y n C - D 0 " ' " O 0' - ‘ fi ‘ I ’ Mt !: c - an a c o o o 4|
O
.--.- -. _ - . - - __ -- -_-_. I u--- _-_.___------
i Id O x e . c- .- o t O ‘ d M .- ’ 0 u o .. ' Ik .qv — u. a o o- v a v
I -.-.. —__- - — - _ _ —__-. - - . i H—L__—-_ __--...._ - -
! : t. O v p p . g u o , I — l C v. - 5 D Q a b 'o i E '. .- h '- v o. O - O
1‘ ._._.l_-___.. - __ __ - ---__.-_ - _ _. >- 1 .__.l__.-_.__-_..--__- .
ill 4 o v n - _ u , - ‘ I o u a- u .- . . s l . n: .. r: ' lfl' . - .o u v a o a. o o
-;.- o-——— . ~ - — - -. — ~— - -4l 6 F4-—-§-—-—- -«
l. .. O u f . ~ ‘ t u I I o- . . - m 0. :I 'u v. e o .u a s a. I-
i'é‘" --—_ __ e — ---- -— — — - - ——— s -_4 . r“ ~-~4————. —— n—
c‘ |;1 .O O u h - - ., ‘ I - ’ I ' O 'l I on o- } u ‘ v 9 'c o I "I :Q - 00 f 9 a V A O
. ' l
5 ;--* - - - -- -- -—‘ - - ---‘ (C I r :' '*°—‘-'-'— '- --- ‘
g i I. o u n . a u ~ 0 I o s a . 1 - c a- u .. 'n. ! 2 g. - . n o a o a o:
x i h._-. -—-—— ~ — - — -- — --_ . 1 | —~——¢——-— —- —— —————--¢
3 . i c u c u - u . ~ 0 - I r . o u r - p p I v u u \V i _, '. — a. n w .- . ~ q. o-
O
.3. —--o——* -- - - - -~------—- —-—; a- * r—7 -—--— ——«
9 g I d o t. . . o x ‘ a ) l o s a a . a . O I! o *v' .3 t E. :o .. n w 9 o- n - Q a-
, ‘
o 3 r-'*‘ ---— - ' * ' ' — ‘ '— ' ‘ - ' an 1 f‘T"‘._‘”“' ——-""— r“
g . 4 o- u I . - - . n v I . g 9 u .. . : o I n 0 a I“ 1 If] a — o- r u a- o s o ‘-
‘ a I i r: | I r
O O I P—°"*‘ ‘ ' T ' ‘ ‘ T ‘ ‘ T‘ ’j i '-.’_—°—-_—-"—‘- '"“"‘""“
I I ': , ' id 0 . 4 .- . . ~ - I o o u c a . a s t u- » .. .2 I '2' o - ~ - o .- 0 .. o a
I f ; l L_. ' - - - - — v v — -—‘- - .- — ——— ¢ t—;—-—¢-— —— ——_—_.-.— -m- —-J
I 5 E I I .1 o . ._. _ . o I c 5 ' Q a - I a . d I i I *9 - h o v a o - . o~
i
| d Z . _. - . - — .- - - - . u, .- .—o—-—L————- —-—— ..
E I c '. g ‘ . , . . 3 g n g u o . — - , I . '4 U) ; O ..a — o. n v «a o ~ 0 o.
2 C : L..-— o —— - — — — - —- - -— - - — . —- o D I; v——o w————————— -—--—--———-—-o
l L f I ll 4 on _ . - . u r o I § n a on .. ; . ‘ a .- ~ iJ .1 [o - ~ - o u - n o
5 :3 M --0 “—m- e“ - — ~ —- ‘- — '2 IO-0-——-¢I--—--—-—-——-————--—-—l
g" I I .1 O ., to c - t v ~ d I I H I " I II -— I a- . u u a. i’r‘l P‘" .. o. c ., .- 9 -. g -l
' r ' >—- o - - - -— - - -- — - ‘ S _r—- ‘—-‘ '~—— — -—— —- —— ——-‘
3 n- }; . . I - . . q - j - A ‘ . .- .— -a ,, 1 . '- . l3.” a .. h. n o r Q ~ . o.
35 ..l . - ---_. _ .- -_-_ - g ._._l-_.-__-_______:
.. t .2 1 a . .. . r ‘ v I 9 I t u 0 on .- ‘1 a . — - - ;:N| o - o. n 9 o .- ~ 0- o
g. :..._ . _. . - -- - _-- -- _. sq": __-__.---—————-—
E a. 5 1" .o c t. ' c . n - a - .' l I a - I u. -- L4 0 I II b ’vi 9": 'o - a. u v a o A II 0
__.__.._ ..1-A_ ~.____. . - - .- - . . .-—— _ .._ _ .. - t-._ l_~_,_- ..h __ .....J ___"-..__.._.._.. __.- .-._J
g . ' v . c v ,n v r 7 I' Y 3 Y ‘
c- z , .5 2- 21¢ . w ‘ ‘ . v. a- r 1 . ‘ ANKWE’H r : a a s 0' .‘ a . $ 71: 145 o- 21 ‘1
szf‘P‘t‘
.a O '. o l 'l o '. 2 ( "I 1 ' '! '3. a ' 9| Ap-....3 '35 0 t o I “A I t o I we a : n r mA I t P '
pl\(J£‘
0’1 3 3 a 1 '0 J l g 9 l a x ." ‘ ‘ t 1 3“ 7 3 a 9 33" 3 3 ‘ 5 23‘ I ‘ 4 5 (4‘ 3 3 ‘ S
3.. Q c g t no a ' '. I , a 0 n .‘o- I 1 a. NA 0 c o 1 304 I c 3 l 3" ' 1 “ I .4‘ C C D.’
13' t J 4 $ 3“ ' J C s as ' l a s M: .‘ l a s 37‘ 1 3 4 t 30‘ l I 1 $ ‘0‘ I J a S 40! 2 1 a 3
at: I t o I 4:: a ; t - 4-. . , - r u. I ; J c “a l c n p m: I t o I or: a g, o g 494 I c O I
u . 2 3 . $ yn y a . s -,.‘ .' - . s ; .- u . 5 USE 32 'n' 2 3 a s s- ‘ 1 3 a s as ‘ z 1 . s 50' 2 J n s
PENCIL
3" g c g 1 3,9. I L 9 I 5.. Q ( r~ t 31;: q a r MA I C O t 02! I t 0 1 83A Q C D I 6“ I C C 9
00' I) a s 01' I ) a '. a l ) a s rn- I . ¢ 1. 30! f I t I 70' l 1 cl 7:! 1 3 : : 7"! a 3 ¢ 5
73‘ g g g ( p.‘ g g 3 | u. g c p ( '0. y t '. ; )7! I C D l .‘h‘ I C D I 79' I C .3 ‘ 33‘ I L O I
.1' 2 1 a | Qj' ) ) a s c‘ ‘ x . q ‘4‘ I 0 ° PS! 3 1 o 9 “3‘ a 1 ¢ 5 6" I ) 0 S 39' 7 J 4 ‘
u I I C o ( O S I t 9 I “I t ' l. '5 l 93! O ’ . I A?¢'.)WER 0) l I c {I l 94 A J V 'J . 95A I L D 1 90 I I , O (
.7 ' i a 4 s an' 2 3 4 s n: I s - . m-1 1 3 4 . £‘_';’,".'_¢§ m: ' : 3 ¢ s m)‘ t ‘ a $103: 1 n a a 104' 2 J a 3
Pace
‘ml 3 C C ("8‘ 1 C 2 ' 'CH ‘ f 5 l ")‘Il ' C 3 l "’9‘ I '. D fiHC‘ ' f 0 l1“! ‘ '. f ("1" U L '3 I
I ‘ ' '
1.31 i ) 4 sun! I ‘ . ' H" I ~ . «'15. :1 Q ; HI: 1 )h511n'I734 3119‘ 7 : ' 4‘3!" 7 J l a
1215 I t o t n;- o t a . ~,A V c o v mu 0 c a l 176a I c a 11-9‘ 3 ~’- 0 IN" ' ¢ 0 ' 33‘ f L J "
110i! 2 ‘ snc' 3 : . s ~a-' 2 s . t nu 1 3 . s 133‘, 1 a _: in“ 2 a ( $115! 2 .~ 4 swan 2 J « '.
1311 l c I u no: 0 t o .' ‘nt 0 r. o ' um I ' a l um; 89 ‘-"A 1 r. '. l ”2‘ y i t V «H I C o f “4‘ l f- 0 E
14.1 1 a a s :u.‘ I ) ¢ 3 14" ‘I : a s “0' z a a s PENC‘L 1m: 1 J . s 150' I J a s 15-! 2 J a s u.“ 1 J 4 5
sun I c a l 154A I t o I up I L o I met I c o I “on o c n I is”! I c o I Hot. n L a I'O')‘ O C 0 l
1.: 1 3 a s 102' l a a s1 : 1 3 c Q 4m: z ) c 3 -66 : p ( 1'60| : I I s M" ' 1 J t 1 HM ' J 4 S
0 . 01 ,
I... U L O 1' I70! 5 C D l 0711 I t O [177‘ O c 3 f ‘73! l .1 a 1‘74: 0 C D l173.A I C S EHGf . L g 5
. . , . , , _ . . _ . _ .,
1 . . ‘ 1 q I 0
"1,3 g 5 s 5 no I ) I [17" l . c I 100', 2 h n S ANSNhfi 15 . 1 p 4 l. 132 . 5 \' I! I m.) t. r a g I .54. I i '_ g
n . . . ,~' up ' s I l' ‘ ‘ '
u. i d I mu I r o l u“ o c a l mu l c o 1 bunk; m: n c u r .00 ' E D I‘ws ‘ I z i n:- I t 9 t
. . - l . - A I, - l I x
. . , . . , PAGE .. . . . . . . . -
1.31 I a a 9 ”.9 7 1 c s ”.1 7 1. a s 19.“ 7 a I i ‘07! t J 0‘ I ”0‘ f I I. l_ '09? 1 J ‘ I 21‘0‘ 5' ’ ‘ ’.

:1} 155631}: 5

Explanation Letter to students
Head Resident Instructions

Instructions for Resident Assistants

 

STHCE’W! fiOLS'fig a‘TJ btafit J .
Desagefice Degrams LUUIVQFSI C-J'vams, Oregon 97331 303) ’54-4771

 

 

 

‘ c . o o -
_.,... . ‘o, ‘ 3“? a .h ‘ - ¢ 3.. . - ~ _, :yq ‘ '7 —‘“~ JV «'3 Q - q o, e “A ‘3
,d l a 1.4.4.-..v . €.~~.r it‘- A. cQA—l .‘ A — K- L. Lr-l¢-~—J -5 t1 Vb-AVR".
0‘ - .
gfii'. ”'wropo . .~'.". 7* ‘ r: 9 -~-' 6 .‘.w - r. ‘(. -y. . .‘h.,. <QDa—130wr‘h ‘.',"A- a“
.. V 4...“-.. l ,3... U v . l - J - A— - — l v- -.. .“’,J"' 1‘ - “a- ‘- .. t—A vb y‘—
.
. p 5 ‘ ‘o- o- '. . q. L‘O A ‘ ,- o- ‘ f- . v‘ ‘
' | 0 you 0 V F: '9 - r. - 9 0; — s u u a y; .H - ‘ '- yv- v e. '3 a u f. .3 .- _ _‘ - a" ’-
-0 An... ~21" .‘v .. c--)’.4 J J ad'. . 11‘ ’ Va . a" v.4 'ta‘a'L -._ b «J uglb ~ ..uJ.D-dCU
' ‘ - .— o. . ~ p - v ‘ -. O
. - ,. v- v ~ ’- A
“a i ‘ y" ' . \v‘ ..‘ ‘ 0 I Q ._ 9" ~ ‘ Q r ‘_, o r. rx Nlfiwfi‘o I: ~ ..
-.o . -.- JA 4.] r J O- o vol~ — h .tsA v ' -ollvo- J a «.6 J61- ‘Ad‘l » v.a-4U a 4". A «*WV--
9 . - Q .A . I I ’ I o O r
..~ ‘ _.'. )l‘ ‘ V. v . .‘ . ~. W’ . . 3 ”0-. A‘Re . 7“ o q“ QAO'W '- ~ o fl- RY-
..- o 0 a a C 0 . V _ ‘I
“-.L- ..L -rb“ a. o -06— . s . 4A“......1 '1. Av- ’ w . -QulJo Q ..a Aa-Arl- V1-.. \ L .5 IHV‘ b
-
or.- qc‘:‘3‘. r‘.‘ . ', o a..- up..‘v-.
'0‘1'4 ..- o u- 4 v _I a ‘4 _.~ 4 ~ ..a (Ax; a o v I- Jot.
. ~ . a . .. . . —\ . .
: — 4:4 ‘ ‘ __, q , . , ~ :- r. ’- ‘Y‘ - .. o- . ‘7'- ‘3 .- - y- 9 r'v ‘ G ..D -.“— v‘f“ v-
-.. I , . .
.u 1.. .. -.t... - . t “u- ... ‘J I. o , J4 ‘4. y 4 d-Agoav o. A~)-o"_J an... uAA.’ . - -Lo‘Ab»
¢
. . c — 4 n - o .
0 'IA o 0" ~ 9‘ v, 0 v. .x . ‘ ,4- . . " .-. r. 'g ‘ v r ‘ . o ,‘ ’- ,‘ 'F y. .- r; 9 Or " 3 c O ‘ -‘~p 0- - “
A.-.‘ cw ¢-," ‘5 4. -n. 4.¢--a A ’w A. -.s 4" a 4 ~l‘ A an... ALoItALLA.:‘ dndfl. ‘J .4244" JV .
I Q o . ' I U ‘ .
:- ‘ 09 ‘;'~ fl‘-. , a, - v- . v " ' I. H‘. 6- - - o. ‘ . (Dr 'yf.'-‘_"\- ‘ w ,- .~ 5‘; 1‘0. "F‘Vc .3”"‘ y‘fi
v-‘ ..A. - -. -_. - s .1 l.--.--. "..;. - I. a -.b n‘. J-'v‘§-Aa'l ..5 49A... -1.an ufi“‘-\/
A
O U
".:.r- H‘. v ' .. ‘ .. . w ,,, Mr‘” ‘*£« ' '~-'a""‘r'r'e ." TAO O-«"
- -oov _ -00 ~. - ' .. c - - -- . . —- ‘0‘ A ~~J-- - . a... ~§a ~ t-ov s ‘r" ~ ~o U ..Al Jel‘. .A.»
a o. 4—. on. c - V‘- I" Iv — ‘ ‘9 . _,\
0—, . I I
d - «A J A—Aclo d x J- ..l . o — I ,0. O
-. . . ‘ . . . - - .
r- . -' Q J ,- . ' ‘ . . ‘ . ~ , ‘ .- .v ,4 ¥ F :1 ”6 . '\ \ I c. .- '-‘ ,s - ‘ a f." : ..o r. ‘. I“ ,~ .— V‘A o ,‘
O .14 as _ . --.ol L . ' o. v - A v J - 0. vi"- .0- ‘u- LA‘ 4-.‘LJ - ..-. i..- -.n ML ‘4 _Iv
J ‘ - - LI
. .- . ‘ - . .
.u - n ‘ A v- — ’ .- _- c ' 4 ’_ - O .. ,va a 0 ."~ . ... .- l. I ‘3 O- o — ~ 9 .— Q ‘ 'n‘v‘ " F) - “‘3 ’n- ' -
~" - 4.... - - a ..n- ..no a - J . a .1 v I u. 4.. a \ JV‘u A o r 7 -- J.‘ -14...) '4—4-.. u‘- v .OAAL‘
- - a . t - ... a . ‘ - c ‘ I
n. -.~' . I H 'q - - ~ . H o - v.."‘ o . "r. " .z‘Irh) '-‘9 ’J ‘r-‘I‘Qm‘ q I‘ [‘r ‘ e
.0--.‘ , -,.,' 1‘ _. . - A... ,‘4 a J v - n #s‘ x..- .1 N- J‘. .l - A.‘ ..v I a... ”‘1‘ 'J‘- ..A -.“-H ’ ~51;
-
. . . . -. ~ . ~ ‘ o -. - -
c—v . ._ ‘ H . . ‘ n ‘ ~¢ ‘~ ' r J a p O f‘, o -‘ 3' 1 ~ ,- 1 -v
o _. .4 04- . .1 III- ”I. or 1
_.t-.‘ J O -...— . .pu -~J‘o¢—~ A - —u .§.¢~ I; ~ ‘.&—~ U - ..io. .4 Idir‘- A A...§-UL'~1* L ..I— e‘
n. -
-'-°' : on‘ ‘I‘r
d..&‘ A... ’ - .. A.- a lth..
V .4 -
o G v o n O ..U I . v 7-. .ac-v ..o . ‘.- —«.“I. . - ..‘ |
_,.. . ,.. . _ 4 oo 4 -4 r ’ ‘ , ,, ’9“ ," I“ ‘e 9‘ "°“SQ " ‘
l". . ‘4‘. “IX. .0. - -‘.‘ s A .14.. a..- - 1“ (’L l.'h.-§- “_,_‘- .’-( "'- -0. N.‘ 2.. Ella I e! ..A v J;
0‘ O- . ‘ o .- v o— - o- ' o ’ ‘ - _ '
. ' ~ .5 I” " '() .' 5" f. .‘ ' " .3 I A." ” W“: ‘ WV] ‘ "r‘"“"‘ 5-“C ‘I
_a 4¢.l..4 ‘. 4 v. - 0 ¢ 4. l .- J .I'A J J .. J..AI ---‘J 4 4. J .01 .A .. v'aL. . vb J .J A ¢\\.~ A.
m -‘ ‘ ‘ O .y 9 - '4' [I '— .
n‘c-JvAJ J’mt J O l'h. n ' J A.

 

’-:4 _ ‘r
..A—U/L,l:/

O'ch Share L’mvori'fv ’5 an / .‘nman‘vo Acnom E7ua/ Coca/runny Employer

w- r!

1

O
5

F

(OD

tb

Student Housing and
Refidmwmifiogmns

llO

   

Oé‘Eé’t‘é”

UHIVEI’Sity Corvallis. Oregon 97331 (50:) 754-4771

STUDENT SATISFACTION/ACHIEVEMEflT SURVEY

HEAD RESIDENT
INSTRUCTIONS

Please see that each of your Resident Assistants receives:

1. A packet of materials
2. A bundle of i 2 pencils
3. An RA Instruction sheet

Each packet has a large red number on it. Please record the packet number
and name of the Resident Assistant below. Advise each Resident Assistant
of a mutually agreeable time for the return of the packets.

 

HALL NAME

PACKET NC. RESIDENT AiSIflA; - NAME FLOOR

 

 

 

 

 

llll

 

PLEASE return this sheet with all materials directly to me. (I'll be happy
to come by and pick them up).

In a project of this sort, many questions arise. Please feel free to call
me at home 753-1090 or at the office YSh—QTYl at any time. It is very important
to me and I'll be glad to come to the hall to help with it.

Your assistance will be appreciated.

”33/ 15? Oregon State University is an Affirmative Aer/on/ Equal Opportunity Employer

Student Housmg and
Residence Programs

 

Otate
nUIversity

Corvallis, Oregon 97331

 

{503) 7544771

 

 

- .mvapg 1H1" *n In n'-~‘:~‘r—‘ '7“
an-uA Itk;-‘v;‘/dv..-£a Le'EA‘A

”fir“
|<
. . “a.“

U)

-.u-‘nho-flmv‘ivfl

-.‘CL‘U'WI ‘3.)
A
.733
“no
‘45.
Coo-worse!" -\ .Qo‘o- :Q
uvi‘f...‘ PKJCLUUR—‘S
:‘n‘. 1-9 :n Aqn:‘-.vs~ Onp F" “‘9' (\0‘ .‘0- -o - ?r.-~'~£‘.- b.“ .muuw o‘ “a. ' -
A N); edae ‘5‘ eat... 44....15 a o- 04.. I .J «A L. «Ame..a h'G‘aLDL1CUlvr-t, 1 mAnlmM CL A Atlnb
aCtL'c'lty '1; I'..3C/I‘.¢ $9.8;ng l3 ulaflue'L.
.2 . -‘ r . A o I‘ Q . "F. T-vv“ -- - ‘ ~ - o- O- s», . v ‘-
-8Cl§e: mate. .cLLJ inslfdle: '.- “Ar/snare}? lest-.61..) V0 C-lier‘ CBS and Aggreemenb
V: ' _ ' a , 6‘ ‘ t- y. \
- or... .\vn Ud-.‘\ O‘ Lebbe‘ ,
o - - I .
, - ‘ q fl - §
rt diie -ustriction eneets \-n les. Boonietsi

"‘- “r ~‘ ? “ ‘ . 2‘ * .—,—~ .. -« ‘.‘ -
_C hasn-:= ecorao-e answer eneets \in -est sCOAlets)
it” 'fi‘ "9' fi“ -\ 1-0+“
L—J AQQU D‘JU. *VVI;
d» u A " : . c
CAR-‘3':-
v‘ua v.
a Li— '- . Li ‘ “F. (”A-c. ‘: r‘ 0-,\ ‘ ‘f,'\1 ’2, y-gfi n ‘ " :A" “7. 0“ Tan“
*0 . ‘.5‘ g; J.L..‘A.L.l) .J’LA V‘u‘r‘rln'tu -r. “ weir ")~ “Cup \AthAA Abm De*e~.t~ULa y-eltr- VG)

A ., . ' ~ , ..~, ..i .. ‘. -1
a. man; eacn ,zrtisi an, an titlinaverJ letter, and v.3: person to read
Q ’ v ~ ' g fi o ‘. 0
:Ci’ 4.53:")? 'L..l ‘_r..x'-‘?n'\: 2.3:: .‘."r‘3’3rnen: (Ola. 3.". L438 CHECK.
'3 7' n “rut-"v" ’ “ t 1;: ‘v‘r Hw- ‘vc" Jr 1“" . 1: :4‘ F“ +30 ‘ 3“-
“ O JO/‘DO‘ - _ .1“- s‘ 4 L l h .4 :. tub; I -" -.s, AI‘O‘L(A It. 13“;VLUJ¢- 411v IJ’-D V .SOC-Zle
aru ~‘ w '"*J c"s” e*‘c“ "° the "V ‘* rs w’°h reswarse‘T rarred
5 Me A. quajuv AA .- I .«Vooor.fiv al.. Ji‘ JL VA to ‘ h We...pa .A-ULA 14‘ LA u h l..-\.l
Of: til” ifip'nny' ' "0,.
L1 anvrmaun. v‘ a .793? 'dhr‘".3* "*""DY‘ P” 5'91; D“ "3 ..“ ‘- ‘ at: a” C. t a;
Q .Q.- 1‘ ‘ 4‘ . UI‘I’. L as; I AJJerAM-I , h‘-~~ug KILIV—r , J.Lu‘v AAAS ‘JrJL LUL‘ Jnee 3.1L.
T,I".-"‘-—T 4-1 /.u . ‘ ' ' A ‘ “ ~—-' J. ‘ o
..si'tu.u-. K‘Jue nérefilnent "01'1“; 7;" assure I‘Et rn 01» 3.3.... Easy maver1813j
D
)0 i182‘lrr; 21.4. 311.1. E'I'lr'lls 1: "33.x; 11"..511‘3‘1'13.
e .0'7 .IA-f Hf“- ‘4' «<-: 2:0- — '3,
fi;“1¢.t\ & JJ :‘le; - dl—l«\ th—IAJL O
'.
c
I \w .
f
. ‘
. / 7/ J'”
2 ‘ .gv

HEB/1.3;) Cregon“ V. :e eUnivers ()1 is an Affirmative Aczion/ Equal Opportunity Empioyer

rufi‘ufiv-‘p fl
«‘1‘ -HA‘U‘.¢5 J

"
J—‘H

OI‘TI

in

en:

fin
OI

C.
091.

3
z.

a,“
1..
l

a..-
\s-

-vv‘v"
--v-I

 

 

C.
.1.

s...

..nfi
0

.h.

o

a.

w
e

a.
w.

ements

b

to .

.: 4.13.

.

u.‘yo~.-—]'
4

A

,.
u

 

'.
‘

.
Q- -
. .,v‘,3
-sJ .

.
0“-

 

 

 

.
7
.
o

 

v:

.5.

f‘
~v
.3
x, w.
I. ..
5.
I. run
.. 9
r. ..
v, :.
‘4 *
I.
a
e .x.
.s. ,
‘Q .v.
1,4 _.4
d s
.
”A .-
i. n”
e. #-
‘.. .._.
u. o ....
n.
.._ .. Q.
.‘ .1 c..
4 ..
n '0
.. ..
._ .9. w
a H ¢
-~ 0.
._ ...
.. m .
... .
L 0‘
A .
c .g e.
.. l H
a. .t. .
a
e c.
._ o
e . s v”
”n I.
n. n ..H
. ... ..4
.9
,h ..
..J.. ..u
t.
C ... .m
_. ,1 v.
D C
..n .

g.

»
Q
V

 

9L

 

7"

1

fl}.

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

RequeSt For Support ti computing Services
Abstract
Response Letter

Second Request For support 0f Computing Services

81
(.1
(J

(D

onput r Services Extension dequest

D:

econd Response Letter

Submit 2 c0pies Please Print or Type

REQUEST FOR SUPPORT OF COMPUTING SERVICES FROM
OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY COM?UTER "ENTER

 

 

 

Name 3"1- E-i‘NaI": Stiles Date 10 Iiove "ice?l 1,75
Department 53331:” Faculty Member X Student
Funds Requested S ":7.33/TT

 

NOTE: This figure should not include data preparation such as
keypunching.

 

 

 

Title of project or Research Activity Satiszaction/Achievemen: Correlati’
% ‘ ‘ ’ ‘ C ' ' ‘ {1"1‘."4C" "‘ ‘n'fi". ”‘- r‘nr:. DA-‘n ---,.
Dfléf description oi computing to oe done»4»4~~«iCe— u 9 , a a “=e-ezce-

Analysis :? Stiier: 7::giitizn Satisfa::i:n/é:hievemen: Tate
Approximate period for which services are requested (month/year).

.‘ . “l;q:.m.n:_pq - 3": ‘y—“{— 1"";

:rom ~ wad- e.-.’ -, _. To .. .‘1:.A.-, {—3 4

 

 

is this research otherwise funded: Yes (Indicate source below),

 

nter been consulted in preparation of estimate?

has the Computer Ce
495 If yes. give name of consultant '9-«~'»rr“"

 

nsponsored research job number this grant is to be placed

u
under, if any

 

Signature

 

(Student) / 5
i 1 I
/' / I.
&//fl57 :/7/ 47m$7(/
' Signatur 4i~1;/13¥</%g:;~«w

(Major Prof) d//

A brief description of the projecc (two copies) should accompany
this regiest. The computational services should be OUCllnud in suf-

t detail that an escimate of comps eter time can be made in con—

15 the request is on b;hals of a student, the nature of tne stu-
dent's participation relative to his academic program and to tne spon-

soring faculty member's research activities should be desc ib d.

'1

(‘0

:i
S t
S a
e S

S
S w.

an”.

de
l a
e t
v. 3

2.. o.

D.
«A .3

n
0
.~.
vi
a
1..

e n
..0 O
S .l
.l.l+U
..al a
a.l r 8
Cu 2. 9 S

d a
t 31.0
nip 8
e n.” Dd
d e O a
u m C o
it u r
3 F r C

.T. e
o. 8.0 9
Zn r. v.
8..-. u .1.
1A 9.
1.13
C e n O
a. T. 3 t

.l.l n
e . +9.1
20 a
m.n/-.Ll

3‘.

a 3.3
0 one.
.Q u U.
97. n
S_q e C
0.1.. .L .i
0.3 3.1
O: S C
r./\ a a
w? 89.

e ..
3 T e .1
.1... n” C

at a
‘. mu 8
0. final.
”v 03‘s..
9... C C
~I. ..a we.

8 3
is 3 C a,
3 “4 I r
8 a u
«A. .3 3
e n e a
v. C 2 9
Q» o\-.1~ m
.s. +v‘fi
.r.” «w;. e
3 a .u h
a9. ”4.9.

1;.
¢

.1. r

...d

C e
p i
3.).e.
n” l
.l
..n .1.
w. a
c .1.
N 3
C
3

9.x
.1 O
F. ...~
3 «a
3.“ a
e C
.v u
3 .C
A; e

r” .1
.1 kn
O C
3.3

: +‘
is .lCS,

..L.
onstructed

assumed.

ta
'8

rd s

'nda

9

Q‘-

o’
L

St

L

'D‘

-
a

-a-
h—r
n

a

4.
yer“

«i
.s.

4...!

... .u

«D
G,

+ u
.1
.1

 

OQQCNW
t:[€ _
Computer Center kUniversity Cor/ems. Oregon 97331 (503) 754.2494

 

 

 

December 11, 1375

4 r.id. Edward 3r~an
Housing
Oregon State University

Gear mr. dryan:
Your recent resuest for computer time for unsponsored

research has been reviewed and approved. fie are pleased
to inform you of the following award:

name: M. dward Sryan

Student name: ----

Date of request: doventer 10, 1575

Title of project: Satisfaction/Achievement Correlation
Amount approved: $500.00

if you will contact GaYle, HCC l40, she will arrange a
job number for t i

it will oe your responsibility to
ane tapes charged to your job number
1'. IS conole C80.

Please note t 3
cancel all file
when this proje

we look forward to serving you at the Computer Center,
and trust you will let us know if we may be of further
help.

Yours ver/ truly,

afar/lei Q .x/«wé'i

I

Larr/ u. r.unter
Director

cc: Dr. aoy A. Young
Gayle Zandofsky

—_.——

Submit two copies

Oregon State University Computer Center

REQUEST FOR SUPPORT OF COMPUTING SERVICES
FOR UNSPONSORED RESEARCH

Please type or print.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

or.
Name ( Mr. ) Tl. Eiwar-i Egan Date September 21, 19'”:-
Ms. fac culty
Name Department'x: :c ~,$. “5‘
Student or second faculty member
Funds Requested S ”S: C NOTE: This figure should not include data
preparation such as keypunching.
Title of Project f'i'isf‘aetion/Achievement Correlation
Is this research otherwise funded? X No Yes (indicate source)
Has the Computer Center been consulted in preparation of estimate? Yes
If yes, give name of consultant imws cxvsanlfnemwcradwd
Current unsponscred research job number this grant is to placed under, if
any '3?l7’3RYA . Previous funds granted $ SILCO ,
A I, ’46" I"
/ g ‘7" 1‘5" / ..l-r
. /’/fi'pf ;.,{ /a;/’
Signed ’. - -" :.- .(Muc-‘r’r '14:..."w-“r-
Major Professor?
Signe‘
T3) student or ( ) second faculty member
If reques: is on be ehal of a student it must be signed by both student and
major professor.
A brief description of the project (two cepie es, typed or printed) should
accompany this request. This should include the aim and scope of the pr j-
ect, is well as an outline of computational services needed in sufficient
detail so that an accurate estimate of computer time can be made
Studerts Should stzte if this is for thesis work, and if so, for which
degree. (M.S., Ph.D., etc.)
Faculty mrroor* who are applying for support of their own research should
state if .esearch is expected to lead to publication or to proposals
for fundec grants. Faculty who have received previous unsponsored research
support shoul state if the research led to published articles. grants
from Other agencies, or other significant results.

N

\Vf"?
HeXL

I;

”v"

F“
a..u( '.

h

)

n

J

IF‘

('VH ‘y
"ql

ER ‘

r1"

K

0MP

n
‘4

OGU

e
.3
e T
.r.“ c
l . a 4 Pu . .
1; ..i. a .0 no
.1 C a... e U. o. .i
.. m... h 3 . u 3 T .F. 3
,TV 4.4 n1 U: m
S .1. S .1 u
+b 9 W is .0 a. S i. ii.»
.n .n 0 @ a .t r o
0b i. v .Q n A fl «.0 h o..lU
.1 e D. C O t
e S T. T. . C 8
mm a a m Au 9 .d t
D. a .b r .d n a
1 a .14 i mu a 8 am :1.
. .. i C . Eu 3. .T. r
,G e .1 0 no 3 n p
e W i u 3 co 8 l .i C
.4 n S in m.” 3; r
a S a .1 6% ..J t C.
u e on; n f. To a
3 e r S O a. r
l .i 8 . .4 +. o. n
3 C. .G 3 “ii a .1
C m S e e B .1. u
94 n in Pi. T T“ .1 n
e s O o a C n. a _ a u .wii 0.
.C .l n D. .3 a... n. o. . i
e 3 3 .1 s. i e l. S
.i h S .1 C e r ..i .. . a ..i
s i T; on S .1 .C o a u r t
.1 T 8 .4. D. n w. a . r
V. ni. c: e n «i a . C. i i a
ow... a. V; a «1‘ AH, 3L fl.
Cd “A ~wz Is A ‘ML 5.) «xx .1“ tie
al‘ 8 e Ov w .V . .l. .ar‘ .
e +. nU F P 1 .i. .3 a
d E N .. a S 1 .G t 9.. m
O .1; «C ”i n ..i. n3 T
r... O a. S O W e on ”b
3. PL 3. .u .1 n f. .1 3
n O U ..u u... : i a.
O c . DJ 8 9.. 3 . i d n
.1 O .i i) m .u .i .2 C. O a
S a . e .- 9. . . W.” .L
S F t i i a P C. r . . . 3 ii
0.. e O 3 .1. 0 r. A s as .. i . i.
n. .D f. u C. C .5. . i 8
Eu m G. _ e“ 7. ”J .5 w
m . A t J o. .3 ..u w i .1
hi” “i. ”1.4 w. . 4 . h. . u
A C 3 ,J D . .ii. ,1
.3 e . a u 3 n . . . ..L a.
e .n o. . .1 .3 3 to 3
0.4 cl. nu 1L .P“ W! "L w . Pu . .v
.n ri : t a r on i _ a e . i 2
g m a; a S i i n. . i n.
.1 m .1 a i F S e L n, .1 T
e F 3 c: n T. . , l W . J
W sci a C . 3 ,..._
L n. S . i .1 a, . i in .. P...
.1. 4.. . n... . z 3 a 3 ‘L n.
o. e 3 r. a 4. n ..u .
d i u .3 C O a“ V 2 . S C
”A 5. o . ‘4 ca; H as .1 no 1A 6.. .J
mi . s C. 4.. +. n 9.. n. ..i
F. 44 . .fl‘ J; he .. i r... . J . .
.Q s O E .3 U. E. .3 ..i a... a. :i
e 3 .. :u r 4. .. u an .
.

file a M” ow O... I A r1 0. ‘ “I.

7‘
A

ow

.i. C 9
E. . ..u D. i. i ..i 3
.1 3 mb 3 O. .s S
e a .

n“

“I
a
4
Va‘
0
a
c-
&
‘-
4.1.
D

i C a. .l
o. G

'N
u
’3
v A
-
fl
‘1
.
C
v
v\
s"
o
7‘,
h

regon State Uh

I“
l

\4

J

I

'J

‘

ugh
~._I‘-

F
’J q

 

F W

Otegon
, te
Semester Center kL/l"ll\.'€|’Slt)Q Corvallis. Oregon 9.7331 (503» 73-2494

 

 

 

October 4, 1976

Mr. M. Edward Bryan
Student Housing
Oregon State University

Dear Mr. Bryan:
We have your request for additional computer time, and

are pleased to notify you of the following action by the
committee on unsponsored research:

Amount of award $750.30

Job number: 73813?

Name: H. Edward Bryan

Stude name: ----

Date of rejueSt: Septenber El, 19'6

Title of project; Satisfaction/Achievement Correlation

You are urged to avail yourself of discount rates on com-
puting don dur a second and third shift hours at the

Computer c:n ter-—everhirgs, nights and week-ends.

As you are aware, responsibility for cancelling files and
tapes upon completion of the projc.ct rests with you.
Gayle, -ICC 140, 'ill be glad to add time to your job
number when you present this letter.

Please let us know if we may be of further assistance.

Yours very truly,

cc: Dr. John V. Bvrne
Sayre Zandof 3}

ECEIVED DC? 5 23:25

03"."

-‘
‘1‘.

'2“
-he Rela

tn

3
.1.
L w

:4

119

CS

'. fill.
\ .
AV‘I—

1"."
4.--”)-

u\.-‘-fi fir I
~ 1

r‘ "Vj.
:3:-ntan

C.

I.

of performance

:38

e
H.“
n .

.a‘
no
0.
r
n

.l
t
«v

a. .

.\.

.-o

S

V

v

o controversv.

4.
'v

'ect

ubg

1.

3
.v
S
o. A

need

8

p
.l

onsn

...
+U

QC
r

a:

I.”
w.

.. v
QC
3

3
o‘l‘

.3.

.5.
W

n

.a.

O
‘9‘!
Lang
..

.. J-
C'Jts v NC

to

It

r.

.1.

vb

not

t8

xober

“

l?55).

0 ‘ I.
SJ'S 49m

4-' 4-
dna V

n

o
1

n

it

W

in-

determ

.5
i0?

n

.l

LtJ

o.
3
.7.

4‘

Lawler

.d

\‘l/
3..
..D
A7
a;

A:

3
+v
r

\J

C
3..

I \

ta to

or da

L v
S

e
fv

9
~%

9“

U .

crter and

:.

{\
n

:1
.3
my

D.

3
.1

'3
A

rmacho
fi-ll 5A'v\4

rfo

“‘3
'UV

~%
3
.1

authO‘e

a:

O

.l

0“

found "t

They

‘

measured.

was

ty

0
u‘
‘

oroductiv

t-

was 3880013

orale

m

h“
0b

'1‘

many

1n

O

8

ion

ey concluded

H

*-
U

CW

1.
a.
e

r0

4-' +-
bna v

'on

‘
. y“ .
~ 0 Q ~

0
‘

\-.l

sugaested on

.3
o...
8

.1”;
Q.
.1

.1.

as
n a.

,
no

r
e
D.
co

.1

outstand

1-.

te

er authors sta

A s
‘. ‘fi
\- Us.

imorove

may

needs.
action

0

their rewards merely

ion 0
-ng

‘

a
‘
0
5

act
max

A
O

satis-
-nates

eater
subord‘

-I
'3-
O:

mance

vs

0

4."
-

fl
’
.‘

ONO

+v
c
:2

g

.1

o‘a‘

ne

Q

-
'v

from

\’

’hJ
Q,
l

C.

S

.‘IU

e
‘U

in

ionsh

the relat

of

o.L

.3.

e
K
C

..“

no
A...
A5

:5
C
r
C;

d .
1. 3
0 Z
”3....
O. «I. l
h a e a
t d u
S .1 t
«Y; i. w D.
O 9
r w 3
V. e O n
C k n O
a r C
n. O S
C. W .1. r
e a
d Vvo O.
a “up. “7‘ .IL
n C. 9 C
.l a Uh
.n r. C
9 O n
h e w
T. .C ..
I e .3
k.” ¢ .1 e
a. :— 7.
U G t .L
O .3 C n
.3... n4 E.
t i d C
a... C C C
..u r r a.
n ‘3 a...

w. a...

Q

8
C

+ .4
E

-
110v

Locke says,

action.

“

is

‘

V

sat

7“ -

o‘-

w

A

711218.

deter

ions attained or

+
8.0»

+-
V

4

a

mu.

‘2
u

one'

0..
a

J:
E
,8

n5

..v

.. v
C

~L
n...
c.
r.

it

change

01"

action

4"

CO‘JI‘SQ 0;

thus

Q

831C.

r.
D

e

.1

'al'

V
V

e's
one's

n
to
.4

in o

0.

01*

.4
6.

9‘

C

l
6

0d

.1.

w

.T.
a
h

o J

S

r
E
«D
S

OIL

7..
9
d

r
.‘.e

e
n .

.C

reward

the

('1
.0.
O
I‘
U)
‘3'
U:
'U
(I)
'1
D0
3
1
.4
P
E
(D
U
1
w
0
O
ij
H
.1
U)
.3
(I)
cf
1
t
H
F-‘
.1
:3
Dr)
'3
O
(5
D 4
”J

L' ' ‘ ' ; z : 9" . ‘ g . 1 r q .
.ne intrinsic and extrinsic reward ne IQCGIJeS :rom im-

proved performance are perceived as eq*n table, then

I o,
H,
(0
H
(D
{J
O
(D

satisfaction will result. Sati sfacticn is the di-

a

a)

"S
t

l.
{J

between perceived equitaoie and actual rewards (i
meister, 1971). Cn this model Sutermeister applied the
concept of a series of cycles varying with each indilidual.

or the individual wnen the reward

O
O
:3
O
(b
('1
\+
L
t
(D
'1
i
(D
H
1
c f
(D
1
y J
A)
\J
}.J
V
)9
t i.
L1
(D
(I.
d
_)
I}
{.3
W
J
k J
H.
b o
(D
O
“C
O
..l
(9

There is little evidence. however, that the Porter—

lawler model Wltd the outerzeister refine me ts has

:1

. A

’1
U)

satisfied the theorists or allayed the controve

(

recent research study done by Janos 'n 197% with small

{0

group (80) of tel epnore operators {women} caused the author
to conclude "tnat perform nce causes intrinsic satisfaction

3

h
J

I;

.).

. causes performance (NanOS. 19

F).

and extrinsic satis fact

'—

m spawns
wzoom oqeoe

La... Rn .omrkrogrfilieil -- 1.11

an

9
O
O
O
.0 .
Q
. O
O
o
0
o 00
o o o o
b
0 Q o
o o 000 00
6
O
O O
o o
O O
00 o 00‘-.- o O O
O
O 0 0 be. 0
O
0 o 0 O
.
o o a. .~
. .0. .
0.0 O O o 00‘
00 I o
o o o o o
o o 090 o o O o. o. o
o o o o
o o o o .0 o w
0 o .9 o. 0
o . O o
09 o o o u
o o O o o
- O U n N O o
o O
O o 000 o O
O o I
0.. O
O 0
o o o o o, 0.000 O
O 0 o O o .0 O.
O. O .0 t. O O .0 "O 0....
O
00 ' I O
o 0 o 9 9’ I. O o
. O O O O O
o o
0000 00‘ O O
.
. . . .. . .
O 0 . o O o C
O o o. O O
O I I O o.
O O O
0.0 O o \ O o.
o o o o o.
O O 0 o 0 o O
00
o o o o“ O o
o o o
o o o O
0
O O
. . . s O
o
o 0 o O O O
o
. .
O O
'0 o 0 0'0 9 .0 0 -

0:.—

.\

2m:

Ml. cm“ is? on owl: 3 cm a-

co."

7 cod

wow.”

 

l
3

a)
«IL

.0

.3

c mpsmflm
onecmZmdzoo I 2m:

- rr ofl an »

T J

O O
0
o
0 o o o
O
o o
O
O
. .
o o o o
o O 0
. O
o o o
o o o o
O .
.
9 o
9 00
.

oo 00 0.00 o o
00 O .0. 9
o o O

u. o o
o Ono o
0. .
..-
o .o o o0 o oo
o w o o o
o
o no .00 o 00 6 9
O I
n O 0.. . .
O O
o“ o o O o
o o.
00 00 O
o 00. .00 o
O 0- .0 O
o. o o
O 00 O
O .
O
o
o O o o
no 0 “a 99
o
0.09 0.0000 0 O
O O
9 0-0. .. D 0 Q
.00 o
0 on o 00 a
o
0 o o no
0 O O . O O
.
9. cm 00 o
.0 O
c o o o.
0 on o o
O
o... 0
“.O . O Q
o o
.
o
9 M O
. . O
.
o o
o o
o. 000 00 .0 o. O

Y oo.N

no .fl

 

WBBL

UdO

12%

2. - 3 r am

0'? T,

m mnzmfla
ZOHFHZOOOMK

I 2w:

 

ow

 

l d ‘ 1 ‘1 4 J J 1 4
A
O
o o g
Yam.
0
9 t
090 6 o 5.00.“
o
o 0 v
0
9
o
w \l.
. .0 6.0“
o C o O
o
u . o o
o .0
o o o
O
o o o
o o
o o o 9 00000000 00 o AwOO.N
to o o oo o. o
0 o o O
o o
o 9 O o O v
o o.
o .00.... o o o. o
O u 0 o o
0 0 o “0 O
o 0 o. o 90. o o. o o o L .J
.0 O o O 0
On m o o o 00"
o .0. o
”to. 0
o o o o 0
o
o to o w Oonoooo. O
o
O to 9 0 v
o o o
o 0. on. o.
o. o o 900 n o. 0.0 fl.
0 00000000090000. 0 Accon
o o o
o o o no one. u o o o
o O o 00
O O
.
Q ” O O O .‘ O.
o o o o v
. . ..m .. . ..
o o o o
o o 9 o
00000 090 o
00 0 .0 o. 0 0
o o 00 .
o o o v
o o no. . LOW”
O o o
. n .
. o
o o o
o o o o
o o o O O O
o
o o
.o .—
o o. o 009 o co... 0 .o o rOO.V

i

N83

6d?)

125

13w

L.“

J

n

O
o
O
.
O O.
. d
0 O
o
0 O
O
0 0
O 0 o 0 o
o o
o
o .0 o o
O. O.
. .
o o
9.0 9
O
0 o
o o
0 O O.
O I 00 o.
o
o o 0
0‘. o o
o o
0 0. o 06
0 o
0. so ‘0
o own.“ .9
.0 \o'ooOO
0 90
O O Q ’ O
- "O o
o.
t
00
’0
O .. .O...‘
O O '- .
o 0. 000’
O
O O
o o o
O. o o .
O o
O o r 00 o
o
o o o
O .
.0 -
o o
o o o
o o
\o o o. o
o o o o
o 00 00 o
o o o
o .
o
90
O 0 O
. O O. O 0‘.

whom“
mmoom QFOH

on can emu can Emitmmmli a? QELfiItlomd cm“ on em on am no

..N

ZmZOE

t ooz—

e on;

toflN

 

 

 

 

 

 

O
6
o o
i
O
O
o o
o O
o 0 ND
09 9 O
0 O
o o
9 o 9 o
0 o 9 p
o O O 000 O
00 o
o o
o ’ 0
oo 00 o 0 kn
O O o O o o o. 00
O O o 00.
O 00 o 00 o. o o o C 0 9 o .
o 0 o O 09 O o O... o 00
0 00-0 0 o O O 9 D
O 0 fi -000 O Q 0 O
O O o 00. .0 o 00. O 0 O
o to. 00 oo- o 0 on. to O O
O on. 0 G. O 0 Q. .0000... o O 0 O
O 00.0 o 0 o o o 009 00 O .9 w
o o o O o. I 0.90. a .0 009 o o O
o o -9 O o . o o o o O o O 0
0 O O 0.. 9.. O O O O O
O 00 O 00 .9 9 O O O O O
o o o o o o o o. L
O o o. o o 9 o 90 o o p
O O O O O
9 0 o o O
o 9 o o o O Q 9 0 O
0 O O 0 0 o o '1
O O 0 Q 0
0 O. O 9
O O 00 9 O
0 v
90 O o o y
0 O
0 9
. O
4
O
y
o
o
«8
p
L A A ‘_ 4 L A. o
t ' e ' ' ' n g g t 5 o
3. 4? 3 0 0. no 3 ‘2
v n n N N .4 A

Edda

COMPENSRTION

Figure 9

NOMEN

.0

ca wpzmwm
ZOCHzooomm I Zmzoz

owl {Lr up I

1“ ‘ W

J»
4
4

0
O
0
O.
9
o
. O
0 O 0 00
O
O
O O
o.
O o
o o o
o. . .
o O o
o o
O. O 090 o O
O o
.O
o
0 o o. 90 0n 0 O o
o o O O o
00 no 9 oo 0
O b o
.. 0 ‘. 0 .
O O on. O O O
O O
000 o o o
O
OH 0’ Q O
u .. o
9 O 00 o. o
O om. O. 09090 0
n 00”. no 0
00
~ No.0 0
O o O
.9. .0 0.. .
O 00 v o
o O 90 .0000. 00... o
0. O O O 9
O O
o. o .0 "o... o o
O 0
o o. oo o
a o O O 0 no
o 9.0 9 o
o no
90 o 0 000 O O
O O O
O o 0 O .9
C 9
an. o o .00 o
o o o o o o
. ..O . O 0.
00 0 0 O
o
O
o o
0 o
o o O
O. O .0 9 O O .0 0

ion.

6 no."

.c an."

e 8.~

g7 an...“

t no."

t and

 

r oo.v

N83-

UdO

l28

as stems:
wmoom JCPOF
tiown own 03113..“ emu saw emu Icon

0
0
.
S
o
9
00
O
O O
O
.
O
0 000 o
o o o
-0 O O
o o o 90
. O
O '0 O
O o
9. 0 o o
..z.
.
00
o o
O O
o o 0
o
0 O o O
o
“9..." o
-00 00.0096
0 O o
09 0
00’” 00
000....
O. 9..
.0 .
O O Q
00
000 o
O 0
I.
O
00
o o
O
O O O
O
90 O

«

ZmZIme

is.

ow.” o

 

h.
«

 

iv on.

At 84

l on.“

 

.r 8%

l
3

UdO WE

\1

b’ 04 r1
m P' c> u) (n

\J

r;

\n

..J

0\

Scattergram

Scattergram

Scattergram
Scattergram

Jcattergram

O

H)

O

PEENDIX F

Aen - Total scores

men Compensation Scale Scores
Men - Recognition scale Scores
women - Total scores

Women Compensation Scale Scores

Nomen

Recognition Scale Scores
Freshmen - Tetal Scores
sophomores - Total Scores
Juniors — Total Scores

seniors - Total Scores

Positive U.k.A. uifference -

. Difference -

:1,

Negative 6.9.

 

O.

O
o
o
o
o o
o 90
O
o
O
O
o
0 00.000
0. o
o
O U
o
o o o
O o o
O o 0
.
O o
.
0 o
O O
\ o 0
00M .00
9
‘0 O. O
l o.
' 000
O on O
O a"... 099
.09 060':
0 o
O 0
o
o o o
000 o o
o S
o
o .90
Q .
oo o oo
0 o o
o o 00
o C
o o
O o
0 O
O. O .
00 o o 9‘
CO.
0
O
O. to

ma magma;
mmoom JCHOF

:.mmzozozdom
can. own own Ba aww can emu mlimmrlmm: and £3 a «If 31:? bmalelow om Po

4 on.

#7 0.94

.v co.N

ASKS

 

l
J.

Wei

HdO

130

m. museum

mmoom JGkOH I mmOHZDU

own own 3” SN emu ohiN

am“ am“ an 64““ ON a 9.“.— 8— 3 3 on 0N a >

 

- u u 4 q 4
e3
v .84
. . :3;
o o
o
o. o oo o o L.8.N
o
o
O o
o
o v o
o
o o
o .
o o $8M
o o
o
. t. .
o
no t
o
’0
o o
o o
o 0 Co. .0 .8.“
o. o .0
oo o v o
o 9'
o no
0 o
o
o o
o o
o o 0 .3.”
o o
. .v .o
o
o
s
s c
o o

 

NBBL

Ude

131

can

own

one“

awu

wmoom

awn

OWN

 

43M0mm2muwm22mm

Si“

2:

on:

OW—

.m

8“

Au 8.—

8.N

l 3.8

v 8.0

 

UdO WBEL

ma mpsmwm
mmoom 4690» I uuHQ qdo m>HFHmOQ
LmifilsewL m. owwiwwipmmII... “lieuilmmt o FLEIIIanIIaIrBIIIfiIIWILa

l. on.“

2 .v 8.
a) N
l

.0

a 00$

0 o 0 lv 3.“

 

W63;

*ddO

133

 

8n

ea muzmw
mmoom JQFOk I uuHo

,fido w>HH¢o

ow. owl“ am 9%

m2
.3

 

can

 

mW

1

s¢~ saw gnu omm sou om.

.. 84

. on:—

 

. 8"

WEBl

UdS