#1“ A....

 

AN IDENTIFICATION OF CERTAIN SIMILARITIES AND
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SUCCESSFUL AND

UNSUCCESSFUL comm: LEVEL BEGINNING SHORTHAND _‘ I ‘

STUDENTS AND TRANSCRIPTION STUDENTS

Thesis far the Degree of Ph. .D.
' MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
L MICHAEL MOSKOVIS
1967

 

 

 

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I‘IIIIIIIIIIIIII .. um R v-

3 1293 10569 0386

Michigan Stab
' University

 

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

An Identification of Certain Similarities and Differences
Between Successful and Unsuccessful College Level
Beginning Shorthand Students and Transcription Students

presented by

L. Michael Moskovis

has been accepted towards fulfillment I
of the requirements for I

M degree in
Distributive Teacher Education

Business and

Major professor

Date October I4, 1967

 

0-169

 

ABSTRACT

AN IDENTIFICATION OF CERTAIN SEMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES
BETWEEN SUCCESSFUL AND UNSUCCESSFUL COLLEGE LEVEL
BEGINNING SHORTHAND STUDENTS AND TRANSCRIPTION STUDENTS

by L. Michael Moskovis

Body of Abstract

The problem was to identify the similarities or differences on
selected variables that may exist between successful and unsuccessful
college level beginning shorthand students and successful and unsuccess-
ful college level transcription students.

Seven public-supported Michigan institutions participated in
this study. These included: three junior colleges, one four-year
college, and three universities.

The subjects were female students enrolled in nine beginning
shorthand classes and nine transcription classes during the winter
and spring school terms of 1967.

Students who received a grade of A or B were classified as
successful; students who received a grade of D or B were classified as
unsuccessful. A total of 82 successful and 61 unsuccessful beginning
shorthand students were identified; a total of 67 successful and 64

unsuccessful transcription students were identified.

2
L. Michael Moskovis

Data were obtained through five standardized tests (California
Psychological Inventory cg;5 Brown-Holtzman Survey of Study Habits and
Attitudes §§§§5 Minnesota Clerical Test ggg; Watson-Glaser Critical
Thinking Appraisal CIA; Wellesley Spelling Scale fl§§), skill achieve-
ment tests, student questionnaires, and institution records.

Three statistical techniques were used to test the significance
of any differences that were identified between the successful and un-
successful students. The Student's g-test and the point-biserial
correlation technique were used to analyze the continuous variables;
the chi-square technique was used to analyze the discrete variables.

The successful and unsuccessful college level beginning shorthand
students were found significantly different at the levels indicated by
category or mean score in:

1. college major (.01)

2. college English composition grade (.001)

3. name checking, §§I_(.001)

4. study habits and attitudes, §§§A (.001)

5. spelling ability, Egg (.001)

6. critical thinking, ETA (.001)

7. capacity for status, g2;_(.02)

8. sense of well-being, g2; (.05)

9. responsibility, g2; (.001)

10. socialization, Q2; (.02)

ll. communality, 92; (.01)

12. self-control, Q2; (.05)

u 13. achievement via conformance, CPI (.001)

3
L. Michael Moskovis

14. achievement via independence, Q2; (.05)

15. intellectual efficiency, 93; (.01)

16. psychological-mindedness, £2; (.02)

17. grade-point average (.001)

18. shorthand theory (.001)

19. shorthand brief forms (.001)
20. shorthand reading (.001)

No significant differences were found between the successful
and unsuccessful college level beginning shorthand students at the
.05 level by category or mean score in:

1. year in college

2. number of weeks of previous shorthand instruction

3. number checking, £91

4. dominance, 92;

5. sociability, g2;

6. social presence, PI

7. self-acceptance, CPI

8. tolerance, Q2;

9. good impression, PI

10. flexibility, 92;
11. femininity, 92;.

The successful and unsuccessful college level transcription
students were found significantly different at the levels indicated
by category or mean score in:

1. college major (.01)

2. number of weeks of previous shorthand instruction (.01)

No

4
L. Michael Moskovis

college English composition grade (.01)
transcription achievement at 80, 100, and 120 wam (.001)
spelling ability, E§§ (.001)
critical thinking, Q§§,(.Ol)
grade-point average (.001)
typewriting accuracy (.05)

typewriting speed (.001)

significant differences were found between the successful

and unsuccessful college level transcription students at the .05

level by categogy or mean score in:

1.

10.

ll.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

year in college
place of previous shorthand instruction
number of weeks of previous typewriting instruction

number of weeks of office work experience involving the
use of a typewriter

transcription achievement at 60 wam
number checking, fl

name checking, fl

study habits and attitudes, §§__.
dominance, Q2;

capacity for status, Q§L_
sociability, 92;

social presence, 92;
self-acceptance, g3;

sense of well-being, g2;
responsibility, CPI

socialization, CPI

5
L. Michael Moskovis
17. self-control, CPI

18. tolerance, Q2;

19. good impression, _C_l_’_I_

20. communality, QB;

21. achievement via conformance, CE;
22. achievement via independence, 9;;
23. intellectual efficiency, 93;

24. psychological-mindedness, g2;

25. flexibility, 92;

26. femininity, Q2;

A number of significant differences were identified between
the successful and unsuccessful college level beginning shorthand
students as related to the variables employed in this study.

There were few significant differences between the college
level successful and unsuccessful transcription students. With a
few exceptions, successful transcription achievement was apparently

based on factors directly related to the transcription process and

classroom achievement.

AN IDENTIFICATION OF CERTAIN SIMILARITIES AND DIFEERENCES
BETWEEN SUCCESSFUL AND UNSUCCESSFUL COLLEGE LEVEL

BEGINNING SHORTHAND STUDENTS AND TRANSCRIPTION STUDENTS

by

D: Michael Moskovis

A THESIS
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
with

Major in Business and Distributive
Teacher Education

1967

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Countless persons made this investigation possible.

I am greatly indebted to the seven participating Michigan
institutions who devoted a considerable amount of class time for
testing and data gathering. Without their complete cooperation,
unhesitatingly and enthusiastically offered, this project could
not have been undertaken.

Sincere appreciation is extended to the members of my doctoral
committee, Dr. Raymond Clark, Dr. Mary Virginia Moore, Dr. Robert
Poland, and Dr. Elaine Uthe, Chairman, for their valuable advice
and interest. I am particularly indebted to Dr. Uthe for her
patient and invaluable counsel throughout this project.

Sincere appreciation is also extended to the staff members
of the Western Michigan University Computer Center and Testing
Bureau for their considerable and patient aid.

Finally, to Dr. Darrell Jones and Dr. Kimon Bournazos,
colleagues and friends, who cajoled, encouraged, and fed an often

disgruntled researcher, sincere thanks is humbly offered.

LMM

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

LISTOFTAIBLES...................

Chapter
I INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Statement of the Problem
Significance of the Study . . . . . . . .
Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Scope of the Study
Delimitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . .
Organization of the Study . . . . . . . .
II RELATED LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Studies Dealing with Multiple Research
Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Studies Examining the Relationship Between
Published Shorthand Aptitude Tests and
Shorthand Achievement . . . . . . . .
Studies Examining the Relationship Betwen
Skill Achievement and Shorthand Success
Studies Comparing Shorthand D opouts with
Non-dropouts . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Studies Comparing Grades in Various Courses
and Shorthand Achievement . . . . . . .
Studies Dealing with Other Factors . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
III THE SOURCES OF DATA, INSTRUMENTATION, AND

METHODOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Sources of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Nature of the Data Collected . . . . . .
The Standardized Test Battery . .
The Classroom Achievement Tests .
Personal Student Data . . . . . . . .

iii

H

mm\JO‘O\O‘D)UJ

,4
V

11

19
22
25
29

34
38

Table of Contents (Continued)

Chapter Page
Summary of Variables by Class . . . . . . . 58
Statistical Procedures and Hypotheses

Tested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

IV ANALYSIS OF THE SUCCESSFUL AND UNSUCCESSFUL
COLLEGE LEVEL BEGINNING SHORTHAND STUDENTS . . . 67
Discrete Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Continuous Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Point-Biserial Correlation . . . . . . . . . 83
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

V ANALYSIS OF THE SUCCESSFUL AND UNSUCCESSFUL
COLLEGE LEVEL TRANSCRIPTION STUDENTS . . . . . . 88
Discrete Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Continuous Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Point-Biserial Correlation . . . . . . . . . 107
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .’. . . . 109

VI ANALYSIS OF THE SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES

OF THE SUCCESSFUL AND UNSUCCESSFUL COLLEGE
LEVEL BEGINNING SHORTHAND AND TRANSCRIPTION
STUDENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112

Continuous Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
Discrete Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
VII SUMMARY, FINDINGS. AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . 118
Summary of the Problem and Procedures . . . . 118
The College Level Beginning Shorthand
Students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
Implications for Guidance Counselors
and Business Education Teachers . . . . . . 122

The College Level Transcription Students . . 127

Implications for Guidance Counselors
and Business Education Teachers . . . . . . 129
Recommendations for Further Study . . . . . . 135
APPENDIX A 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O 1 3 7
APPENDIX B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
APPENDIX C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
APPENDIX D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152

iv

Chapter

APPENDIX
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
APPENDIX

APPENDIX

BIBLIOGRAPHY .

M .

N 0

Table of

Contents (Continued)

Page
157
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
170

181

Table

10

11

LIST OF TABLES

Class Enrollment of Participating Institutions

Beginning Shorthand Subjects by Type of
Institution . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Transcription Subjects by Type of Institution .

Number and Percentage of the Successful and
Unsuccessful College Level Beginning Shorthand
Students by College Major . . . . .

Number and Percentage of the Successful and
Unsuccessful College Level Beginning Shorthand
Students by Year in College . . . . . . . .

Number and Percentage of the Successful and
Unsuccessful College Level Beginning Shorthand
Students by Number of Weeks of Previous
Shorthand Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number and Percentage of the Successful and
Unsuccessful College Level Beginning Shorthand
Students by College English Composition Grade

‘g-test Analysis of the Differences Between the

Means of the Successful and Unsuccessful College

Level Beginning Shorthand Students and Nine
Continuous Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . .

g-test Analysis of the Differences Between the

Means of the Successful and Unsuccessful College

Level Beginning Shorthand Students on the

Eighteen Scales of the California Psychological

Scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Point-Biserial Correlations Between the Successful

and Unsuccessful College Level Beginning
Shorthand Students . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number and Percentage of the Successful and
Unsuccessful College Level Transcription

Students by College Major . . . . . . . . . .

vi

Page

41

42

42

69

7O

71

73

79

84

9O

Table

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

List of Tables (Continued)

Number and Percentage of the Successful and
Unsuccessful College Level Transcription
Students by Year in College . . . . . . .

Number and Percentage of the Successful and
Unsuccessful College Level Transcription
Students by Number of Weeks of Previous
Shorthand Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number and Percentage of the Successful and
Unsuccessful College Level Transcription
Students by Place of Previous Shorthand
Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number and Percentage of the Successful and
Unsuccessful College Level Transcription
Students by Number of Weeks of Previous
Typewriting Instruction . . . . . . . . . . .

Number and Percentage of the Successful and
Unsuccessful College Level Transcription
Students by Office Work Experience Involving
the Use of a Typewriter . . . . . . . . . . .

Number and Percentage of the Successful and
Unsuccessful College Level Transcription
Students and Office Work Experience by
Hours Involving the Use of a Typewriter . .

Number and Percentage of the Successful and
Unsuccessful College Level Transcription
Students by College English Composition Grade

Number and Percentage of the Successful and
Unsuccessful College Level Transcription
Students and Transcription Achievement . . . . .

tfitest Analysis of the Differences Between the
Means of the Successful and Unsuccessful College
Level Transcription Students and Eight Continuous
Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

E-test Analysis of the Differences Between the
Means of the Successful and Unsuccessful College
Level Transcription Students on the Eighteen
Scales of the California Psychological Inventory

Page

91

92

93

94

95

96

98

99

101

List of Tables (Continued)

Table Page
22 Point-Biserial Correlations Between the Successful
and Unsuccessful College Level Transcription
StUdentS o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 1f}?
23 A Comparison of the Mean Scores of the Successful

and Unsuccessful Students and Twenty-Four
Variables Employed in the College Level
Beginning Shorthand Classes and Transcription
Classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1—J
u...‘
b

24 A Comparison of the Chi-Squre Results of the
Successful and UnSuccessful Students and Four
Discrete Variables Employed in the College
Level Beginning Shorthand Classes and
Transcription Classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116

viii

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The problem of who should and who should not enroll in shorthand
has concerned business educators for many years.

As early as 1917, Herbert W. Rodgers attempted to prognosticate
shorthand success by administering a series of tests to typewriting
and shorthand students enrolled in the Extension Department at Columbia
University. After analyzing his data, Rodgers expressed the hope that
eventually a series of tests could be found which would yield a better
criterion for vocational guidance and selection.1 By 1947, Louis A.
Leslie stated, "In the past thirty years, there have been something
like a hundred recorded attempts to set up a prognostic test for
shorthand, all of which have proved failures."2

Since that time, more research has been conducted in developing
or determining methods of prognosticating shorthand learning success.
In spite of many and varied investigations, however, the problem of
high failures, high drop-out rates, and low achievement continues to
plague shorthand teachers and guidance counselors.

Research indicates that the percentage of students who drOp

shorthand is high, ranging from 18 to 29 percent of the total beginning

 

1Rodgers, Herbert W., "Psychological Tests for Stenographers and
Typists," Journal of Applied Psychology, I (January, 1917), 268-74.

2Leslie, Louis A., "A Suggested Prognostic Test for Shorthand,"
American Business Education, IV (December, 1947), 91.

 

1

2
enrollment. Moreover, the percentage of students who fail shorthand is
reported to be even higher--with the estimated Failure rate to he as
high as 50 percent.3

An additional problem now facing business educators is the amount
of time required to train proficient office workers. This problem
promises to become more pressing as instructional time and place con-
tinue to be evaluated in view of the growing knowledge explosion and
the apparent need for more adequate preparation in the liberal arts.4'5
Yet, the inadequacy of many vocationally-trained students is all too
apparent--in spite of considerable and costly instructional effort and
time.6 In addition, such intangible factors as human frustration and
vocational delay and disappointment cannot be estimated.

Many persons believe that the duties of the secretary-stenographer,
while now generally consistent with those of the past, will become
more demanding in administrative and leadership responsibilities.7
Thus, it becomes urgent for business educators, particularly those
preparing students who anticipate careers in business education or
executive secretarial positions, to re-examine their selection pro-

cedures and to identify those areas of instruction that deserve Special

attention or emphasis.

 

3Frink, Inez, "A Comprehensive Analysis and Synthesis of Research
and Thought Pertaining to Shorthand and Transcription 1946-1957"
(unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, 1961), pp. 168-98.

4Douglas, Lloyd V., Business Educatigg (Washington, D. C.:
Center for Applied Research in Education, Inc., 1963), p. 92.

 

5Eyster, Elvin S., "The Case for Secretarial Education in
Colleges," Journal of Business Education, XXXIX (November, 1963), 48-50.

6Frink,pgp. cit., 196.
7Reynolds, Helen, "Shorthand and Transcription Now and In the

1970's,” Business Education Now and In the 1970's, Business Education
Association of MetrOpolitan New York, 1963-1964 Yearbook, p. 119.

 

Essence t of. Lbsireblsm

This study will attempt to identify certain significant similar?-
ties and differences in successful and unsuccessful vollege level be-
ginning shorthand students and successful and unsuccessful collece
level transcription students.?

The subjects of this study will be analyzed in terms of:

l. certain psychological characteristics

2. clerical speed and comprehension

3. critical thinking

4. spelling ability

5. study habits and attitudes

6. number of weeks of previous shorthand and typewriting
instruction

7. place of previous shorthand training
9. college major

9. college grade-point average

10. year in college

11. number of hours of office work experience involving the use
of a typewriter

12. college English composition grade

13. skill achievement at the two instructional levels

Significance of the_§£udy

....o..1.__...

 

The purpose of this study is to identify the similarities and

differences that exist between successful and unsuccessful college

 

8While certain variables were administered in both the beginning
shorthand classes and the transcription classes, other variables were
obtained at one instructional level but not the other. These variables
are summarized by instructional level on pages

level beginning shorthand students and successful and unsuccessful
college level transcription students.

Knowledge of the differences or similarities that exist between
these two achievement groups should provide data helpful in providing
information that may result in more enlightened course and occupational
planning.

Arnstein reports that:

Secretaries and typists increased by 70 percent in the
1950's alone--more than three times as fast as all
other employees. Furthermore, the first annual Man;
pgygrwheport of the Egegigent indicated that shortage

of stenographers and other well-trained office workers
with typing skills will persist for some time.9

 

with an increasing emphasis on academic subjects and the critical
demand for well-trained secretary-stenographers, it is crucial that
business educators search for more efficient methods of guiding stu-
dents in the selection of appropriate vocational programs.

A secondary purpose of this investigation is to provide data that
may be useful in identifying prognostic factors.

In terms of enrollment, shorthand continues to remain among the
top three business subjects offered in high school and collegiate
departments of business education.10

Research indicates, however, that the achievement of students
completing stenographic programs is low. Of the students completing

one-year high school programs, approximately ll to 20 percent were

 

9Arnstein, George E., "The Impact of Automation on Occupational
Patterns,” ggcggt_§nghfrojected Developments AffECfi193_Busiflsegufifiyfa;
tion, National Business Education Yearbook, 1964, p. 46.

 

10Tonne, Herbert A., Popham, Estelle L., Freeman, M. Herbert,
Egghods‘gf Teaqhing Bugin§s§w§pbjects (New York: Gregg Division,
‘McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1965), p. 3.

reported capable'of producing vocationally acceptable transcripts; of
the students completing two-year high school stenographic programs,
less than 50 percent were reported capable of producing vocationally
acceptable transcripts dictated at 80 words a minute. Moreover, less
than 50 percent of the high school students and b5 percent of the
college students taking the National Business Entrance Tests in 1953
were able to produce mailable transcripts from material dictated at
80 words a minute.11

This investigation will compare the similarities and differences
that may exist between successful and unsuccessful students in the
selected variables at two levels of college shorthand instruction.12

While certain of these variables have been examined in previous
research studies, inconclusive or contradictory evidence indicates the
need for a re-examination of them. The majority of the variables

under investigation, however, have not been analyzed in any known study

relating shorthand success or failure to these variables. Moreover,

 

llFrink, 93. cit., 199.

12The variables employed in this study at both instructional
levels included: college major, year in college, number of weeks of
previous shorthand instruction, number and name checking, study habits
and attitudes, Spelling ability, critical thinking, dominance, capacity
for status, sociability, social presence, self-acceptance, sense of
well-being, responsibility, socialization, self-control, tolerance,
good impression, communality, achievement via conformance, achievement
via independence, intellectual efficiency, psychological-mindedness,
flexibility, femininity, grade-point average, college English composi-
tion grade.

The variables employed at the beginning shorthand instructional
level included: shorthand brief form test, shorthand theory test,
shorthand reading test.

The variables employed at the transcription instructional level
included: number of hours of office work experience involving the use
of a typewriter, place of previous shorthand courses, typing Speed and
accuracy, number of weeks of previous typewriting instruction, and
transcription ability.

the method of statistical analysis is one that has not been used in
any known study relating shorthand achievement to these variables.

Why some students succeed and others fail is a complex problem.
Turse believes that:

If the differences noted among individuals can be
related to differences in test scores, then we

shall have instruments which may make valuable
contributions toward fulfillment of the guidance
ideal of individual job adjustment and satisfaction.13

Hmbsess
The research hypotheses tested in this study will be:

1. There is a difference between successful and unsuccessful
college level beginning shorthand students, as measured

by the variables employed in this study.

{\3

There is a difference between successful and unsuccessful
college level transcription students as measured by the
variables employed in this study.

Sggpe of the Study_

 

Seven public-supported Michigan institutions offering secretarial
or business education programs participated in this study. These
included: three junior colleges, one four-year college, three
universities.

The subjects of this study are those students enrolled in nine
beginning shorthand classes and nine transcription classes enrolling

a total of 431 students during the vinter and Spring terms, 19u7.

Delimitations

 

7. This study will be limited to girls enrolled in the begirning

shorthand classes and transcription classes at the seven participating

 

13 . . . . .
Turse, Paul L., "Prognostic Studies in Business EUUCGClOU,
,§g£;_nal Business Education anrterlv, KKKKV Winter, 1966-1967), 53.

 

14

Michigan two-year and four-yer" colleges and universities.

2. This study is confined to students who receivel a grade of
A, B, D or E according to the standards established by the partici-
pating departments of business education or those of individual
instructors.

3. This study will include only subjects enrolled in the selected
classes during the winter and spring terms of the 1967 academic year.

4. This study will not attempt to predict vocational success or
failure.

5. This study is concerned only with the variables Specifically

selected, although it is recognized that many factors may be instru-

mental in success in any course.

Assumptions

 

The following assumptions are made related to this investigation:

1. That success in beginning shorthand and transcription is
based on a number of identifiable variables.

2. That subjects will respond honestly to all standardized and
clasSroom tests to the best of their ability and perception.

3. That subjects will honestly report all information rcqrested
related to work experience and prior skill training to the best of
their ability and perception.

4. That students participating in this study will have approxi-
mately the same kind and quality of teaching.

5. That participating instructors will administer the classroom

skill tests according to the directions given.

 

14Because of the limited number of male students enrolled in
classes, this investigation is concerned only with the female subjects
selected from the seven participating Michigan institutions.

CO

6. That participating instructors will assign class grades on

the basis of earned achievement.

Definition of Terms

 

1. Beginning Shorthand. The first course in Gregg Shorthand,

 

Diamond Jubilee or Simplified Editions.

2. Transcription. The third semester or equivalent of Crepe

Di.)

 

Shorthand in which typing, shorthand, English, and other skills are
integrated in producing usable copy in a reasonable period of time.

3. College Level. These include two-year junior or community

 

colleges, four-year colleges, universities.

4. Successful Students. Students who receive a grade of A or
B according to the standards of the participating institutions or the
standards of individual instructors.

S. Unsuccessful Students. Students who receive a grade of D

 

or E according to the standards of the participating schools or the

standards of individual instructors.

Organization of the Study

 

The organization of the study is as follows:

Chapter II -- A review of the literature concerning the problem
under investigation.

Chapter III -- The deveIOpment and use of the instruments em-
ployed in gathering the data, the methodology employed in collecting
and analyzing the data, and the statistical techniques employed.

Chapter IV -- An analysis of the successful and unsuccessful
college level beginning shorthand students.

Chapter V -- An analysis of the successful and unsuccessful

college level transcription students.

Chapter VI -- An analysis of the similarities and differences of
the successful and unsuccessful college level beginning shorthand and
transcription students.

Chapter VII -- A summary of the study, findings, and recommenda-

tions.

CHAPTER II
RELATED LITERATURE

Seeking a solution to the high failure and dropout problem
among shorthand students, many investigators have attempted to develop
instruments and identify characteristics useful in predicting short-
hand success.

Although the present investigation is not primarily a prognostic
study, it is concerned with the differences that may exist between the
high and low achievers at two levels of shorthand instruction; thus,

a review of the shorthand prognostic literature is important.

Because of the large number of prognostic studies conducted by
business education researchers, only those studies generally signifi-
cant to the total prognostic literature or those particularly related
to the present investigation will be reviewed in this chapter; other
related studies will be included in the bibliography. Because of the
dearth of related studies conducted on the college level, a number of
studies conducted on the high school level will be cited. However,
course goals and objectives as well as instructional methods of high
school and college shorthand classes are generally similar.

Because of the varied criteria used to measure shorthand success
or failure, the varied instruments employed and the reliability of
these instruments, the varied sample sizes and instructional ‘evels,

the varied methods of conducting investigations and reporting findings,

10

ll
comparing one study with another is difficult and perhaps misleading.
Moreover, categorizing a particular study into a speciric e oup or
type may also be misleading. Although direct comparisons cannot
necessarily be made, this review of literature is divided into six
major sections:

1. Studies dealing with multiple research factors

2. Studies comparing shorthand dropouts with non-dropouts

3. Studies examining the relationship between published
shorthand aptitude tests and shorthand achievemcrt

4. Studies comparing grades in various courses ard shorthand
achievement

J. Studies examining the relationship between shill achievemert
and shorthand success

0. Studies dealing with other factors (e. a , listening ability)

:3’

 

figltiple Factors

Most prognostic studies conducted over approximately the past
I: O O . O ‘ ’- ‘ O V '
iorty-five years have investigated a number of ractors that might prove
useful in predicting shorthand success. Bills1 was perhaps the lirst
investigator to recommend that a battery of tests be used to prelict
shorthand success rather than relying on a single test or prognosti-
cating factor. Many business education resea;chers have concurred
with Bills' 1921 recommendation.

2

Eyster conducted one of the most extensive early predictive

studies based on multiple factors, an investigation that served as a

A

 

'l
.

1Bills, M. A., "A Test for Use in the Selection of Stenographers,
Journal of Applied Psychology, V (September, 1921), 275-83.
2Eyster, Elvin 8., "Prognosis of Scholastic Success in Shortland ”
The National Business Education Quarterly, XVII (December, 1938), 31-3“.

 

prototype for subsequent investigators. His findings, reported in
193?, were substantiated by other researchers.3’ 4’ 5' 6’ 7

Eyster compared five predictive factors and shorthand achieve-
ment: 1) mental ability; 2) average English grades; 3) average of all
high school grades exclusive of English; 4) scores on a stenographic
prognostic test; and 5) subjective trait ratings (work habits, per-
sonality, and character traits).

A total of 617 high school pupils were divided into three
groups: those predicted to succeed in shorthand; those predicted to
have a 50-50 chance of succeeding; and those with little chance of
succeeding. Classroom teachers were not aware of the category of any
particular student.

0f the 370 pupils predicted to succeed, 2.4 percent failed; of
the 109 pupils predicted to fail, 100 percent failed; of the 138
pupils predicted as having an even chance of succeeding or failing,

49.2 percent failed.

 

3Kortendic,‘M. L., "A Study of Prognosis in Shorthand," Summaries_
of Studies and Research in Business Education, Delta Pi Epsilon Publi-
cation, 1962.

4Missling, Lorraine, ”Prognostic Testing in Shorthand” (unpub-
lished Master's thesis, University of Wisconsin, 1954).

SStrickland, Esther H., "Criteria for Predicting Success in
Shorthand at East High School, Columbus, Ohio" (unpublished Master's
thesis, The Ohio State University, 1957).

6Stroop, Christine, "Research Conclusions ior Teaching Stenogra-
phy," Journal of Business Education, XXIX (October, 1953), 15-16.

7Worley, Raymond J., "Relative Value of the I. Q. and Marks for
Predicting Success in Shorthand” (unpublished Master's thesis, Harvard
University, 1931).

13

Although Eyster's reported prognosis was highly accurate For all
three groups, he concluded that the factors selected for investigation
were actually indices of general scholastic ability rather than Lndices
of shorthand aptitude. He reported that the prognosis seemed to apply
to other school subjects with similar accuracy.

Another major study of shorthand achievement was conducted by
Osborne8 in 1943. This multiple factor study also served as a model
for a number of studies that correlated certain factors with a certain
criterion of success.

Osborne administered a battery of selected psychological tests
to 139 second-semester high school students attending four different

high schools. She based success on a standardized shorthand achievement

 

test, the Carmichael Shorthand Learning Test, a test consisting of
shorthand dictation, brief forms and phrases, reading and transcription.

Other tests utilized included: the Otis Self-AdministeringATest of

 

Mental Ability, the Iowa Silent Reading,Te§t, the institution of Educa-

 

 

tional Research Clerical Ability Test, the Revised Minnesota Pap§£_§or

fl...—

 

 

Board Test, and the Gates Visual Perception Test.

 

 

Correlations were computed for the thirty variables obtained from
the five standardized tests with the achievement criterion and with one
another. Osborne reported that not one of the correlations was high
enough for predictive value. Although the correlation obtained between
the shorthand criterion and mental ability (.3765) revealed that a
degree of relation existed, Osborne cautioned that high mental ability

does not necessarily result in superior shorthand achievement nor low

 

8Osborne, Agnes E., "The Relationship Between Certain Psychological
Tests and Shorthand Achievement" (published Ph. D. dissertation,
Columbia University, 1943).

)4
mental ability preclude high performance. She, too, believed that no
single factor would be adequate for predicting shorthand success.

Subsequent investigations conducted at both the high school and
college level with varied sample sizes, examining many of the factors

studied by Osborne also reported low correlations.9’ 10’ 11’ 12’ 13

Doubleday's14

study also included multiple factors. His investi-
gation included a study of: silent reading abilities on printed and
longhand material, mental ability, rapidity of motor response, purpose
for taking shorthand, personal reaction to shorthand, vocational inter-
est, amount of time and interest given to school activities, and a
composite of teachers' grades and shorthand grades.

While he found no significant correlations in the factors studied,
Doubleday also concluded that, while a student of high or average mental

ability has a better chance for success in shorthand than the student

of low intelligence, the difference is not great enough to predict

 

9Cruzan, Fairah, "Predicting Shorthand Ability by Prognostic
Testing" (unpublished Master's thesis, Oklahoma Agricultural and
Mechanical College, 1942).

10Henrickson, Rosanne C., "The Differential Aptitude Tests for
Verbal Reasoning, Numerical Ability, Abstract Reasoning, Space Relations,
Mechanical Reasoning, and Clerical Speed and Accuracy as Predictors of
Success in Shorthand" (unpublished Master's thesis, University of
Minnesota, 1963).

11Takasugi, Dorothy, "The Relationship Between Certain Psychologi-
cal Tests and Other Selected Factors with Shorthand Achievement" (un-
published master's thesis, University of Southern California, 1961).
12Whittle, Marie, ”The Relationship Between Certain Variables and
Achievement in Beginning Shorthand at the University of Texas“ (unpub-
lished Master's thesis, University of Texas, 1959).

13Worley, 92. cit.

14Doubleday, Lewis, ”A Study of the Factors Affecting Achievement
in Shorthand" (unpublished Master's thesis, State University of Iowa,
1939).

15
success in individual cases or that students of less than average men-

tal ability will not succeed.

15) 16: 17’ 18 further con-

Doubleday, and other investigators,
cluded that the relationship between a composite of student grades and
shorthand success is sufficiently high to warrant using them for pre-
dicting success in shorthand.19

Studies conducted by Sherman20

and Hutson,21 however, were not as
optimistic concerning teachers' grades as an accurate predictor of
shorthand success or failure. Both investigators cautioned against
using these marks as a sole selection factor. Neither study obtained
significantly high relations between the other factors studied in
addition to teachers' grades (reading comprehension and rate, penman-
ship speed and quality, English, spelling, typewriting achievement,

motor action, mental ability, grade-point average, stenographic apti-

tude, vocabulary, interest, age).

 

15Jones, Lena, "Prognosis of Shorthand Achievement at the Univer-
sity Level” (unpublished Master's thesis, University of Tennessee, 1951).

16Lynch, Aline, ”Factors Related to the Achievement of the One
Hundred-four High School Seniors in a First Course of Shorthand” (un-
published Master's thesis, University of Michigan, 1947).

17Missling, 22. cit.
18Whittle, 22. cit.

19See also, Maedke, Wilmer 0., "The Relative Prognosis Value of
Selected Criteria in the Prediction of Stenographic Success or Failure
in Selected Secondary Schools in Illinois" (unpublished Ph. D. disser-
tation, Northwestern University, 1957).

20Sherman, Marsden A., "A Study of Prognosis in Shorthand,"
Business Education World, XXII (April, 1942), 696-97.

21Hutson, Billy, ”Prognosis of Achievement in First-Year Greg;
Shorthand Simplified” (unpublished Master's thesis, University of
Tennessee, 1951).

5‘

Other studies concerning student grades will be discussed in a
separate section.
Spelling ability, 3 concern of this investigation, was also

as 75
22’ ?3’ 7" “ all of whom found

studied by a number of investigators,
slight or no correlations between spelling achievement and shorthand
success, according to a variety of achievement criteria. No investi-
gation, however, compared the spelling achievement of high and low
shorthand achievers.

H31926 conducted a factor analysis to identify factors that enter
into the shorthand-transcription process. Five independent, uncorre-
lated factors were studied: verbal, perceptual, manual dexterity,
abstract thinking, and personal. Seventy-eight high school trans-
scription students were given standardized tests measuring reading
ability, vocabulary, word sense, spelling, manual dexterity, name and
number comparison, spatial visualization, abstract thinking, symbol
manipulation, perseverance, speed of writing, memory, phonetics, type-
writing speed and accuracy, study habits. The New York State Regents

transcription and typewriting examination was administered as the re-

search criterion.

 

22Strickland, 22. cit.

23Cheney, Truman, and Goodish, Naomi, "Analysis Between Certain
Variables and Achievement in Beginning Shorthand," Journal of Susiness
Education, XXXVIII (May, 1963), 317-19.

24Ryan, Christopher M., ”Prognosis of First-Term Pitmau Shorthand:
The Relationship Between Certain Characteristics of the Vocational High
School Pupils and the Achievement in First-Term Shorthand” (unpublished
Ed. D. dissertation, New York University, 1953).

 

23Hutson,lg£. cit.

26Hale, Jordan, "A Factor Analysis of Shorthand-Transcription
Ability" (unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, New York University, 1958).

Hale identified three significant factors through his Factor
analysis:

1. Psychomotor speed, consisting of perceptual and manual speed
and ability to work quickly under stress without breaking down.

2. Verbal, consisting of the ability to manipulate or to work
with words and meanings.

3. Non-verbal with a spatial visualization-mechanical ability
component.

Hale reported that 54 percent of the total variance of the Minrt-
sota Clerical Number Comparison Test could be attributed to the psycho-
motor Speed factor; that 84 percent of the total variance of the Turse
Word.Discrimination sub-test could be attributed to the verbal factor;
and that 44 percent of the total variance of the Turse Symbol Trans-
cription sub-test could be attributed to the nonverbal factor. \

Krueger޴7 study of 31 beginning shorthand students found a cor-
relation coefficient of .61 for name checking and .64 for number check-
ing on the Minnesota Clerical Test and his criterion for success.

Other studies using the Minnesota Clerical Test found only slight or
no relation between the test and the particular shorthand criterion.29’ 29

The present investigation will also analyze the separate scores

of the Minnesota Clerical Test in order to study the relationship that

may exist between the successful and unsuccessful beginning shorthand

students and the successful and unsuccessful transcription students.

 

27Krueger, Donald D., "Prediction of Success in Business Subjects
with Use of Minnesota Clerical Test” (unpublished Master's thesis,
University of Wisconsin, 1963).

28Green, Charles C., "The Use of Clerical, Intelligence and Other
Tests for Guidance Purposes in Shorthand I, Typewriting I, and Office
Machines" (unpublished Master's thesis, Kansas State College, 1951).

29Cruzan, 22. cit.

A study related to the present investigation was corducted by

30 , . c - ‘
Evans who evaluatec certain rectors relating to college snorttand
achievement.

Evans studied the high school and college records of 335 female
subjects who completed one year of shorthand and received a grade of
A, B, D or E. He reported that:

1. High school rank appeared to have a deri te relation to

ni
achievement in shorthand at college.e1, 32

2. The amount of high school shorthand did not have an effect
on college shorthand performance.

3. High school typewriting in excess of one year appeared to
have no predictive value for college shorthand achievement.

4. Success in college shorthand seemed related to high school
E1131 ish grades .

5. Performance on the American Council on Education Psychological

Examinatfign was related to shorthand success or failure in
-4

college. ’

6. Seventy percent of the successful students received high
grades in college English; however, twenty-two percent of
the unsuccessful students also received high grades in
college English.

7. Sixty-eight percent of the successful students received high
scores on a standardized English placement test; however,
twenty-eight percent of those who received high scores on
this test also failed shorthand.

 

3OEvans, Ernestine, "Factors Related to Varied Achievement in
Shorthand on the College Level" (unpublished Master's thesis, State
College of Washington, 1941).

31See also, Whittle, op. cit. and

32Maedke, 22. cit.

33See also, Danielson, Harriet Ann, "The Relationship Between
Competency in Shorthand Vocabulary and Achievement in Shorthand Dicta-
tion" (unpublished Ed. D. dissertation, Indiana University, 1959), and

34Lang, Mary Jane, "The Relationship Between Certain Psychological

Tests and Shorthand Achievement at Three Instruction Levels" (unpublisle!
Ed. D. dissertation, University of Missouri, 1960).

19

In summary, while most multiple factor investigations attempted
to identify a single or several factors predictive of shorthand success,
the general conclusion was that a combination of factors should be used
for rognostic or selection purposes. These factors included: mental
ability, English composition grades, overall grade-point average, and
personal trait ratings.

It was generally agreed that achievement in shorthand was not
dependent on a single characteristic or trait but upon a variety of
factors.

The conclusions of many multiple factor prognostic studies were
based on small samples or percentages with little attempt to measure
the significance of any identified differences through statistical tests.

The present investigation is also concerned with a number n?
factors. The emphasis, however, is one of identifying a characteristic
or a combination of Characteristics that may diftercntiate the succsss-
ful shorthard student from the unsuccessful shorthand student so that

more meaningful guidance and vocational planning may take place.

Shorthand Aptitude Tests

 

Many researchers studied the relation between the various published
shorthand aptitude tests and shorthand achievement. In general, bon-
ever, the findings yielded low or contradictory results.

The Hoke Prognostic Test of Stenographie Ability, one o
Oldest shorthand aptitude tests, has proved ineffective as a sinqle
predictor of shorthand learning success. A comprehensive study by

Blanchard35 conducted in 51 high schools and colleges in 26 states

 

3SBlanchard, Clyde 1., "Results of a Study of the Validity o?

00
found no Forrelation betteen the test arl shorthard achievemert.

Earlier and Subsequent studies by a number of investigators corroborated

CO

7,9

, ‘

. .. 1 1
Blancliard's findings.36: «7, _.

One factor of Meedke's study 0? 490 first- and second-year binh
school students was the relationship between the Turse Shorthand Anti-

40

tude Test and shorthand achievement. He reported a correlation o‘

.45 between the Turse Test and the achievement of the First-year stu-

dents and a correlation of .5? between the test and second-year students.
Agreeing with Maedke, Jack41 studied the correlation betweer the

Turse Test and the achievement of first- and second-year shorthand

students. He reported a higher degree of correlation existed betueer

the test and second-year students, .51, than the first-year students,

.32. Jack also reported a higher degree of correlation existed between

the intelligence scores of the second-year students and the score re-

ceived on the Turse, .60. A correlation of .41 was obtained tor intel-

ligence scores and the T rse test for the first-year shorthand students}U

 

the Hoke Prognostic Tests of Stenographic Ability," The American Short-
hangnlgaeher, X (January, 1933), 196.

 

36Jessup, E., "Application of Prognostic and Achievemeit Tests in
Shorthand," Journal of Commerical Education, LVII (June, 1929), 173-74.

 

'3 v. , . ‘ _‘ .
r7KeSSineer, E., 'a Prognostic Study in High School Shorthand

(unpublished Master's thesis, Louisiana State University, 1936).
3pwood, Ethel H., "Correlation of Prognostic Test and will-
Temperament Tests with Actual Results in Gregg Shorthond” (unpublished

Master's thesis, Washington State College, 1928).

39Terrill, Chester J., "The Value of the Hoke Proonostic Test of
Stenogiaphic Ability as a Means of Selecting Shorthand Students"
(unpublished Pmster's thesis, New York State College for Teachers, 1927).

whmeflug gp.cit.

41Jack, Melvin C., "Can We Predict Success in Slorthand°" T:e
fialance Sheet, XXXIII (January, 1932), 212-19.

 

Other investigators, working Hit‘i smaller samples, .:epo:'tcd ‘m-e.

- r-

corre1.tions between the Turse rest and their oPGClth crite fa For

J}

0 ['5 .I’ I'-
claserOm achievement.43: +4: 43, h

Hosler47 studied the relation between 75 beginning college short-
hand students on two different shorthand aptitude tests, the Turse and
the Educational Research Corporation Shorthand Aptitude Test (ERG). He
reported a correlation of .79 between the two tests and found that both
gave almost identical results when correlated with intelligence scores
(.64 Turse; .65 ERC). Hosler also reported that the relationship be-
tween scores made on a five-minute dictation test and the tests were
almost identical (.65 Turse; .63 ERG). He concluded that neither test
should be used as the determining factor in predicting shorthand success.

. Q
Takasugiav

compared the relation between high school sh rthand
grades and the scores obtained on the Turse Test (.53) and the Byers'
First-Year Shorthand Aptitude Test (.60). She found that the Byers'

test was slightly superior to the Turse but also concluded that neither

should be used as a single prognosticating device.

 

425ee also, Dibona, Lucille J., "Predicting Success in Shorthand,‘
Journal of Business Education, XXXV (February, 1960), 213-14.

 

Q o ' o o c o p ,w ;
4"Davis, Alexandria M., 'Criteria for tne SelectiOn o: stueents
of Shorthand” (unpublished Master's thesis, University of Minnesota, 1944).

I .
44Didson, Mary H., 'A Study in Typewriting and Shorthand Prog-
nosis" (unpublished Master's thesis, University of Kentucky, 1943).

45Cruzan, 22. cit.
46Edmunds, B. R., "A Study of Shorthand Prognosis at Jordan Senior
High School, Long Beach, California" (unpublished Master's thesis, The

University of Southern California, 1957).

47Hosler, Russell J., "Aptitude Testing in Shorthand," gggrral
of Business Education, XXII (May, 1947), 25.

 

48Takasugi, op. cit.

22
The staff members of the Chicago Bureau of Business Education

and the Bureau of Child Study administered the Turse Test and the ERC
Test to 309 high school beginning and advanced shorthand students to
determine the most satisfactory instrument for predicting shorthand
success.49 The results of these tests were correlated with classroom
achievement tests. The Turse yielded a correlation of .52 while the
ERC yielded a correlation of .47. Neither, however, were considered
Sufficiently high to be used as the sole instrument in predicting
success in shorthand. In summary, while there was definite agreemert
that the Hoke Test was not useful as a single predictor ‘0‘ shorthard
success, there was certain disaqreemert concernine the value of tfe
other published shorthard aptitude tests. It was gcrcrally concluded,

however, that the published shorthand aptitude tests should rot be

used as a single predictor of Shorthand success or Failure.

3'15 l l z‘mhieverzert

 

The relationship between shorthand skill achievement and class-
room success has been studied by a number of researchers seeking to
identify factors useful in improving shorthand instruction.

Haggbladesg administered a series of five letters of equal lenqth,
syllabic intensity, syllables, and sentences at 80 words a ninute to
232 fourth-semester high school shorthand stiients. She correlated
shorthand achievement with the ability to write theoretically correct
shorthand outlines, shorthand and typewritira speed, transcription

s)

speed and accuracy, and typewriting accuracy.

 

“gniBona,‘g£. cit.

: 1 ' ya I A a o f.
JOHaggolade, Berle, 'vactors Affecting achievement in shorthand”
(unpublished Ed. D. dissertation, University of California, 1965).

M)
L)

The variables making the greatest contribution to shorthand suc-

cess when correlated with Haenblade's criterion were the abilitv to
, en 3 J

3‘
7‘
Ho
['1'
m

theoretically correct shorthand outlines for the high frequency
words (.76923) and transcription Speed (.76842).

Factors producing the lowest correlations were the ability to
write theoretically correct brief forms (.23396) and typewriting
accuracy (.23644).

An earlier investigation by Danielson51 studied the relationship
between shorthand vocabulary competency and shorthand dictation achieve-
ment of 120 college transcription students. The influence of general
scholastic ability on each of these two factors was also studied.

Shorthand vocabulary achievement was measured by six tests, each
consisting of 250 words, taken from Silverthorn's "High Frequency
Business Vocabulary Word List."

Danielson reported that shorthand vocabulary theory competency
was significantly related to dictation achievement (a correlation of
.49). She cautioned, however, that though vocabulary is a prime
requisite in attaining dictation ability, it was not the sole factor.

Danielson reported that general scholastic ability, as measured
by an intelligence test and overall grade-point average, was found to
be only remotely related to ability in shorthand vocabulary. Practi-
cally no relationship was found between the scores on the English
section of a general ability test and shorthand vocabulary cowpetency.
She reported a correlation of .46 between ictation achievement and
general scholastic ability. Danielson further reported that students

having low-level general scholastic ability were unable to attain

¥

5].. ‘ , 4’4-
Danielson, op. cit.

I“)
43

average-or-above shorthand dictation rates vhlle studetts vho attained
high-level dictation rates were of hieh-level scholastic ability.

Danielson believed that the lack of influence of general scholastic
\ability on competency in shorthand vocabulary leads to the defensible
conclusion that mastery of shorthand vocabulary requires abilities and
capacities different from those required for mastery of academic sub-
jects such as literature, history, and science.

PullisS2 also found a significant relation between sho:thand
theory accuracy and shorthand dictation achievement of college students
enrolled in the first, second, third, and fourth semesters of shorthand.
He reported a correlation of .8326 between shorthand vocabulary accuracy
and dictation achievement. Pullis did not find a significant relation
between intelligence and shorthand accuracy (.1327) nor intelligence and
dictation achievement (.0694).

Studies by Fermenich53 and Lusksa used high school students as
subjects. Fermenich also found a significant relation between acouracy
in shorthand theory and accuracy in transcription; Lusk reported that
successful students, according to his research criterion, wrote approxi-
mately 70 percent of the shorthand Outlines correctly while unsuccessful
students wrote approximately 50 percent of the outlines correctly. In

summary, there was general agreement among researchers that a relation

 

A

c o ’ o p o o
J‘Pullis, Joe M., ”Relation Between Accuracy and achievement in
Shorthand” (unpublished Ed. D. dissertation, North Texas State Univer-
sity, 1966).

53Fermenich, Jilliam F., "An Analysis of the Relationship Between
Application of Some Principles of Gregg Shorthand Simplified and Errors
in Transcription" (unpublished Master's tlesis, Nankato State College, iCSJ).

54Lusk, Norman M., "A Study of the Comparison Retwecn Construction of
Shorthand Outlines According to Theory and Accuracy of Transcript" (on-
published Master's thesis, University of Washington, 1959).

h.)

’

existed between shorthand vocabulary competency and rictatiOI :cwieve-
ment at all levels of shorthand instruction. Because of tie varied
methods of determining vocabulary competency, however, and methois of
relating this competency to a reliable criterion of dictation and
transcription success, certain research conclusions must be viewed
with caution.

The present investigation will measure the relationship between
successful and unsuccessful beginning shorthand and transcription

students on certain classroom achievement tests.

Shorthand Dropouts

 

A number of researchers compared students who fail or drop short-
hand with those who remain in the course--secking to identify factors
that might distinguish one group from another.

Meyer55 examined 41 different characteristics possessed by
107 shorthand dropouts and 106 non-drOpouts in first-year high school
shorthand programs. Data were gathered from school records, the stu-
dents themselves, and teachers' ratings. The reasons for dropping
shorthand were associated with a lack of success in the course.

Meyer concluded that while shorthand dropouts do differ from non-
dropouts, they are alike to such a degree that selecting shorthand

students on the basis of these differences is not justified. She re-

ported the factors that distinguished dropouts from non-dropouts included

1. The dropOut ranked lower academically than the non-dropout,
usually coming "rom the lower two-fifths of his class.

 

SJMeyer, Bernadine, "A Study of Selected Factors TosseSSed by
Shorthand Dropouts and Non-Dropouts in Eleven Western Pennsylvania Hi5“
SchoolsH (unpublished Ed. D. dissertation, Teachcr' College, Columbia

University, 1956).

(J

2. The ivopont ;eceivef lower "rates in English and busiress
courses other than shorthard.

I . . .

3. The drOpout s readiu‘ ability was poorer than the nor-
dropout.

4. Shorthand teachers ubjcctively rated t‘e dropout low in
such traits and skills as: ability to understand and
Follow directions; interest in shorthand and school;
enthusiasm For school work; good study habits; reliability;
dependability; initiative; self-contidence; emotional
stability; care and thought in work; neatness and speed of
work; punctuality in handling assignments; Eno lish skills;
honesty; and emotional stabi it .

p.
5. The dr opout was absent From school more frequently.5”

6. The dropout was less interested ir office work than the
non-dropout.

Meyer reported that the drapout and the non-dropout were alike in

the following characteristics:

:3

l. TheyD did not differ significantly on the scores wade
the ifferential Aptitude Test.5

2. They were not considered different in the ratings given
them by their Current teachers in cooperativeness with aid
acceptancy by classmates.

3. The occupations and educational backgrounds of their pa ents
were not diffe:ent.

4. The dro out's overall general attitude toward school was
«.2
not significantly different than that etpressed by the non-
dropout.

5. Both groups enrolled in shorthand for the same reasons--
they thought they wanted to be stenographers and wanted to

prepare for earninq a living.

6. Before cnr olling in shorthand, both grorps believed that
shorthand would be hard--though interesting.

I:
Breuchig analyzed the responses of 143 students who d:0ppe( first~

 

56See also, Lee, Mary Elizabeth, "Ix Pregnostic Study in Shorthand"
(unpublished M;:ster' s thesis, The University of Southern California, 1°39).

r
J7See also, Hendrickson, 22, cit.

58Breuch, Margaret E., "An Analysis of the Drop-Outs in First Yea;
Shorthand Classes (unpublished Master' 5 t‘ esis, Coloxarlo State C: ill ‘

year shorthand and tle “hirions of their 3

p;
0

following accordiu" to perceotngos and w--quc1c1 5 PL

Of the reasons give u as to why pupils enrolled in shorthand,

the JQECL red Vocational objective was g7ven wos: fruqueptly,

a total of 96 times; tht p :30 31 use obicct.?ve, a total n7

2') times; parcntcl influcrc Cr: and inr 31 est in a re; ste; in 3
subject each 24 times; and the imwediate vocati tal ohjective,
22 times.

Reasons given for dropping shorthand wege: miscellaneous
reasovs such as neefled at home, marriage, tgansfs: to oust or
school, moving anl ill health, 8 times; the difficrlty o"
shorthand, 33 times; no need for slzorthaul, 25 times; too
much home work, 16 times; and failing, 12 times.

Analysis of the causes of droppi n3 shorthand, according to
teacher OpihiCn, showed failure to be listed most frequentl',
25 percent; difficulty of the subject, 19 percent; LO ‘
for shorthand and miscellaneous causes, each 13 percept; &Ll
cork, 9 per cent.

Intellizcnce scores and giades in ligh school seemed to

have little relatior to the number of students who C“or
shorthand.

O Q

Spanglersg also reported that no single factor could be _vcnti'

fied as

an CXClUuiVC factof causiny students to rithlrnw 5T0? thort-

7

hand. His ‘iu’ings gleaned from tPC high sclool records of ‘3 3%rvr~

band firepouts VLF? based on ?reqnencies oui suhjcctive ovoluatior:

1.

LJ

Abore-aze=a7e wnte ll ivevce does not 3533 e shorthnn4 .tcceza?
likewise, below overeat ‘rtcllijcrce loos wot allrys “usnif
*7: Qlilurc.

P“F‘15 ”50 d0 b’lOV‘“73""co xo:L ix tyPirg "one (ll! 30 "of
continue wit’: edmance‘ stow. therd. 0n the ot‘ -‘ 7

o ales or above in typeurjtinz Coos nOt assuri -uccces.

Excessiv: absence is a factor conclltstin~
. 9
sloztunnu.

The vocational objective may on a c .trihutiu; tactoh t3

 

‘9 1' . 1 ‘ ‘ ‘V‘ v~." C. ‘4 V ,- ~ ‘v4 ‘ 1. ~ ‘-:~- h.."'~n - £— ‘ Y
bp;.3le_, A.lcu C., cause :0. ‘_op Lots “1 .llrt LLuL slo1t_
‘. ' ‘\' ' r - n A‘- x ‘ '. ~‘- ‘ \‘s —‘ i. ,--'—< -0 V: ' ‘ A - C -' 1- ' o "v‘ A‘ -
- l‘ 1‘.'~2"-‘-’(1L}~ ’ k’izi'kt' ti; .3-: b o-IO‘A' 3. ‘\\-- ‘p._.h11 0-13‘; tha'-eg_ S tliL—f’ Lb , L'l'-I II- ()

Store Ur‘u-"

ska-“tqrd ‘C"' 4 stfoos'snb't “ ' "S "' P' "‘ ll I“
~ . a ‘ o c ‘r‘ 7‘ .\' ‘ -‘ "~~ r ‘ G .. - r“ r \ w
to Fesi-C: }”HG ”. v”_v s o Ln J -as rot nu -ts.l'

apilS‘citi 1v1tazc oi fibOTQ‘813C3"0 nuclisl slafcs ta"r
firts'at pfohroility ‘0' our "
Q I
Q

‘ ' ‘ ‘ t Y? n
t'LLn lnzlouhznuwlzi,e .niql-

6. Inadcquacics in tie duifinoce pgoqzam is a mrjoi factor 31
the high dropout tote since only 32 ort O7 tHC A3 tt:d(rts
stated that they were interested i? lcarrinq s’orttnrfl.

Concerncfi tflat enrollments in advanced shorthanfl vece only a

third 0F those in first-feat slorthard, the Rusiness Education Rtxcat

’1
of Virginia6J surveyed students and tescners ‘n 137 diffegurt tiqh

schools. Of the 4,754 students cncolled in Eirst-yea* slortkard, orly

[.4

enrolled for second-year stortbard. Survey ?o;ms for Fft npil

m

"J

v
I

were evaluated and the HajO" CHLSES of iropping and failing s'

-o:tkand,

—‘

as implied by the studcrts accorting to f"cquency 35 resporse, incluacfiz

1. Lack of patience ard un-evstanding on the part o? the short-

hand teacher.

2. Lack of tnowledic of the usefulness ard importarce o
shorthand.

3. A teal that the shorttand class wss paced too crust to“
the student to gtasp.

4. Monotory.

Students who passed Figst-vear slorttanu but did rot take advancr‘
training reported that they feared faiLinv second-yen? slo-t‘a=d or
‘that taking shorthanl dictation made them rervous.

In summary, while research l‘loes Show that shorthand "."‘opot-:t:s

<fliffcr from non-”ropcuts in certain ctnracteristics, rvsea ct also

shows that these s-udents are Sutticititly alike to r>“o selection

 

60Vitqinia Business Eflucation Bulletin, "Implications of a Surlcy
of Shorthand D:Op-outs and Failures,” gnu:nal of Fusincss Education,

XXXII (February, 1957), 215-17.

 

the bmsis of these

or

opinion an]

1

the studerts, the teachers, and tn

were generall

Stuflen

. K - .o-
l‘ILQ L.

4.

vl cferences. Many of theze

l.‘ l-

O

ebjeetho evaluatior--on tle pm

L‘.

e ators. S ntistienlly

not "eborlxy‘.

.\’
J

t

 

S

The relationship betwter

hi?

been eonsiflered , many researcher

r
bl
’~

Spellman correlated tie gr

by 200 collefie stufents and the

a”
3.

economics (.190); English (.348);

4

I
3

1

-—

(« 6)

He

nathematics (.250); Scienc

team! that these evades bat!

shorthand grade

that a

tee

tHe

Yiigb school shorthand studerts.

1

n, I

Izrgflis .54; typewriting, .49;

S

s, .46; and bookkeeping, .57.

I3CDlnt average was a Sigrificant Ea

liailuse of prospectiv shorthand s

q
C.
‘

’l 4
n*Sr~e.‘lln::m, Leela 8., "A ate

3})\

a

published Master's thesis, Oklahoma A

1945).

tuient

relatio:
a five-minute ttarscrfption test of 490 beeirtin
He repottcd the t

foreign languages,

lated to Grades in Aeademie S'

S.

;‘ « e \ \' '--.\ ~v ta 1 .o .
hues LCLCTJCJ u al.3yeed ”Holtldld

ndes reCeived in accaurtiufi (.
foreign lsrguages (.4
e (.399); and tynev

slur, JalJJO

cortelatiovs

d to

O

“snip betweem te“n

tea

cfi11 ~’;~ Anflqp1
V-L0wll; c Lteid

.57;

(.0

general bu
Maedke reported that the qsaie-

ctor in predicting the success or

q

tudents at the bijh school 1673;

of Shorthatj G‘ela
cts on the College Level” (3L-

:ieultursl and Mechanical College,

tistieal Analysis

8

8
7
3

 

3")

‘ Q 1 Q , ‘ v o < Y o _ A a
p ‘ .- o- o . ‘ ., .- 0. ‘ . . s u , I ‘ . a -
u szoitianu :Ls.es a,a in £1,11Chce min." i t‘

(if _ , .. , fl. ,, -
Io:]_SOll "01_.'.f:‘.‘LJ'.

(i

tvrinfi enfl Englis“ icafies; he .tovcletvl that 7V7”DS It beginnis: typin~

nith an intelligenc rh at Ci<e-, the

(T‘
i
f
0
r3
:3
'—l
r.
U

A i. ‘ ,. ..
anJ EF 1193 .inn

~
3
best indicators of shorthand success. His Einlinjs wrre supports} h;
I

I 0 é
0: net 'nvestigators. +

Heil65 studied the records of 22S hifh school ziaduates who com-

pleted sterographic tunining and grades in Euilish, Tyrirq 1, Book-

Ho
:7
}_J
H
4.

genes was also cogslu372i.

keeping I and II, auJ Spanish I and II;

She reported that, while there was little relation b3:JL2r iiLe 1-

ligence and f ades received in shorthand, no puoil whose I. Q. wrs

) A

if“
' 4
C

than 90 made an A in slatthand. Correlations hetx-e: e1. Engl

shorthand grades were higher than those between intelliterce and short-

hand grades hut not high enough to use as a sirgle ptogrosticatin;

Ea3t01.

;\lthough ($31303 in tyTMafi;1t1n3 arvl:s!orthald lvul too lIHJZ‘ 107‘:-

. u
l

lation (.24 and .43 respectively) for prediction pULPwses, qze< ; in
fiist-scmester bookkeeping lad a higher positive relation that intel-

JLigence or gieies rece iJe

CL

in English or beginning typewritinfi. Rut,

J

£35; Hail pointed out, since 60 percent of the stuJents who failed first-
ESQnester bOOkkEL epi 'ng received a qrade of C in shorthand, failure in
Erookkeeping could not be used as the basis for prdiCCiL; :ailuce in

Sliorthand.

¥

63W1180n, W. Hermon, "Who Should Take Shorthand?” lhe balance
ESheet, XXXI (March, 1950), 3lO-l2

 

[I'm 3 I 'a * w

zeoee also, G1ll1gner, Ralph P., Llhert, L‘izaheth, 2L; :1 ,xe-,
Barber ,"Aflvisory Criteria for Selecting Pupils for Chcrthand "
3.°1‘e s Bflucetior Pogum, IV (Mny, 1950), 25, 39.

 

 

o 1‘ ”r . n .
6SHell, Margaret 2., [he Value of the Teache s' Ma Vs PH tectazu
High School Subjects for P‘; el ctinj Teachers' HprPs in Stuuririohy"
_ . o 1 ’\
(unpublis ‘efl master's th091s, University “F Louisvil.l°, ‘°3:/

' ‘1 .. t.- ‘ .. ..., f .7 , -"-"-'«.‘ A "‘ if“ -- .- .‘ . '

11:: L .CW‘» lc: F .0. v. slot. 0. f‘...‘ .1 .et-t O ,(. .~ ‘\ twem .: 7 -‘ L3;- .‘1
T . .. ‘c- ‘ _~‘ . . o -- r. P . r r: ' " v ' n, ~l v i - ’h - t‘ I": .’ . - ' « 1 r .' ‘
;.st scmcsLei Dyerish and .iist unmtstdl the tbP1«. l t o 1;.At o1

v ‘ ' \.-‘\ - . ' - s urn " v ~ ,-- ~ - I _ ’nl ' .1
Hctncer Spanish I an; oteaod phy III, however, lions: to .76. J3.-
., I - ., ._ , ' , ., q \ . . '1'. a .. —- ‘ q. k l, a fi- - . ~
CD":C1U"€..‘=., heist-rut , t at b.1(,(.f?o£:-..ll “d unit/31cc 71.- .‘laftnf‘u’. 13w; 5.
o: shortnn: icpsri more or inovled7c nrd shill 13incd in the fso n';~
ctvLPI semestets CL hfinvthfinu Cher on leaniiro -Lttors W.Uon to CHO *-
. o t f. o: . v- ‘u o ‘ ‘ - .' a ’ Q
Hell 5 .11~inos or ee« nith a ~-~'.1rnh_. '_ stu mes tnat CJUCJ'

that English marks, scholastic achitvame.t, a~a tvrcign intjufic=

' .. . . . ,: - T . - 3. , .- . 1“- '.
syta.es we'22Lii: hesi.zneastn‘*s war:.laoli: or ~,:idznct;;mi u SJL. ’ ’
to o '7 1 no ,

\Ig, 1., .(:, 74’ IL, 73, 74

An alditi val conclu ion :cwched by Neil, has d on iur :tnlv

luigh sczvol st"dsnts, was “LDPOEEGd by Dompsgy,75 who baScj her flrdiu;?
(\n college wtlJITCCZ the hast nenLu;C ?o; n chctivq s::c-ss in

.n';rn;3? s?o;fhand is by the grade earned in prerequisite shorthand

66Beam, Verna Frances, ”Vocational Guidance of Pupils in the
EStenographic Curriculum in Senior High Schools" (unpublished Master's
thesis, The University of Southern California, 1933).

67Cheney and Goodish, op. _i_.

68Duncan, Margaret E., "PrOgnostic Testing in Shorthand," ggggggl
of Business Education, XII (April, 1936), lS-lb.

 

69Maedka, 92. gig. 70Edmunds, op. cit.
71Joncs, 22. gig. 72Lynch, op. cit.

73Ohmann, O. A., "The Possibilities of Prognosis in Stenography,”
Research Studies in Commercial Education, Monographs in Education
Series No. 11 (Iowa City: State University of Iowa, 1926).

74Stricklsnd, op. cit.
759empsey, Audrey V., ”A Study to Determine to What Extent Success

in Beginning Stenography is Indicative of Success in Advanced Stenography”
(unpublished Doctor's field study, Colorado State College, 1950).

32

courses.76 Dempsey studied the college records of 200 students who
completed a required collegiate shorthand sequence. She found that:

1. Of the 14.5 percent rated "superior" (in grades) at the
beginning of their training, 3.5 percent received a
"superior" rating (in grades) at the end of their training.

2. Of the 200 subjects who completed the shorthand sequence,
only 4 percent were considered "below average" at the end
of the first semester of shorthand; 29 percent, however,
were considered "below average" at the end of the fourth
semester of shorthand.

3. The fact that none of the students who received "superior”
ratings in their beginning courses fell below a rating of
"average" by the time they reached transcription indicates
that a "superior" rating in beginning shorthand may be used
as an index of possible achievement in the transcription
process.

4. Of the students who were considered average at the beginning
of their training, only 5.2 percent were in the failure
category in the final course. Of those originally below
average, 37.5 were still below average or failing at the
end of their training.

Dempsey concluded that, although a beginning student whose achieve-

mnent is "superior" or "above-average" is almost certain to complete the
eadvanced courses in a satisfactory manner, below average achievement

:ln beginning shorthand does not necessarily preclude success in the
advanced courses .

In summary, average grades are generally the best predictor of
:sherthand success, though certainly not an infallible one. There was
general agreement that knowledge of the average English grade is also
useful for guidance purposes. Foreign language grades, if they are
available, were also considered useful for guidance purposes.

76See also, Varah, Leonard J., "Effect of Academic Motivation and
Other Selected Criteria of Achievement of First and Second Semester

Shorthand Students" (unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1966). r

33

Grades in typewriting and bookkeeping have yielded significant
relationships to success in shorthand in some studies while yielding
low correlations in others, probably because of varied course defini-
tions, objectives, methods of instruction, and research design.

Grades in beginning shorthand were an important factor in pre-
dicting success in advanced shorthand, though not necessarily a pre-
cluding factor.

College English composition class and the overall college grade-

point average are factors studied in the present investigation.
Mental Ability

More research has been conducted studying the relationship be-
tween intelligence and shorthand achievement than any other factor.

Bills,77 who conducted one of the earliest multiple prognostic
studies, found that intelligence was an effective factor in eliminating
sahorthand failures. Other investigators concluded that though a rela-
‘tionship between intelligence and shorthand success did exist, it was

tnot high enough to justify the use of an intelligence score as a

single prognosticating factor.78’ 79: 809 81» 82» 83: 8"

_

773111., M. A., "A Test for Use in the Selection of Stenographers,"
.Journal of Applied Psychology, V (Mhy, 1921), 275-83.

7BBeam, gp. cit. 79DiBona, 92. cit. QOEdmundS, 92 SEE-

81Hutson, Billy T., and Vincent, Nicholas M., "Motivation and
Prognosis in Shorthand," Journal of Busingss Educatiqg, XXXIII (October,

1957), 31—32.
820sborne, 22, gig.

83Rankel, William L., ”A Comparative Study of the Relationship
Between Intelligence and Success in English Composition, Typing, and
Shorthand" (unpublished Master's thesis, The University of Southern
California, 1943).

34

Sandy,85 who reviewed five shorthand studies involving 1,123
cases, found correlations between intelligence and shorthand grades
ranging from .22 to .46.

Harley86 correlated shorthand achievement as measured by teachers'
grades and the intelligence scores of 536 high school students and
reported that the relationship between intelligence scores and grades
received in shorthand was not as high as correlations in other school
subjects. The correlations between shorthand grades and the factors
studied were: foreign language grades, .759; junior high school English
grades, .707; penmanship marks, .557; typewriting marks, .526; science
marks, .418; mathematics marks, .408; and intelligence quotient, .398.

In summary, there was agreement that while a relationship between
:shorthand achievement and intelligence scores did exist, intelligence

escores are not adequate predictors of individual success or failure.

Other Factors

87 88

Language Aptitude. Studies conducted by Lang and Veon corre-

Zlated shorthand success with aptitude for foreign languages.

 

8l"VanKirk, Virginia, ”A Study of the Relationship Between Ability
Ideasures and Success in Beginning and Advanced Shorthand" (unpublished
llaster's thesis, The University of Southern California, 1960).

85Sandy, F. M., "A Critical Examination of Research Dealing with
the Intelligence of Secondary School Commercial Students" (unpublished
'Master's thesis, State University of Iowa, 1932).

35Worley, _p. g_i_t. 87Lang, _p. cit.

88Veon, Dorthy M., The Relationship of Learning_Factors Found in
Certain Modern Foreign-Languggg Aptitude Tests to the Prediction of
Shorthand Achieygggnt in College, Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical
College, Stillwater, 1950.

Lang related the achievement of 184 college students at three
instructional levels and aptitude for foreign language, vocabulary
aptitude, linguistic ability, and general scholastic aptitude. She
reported that, though there was a positive relation between foreign
language and linguistic aptitude and shorthand achievement, the great-
est proportion of the variance found in her study was attributed to
factors not measured. The highest coefficient of correlation yielded

by a single measure (.60) between the Iowa Placement Examinatiogf-

 

Foreign Language Aptitude, Form M and achievement at the elementary
shorthand level accounted for only .36 of the total variance.

Veon studied the correlation of certain standardized language
aptitude tests and the Carmichael Shorthand Learning Test of 299
college level students. A multiple correlation (.5421) indicated that
the combination of the standardized tests was not effective in predict-
ing shorthand success. However, subtests using Esperanto yielded
(:orrelations as high as .8363. Veon recommended that additional study
(sf the Esperanto subtests be conducted for possible predictive measures.

Listening and ReadingpAbility. Duncan89 administered the Egggg;
Siarlson Listening Comprehension Test to 552 third-semester shorthand
‘high school students to determine the relation of listening ability and
shorthand success. Success was determined by three letters constructed
by the investigator and dictated at 90, 100, and 110 words a minute.
Duncan reported that the relationship between listening ability and
shorthand achievement (3 .36 correlation) is slight.

Investigations relating reading ability to shorthand achievement,

89Duncan, Charles H., "The Relationship Between Listening Ability

and Shorthand Achievement" (unpublished Ed. D. thesis, University of
Pittsourgh, 1959).

36
conducted at both the college and high school levels, also reported

slight or no relationships.90’ 91’ 92' 93» 94’ 95: 96

98 99 . 100 101

Mpgiyation. lhnflunuh97 Sherman, Leslie, Whittle, Osborne,
and Varah102 are among a number of business educators who believe that
motivation, emotional maturity or study habits are major determinates
in shorthand success. Many investigators have subjectively concluded
that the "drive-to-succeed" is the instrumental factor in shorthand
success.

Apparently this ”drivewxrsucceed" is composed of factors not
related to occupational interest or aptitude as studies relating short-
hand achievement to occupational interest or aptitude have found no

significant relationships.103: 104. 105, 106, 107

 

90Blacker, Margaret, ”The Use of Certain Tests in the Prediction
<of Success in High School Shorthand" (unpublished Master's thesis,
IJniversity of Wyoming, 1951).

91Duchand, Simon A., "Can We Predict Superior Achievement in Short-
P1and?" Business Education World, XXXIII (February, 1953), 276-77.

92Doubleday, 92. gig. 93Lynch, g2. gig.

94Ryan, g2. cit. 95$herman, gg. cit.

96Maleug, Evelyn and Snyder, Louise M., "Shorthand Success in
(3<)11ege," Journal of Business Education, XV (February, 1940), 17-18.

 

97Duchand, gg. cit. 98Sherman, gg. cig.

99Leslie, Louis, Methods of Teaching Gregg Shorthand (New York:
(3!?egg Division, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1953).

100Whittle, gg, ggg. 101Osborne, gp. gig. 102Varah, gg. gig.

103Barrett, Dorothy M., ”Prediction of Achievement in Typewriting
Ernd Stenography in a Liberal Arts College," lgurnal gngpglignggyghglogx,
Xxx (December, 1946), 624-30.

104Hargrave, Marjorie, "The Relationship Between Achievement in
Shorthand, Intelligence, Clerical Aptitude and English" (unpublished
Buster's thesis, University of Iowa, 1942).

37

Varahius administered the Michigan M-Scale to first- and second-
semester high school shorthand students. The Scale, developed by
Farquhar, polarized the theory that achievement-motivation is composed
of: l) long-term involvement; 2) unique accomplishment; and 3) compe-
tition with a standard of excellence. His assumption was that a con-
tinuum of achievement-motivation existed. The scale is composed of
four measures: 1) a word-rating list which measures the student's
perception of how her teacher perceives her; 2) a human trait inventory
which measures personal characteristics of the individual; 3)Ia gen-
eralized situational choice inventory which measures what an individual
taould do in a given situation; 4) a preferred job characteristic scale
ydhich measures vocational choice.

Varah reported that the Scales, when correlated with a measure of
rnental ability, significantly increased (at the .05 level) the precision
(sf predicting the achievement of the first-semester shorthand students,
t>ut they were not a factor in predicting second-semester shorthand
zacehievement. Varah also reported that the word-rating list was a
Significant predictor of shorthand grades for both first- and second-
Semester shorthand students. He concluded that the academic self-
c=C>'ncept of the student as measured by the word-rating list is a factor
'111 learning in both first- and second-semester shorthand.

Varah further concluded that the best predictors of first-
Semester shorthand success were in order of importance: grade-point

a‘V’erage, ninth grade English grades, tenth grade English grades, and

Inental ability. He reported the best predictors of second-semester

 

1”Slilutson, 32. gig. 106Kreuger, gg. cit. 107Osborne, gg. g_g.

108Varah, gg. cit.

38
shorthand success were in order of importance: shorthand I grade, giade-

point average, tenth grade English gtade, and mental ability.

k

Summary

While many research studies have been conducted seeking to identify
instruments or characteristics useful in predicting shorthand success,
these investigators have not provided conclusive predictive evidence.
They have, however, provided information considered useful for guidance
and counseling purposes.

A multitude of factors have been studied and their relation to a
‘variety of research criteria tested and evaluated. Because of the vari-
eety of instructional levels and the number of cases involved, the re-
ssearch instruments used and the reliability of these instruments, and
tzhe method of conducting and reporting research findings, the results

113ve varied widely. Moveover, direct comparison of research studies
crannot generally be made because of the varied determinants of success
(>r' failure.

The conclusions of many prognostic studies were based on small
fiseamples as well as on student and teacher opinion and judgment. In

Elcidition, many researchers based their findings on subjective evalua-
tllon. Frequencies and percentages were often compared with no statis-
tlical tests to determine the significance of these differences. While
studies were conducted on both the high school and college levels, tne
1'i‘igh school studies far outnumbered post-secondary investigations.

It was generally agreed that success in shorthand and transcription
is not based upon a single trait or characteristic but upon a variety

of different factors, many of which have not yet been measured. It nas

also generally agreed that a combination of Factors is a better pre-

dictor of beginning shorthand success than any single factor.

The following factors were Suggested for guidance and counseling

purposes: mental ability, English composition grades, average grades,

and personal trait ratings. Intelligence scores and grades in previous

shorthand courses were considered the best predictors for success in

advanced shorthand courses.

A large number of prognostic studies placed emphasis on an instru-
ment which could_be used to predict shorthand achievement with little

or no attention paid to the characteristics or traits of the students

involved.

The intent of the present investigation is to study certain simi-

].arities or differences that may exist between the successful and un-
esuccessful college level shorthand students at two instructional levels.

tJnlike much of the prior prognostic research, it is not concerned with

rrredicting shorthand achievement. The subjects of this study are those

£;tnudents classified as successful or unsuccessful according to teacher

Efitfiades ard enrolled in the beginning shorthand classes and the tran-

Scription classes at seven different Michigan colleges.

Certain factors studied in the present investigation have been

T’I‘Qviously examined with incorclusive or contradictory evidence; others

have not been used in ary other known study relating shorthand achieve-

5

“leru:to these factors. The method of statistical analysis used in thi

Study is one that has not been used in any similar research study

e>-:amined .

CHAPTER III
THE SOURCES OF DATA, INSTRUMENTATION, AND METHODOLOGY

To compare the similarities and differences in regard to the
selected variables between successful and unsuccessful college level
beginning shorthand students and successful and unsuccessful transcrip-
tion students, data were collected at seven Michigan public-supported
post-secondary institutions during the 1967 winter and spring school
year.

Data were obtained through published standardized tests, skill

achievement tests, student questionnaires, and student records.

Sources of Data

Selection of Schools. Eighteen post-secondary institutions
Tltncated within a two-hundred mile radius of Kalamazoo, Michigan, offer-
ing both a beginning shorthand class and a transcription class during
the period under investigation were asked to participate in this study.
Seven schools offered both courses or had time available for partici-
Pation and were, therefore, included in this study.

Participgting78chools. Seven public-supported Michigan post-

!Becondary institutions offering secretarial and/or business education

‘programs participated in this study. These institutions included:

three junior colleges, one four-year college, and three universities.
All participating institutions offered one or more beginning

40

41
shorthand class and one or more transcription class during the period
under investigation. All of the participating institutions taught the
Gregg Shorthand System. Six schools used the Diamond Jubilee Edition
in all classes; one school used the Simplified Edition in all classes.

Table 1 shows the class enrollment of the beginning shorthand

classes and the transcription classes by type of institution.

Table 1. Class Enrollment of Participating Institutions

.— .~-_ _ -._._._-....r '—
‘fih .5. m-_H’.‘--.—

 

 

 

 

 

 

Institution Beginning_Shor£h§nd. Transcription Total

N 1 N 1 N Z
University 127 57 114 SS ~¢ih4lqfl~56_m
College 41 18 48 23 89 21
Junior College 56 25 45 22 101 23
‘TOTAL 224 100 207 100 431 100

_—

 

Subjects. The subjects of this study were those students who
Ireceived an A or B and were classified as successful or those students
‘viho received a D or E and were classified as unsuccessful in the begin-
Iling shorthand classes and the transcription classes.

A total of 82 successful and 61 unsuccessful beginning shorthand
Situdents were identified from a total enrollment of 224 students. A
tuotal of 67 successful and 64 unsuccessful transcription students were
identified from a total enrollment of 207 students.

The number of subjects under study according to the type of

institution is presented in Tables 2 and 3.

42

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 2. Beginning Shorthand Subjects by Type of Institution
Institution §gggg§§fgl ggsuggg§§f_l r~* 6'Tji:;::;?.
N % N 1 N %
University 56 68 27 44 I 83 58
College 19 23 13 21 32 22
Junior College 7 9 21 35 28 20
TOTAL ‘65. 666 ’66 666 I66 i66
Table 3. Transcription Subjects by Type of Institution
Institution i-Successful Unsuccessful .flh—nggif64-
N % N Z N %
‘University 38 S7 35 SS 73 56
College 18 27 ll 17 29 22
.Junior College 11 16 18 28 29 22
TOTAL ‘6; 166 62. 666 661 666

 

bfiature of the Data Collected

 

Four methods of obtaining data for each subject were used:

(31) five standardized tests; (2) skill achievement tests for the

be-

ginning shorthand classes and the transcription classes; (3) two

8tudent questionnaires; and (4) student records at each participating

institution.

The Standardized Test Battery

 

A battery of standardized tests was chosen to measure selected

characteristics, aptitudes, and abilities that seemed to correlate with

the shorthand and transcription process based on empirical observation

43

and the conclusions of other investigators. These tests were adminis-

tered to the beginning shorthand students and the transcription students.

The

1.

2.

40

S.

standardized battery included:

Brown-Boltzman Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes, TL:
Psychological Corporation, New York, New York.

 

 

Califiprria Psychological Invegtggy, Consulting Psychologists
Press, Palo Alto, California.

 

Minnesota Clerical Test, The Psychological Corporation,
New York, New York

 

Ea£§99:91assr-Erisissliihiekipg.sepraisal. Form YM. Harcourt,
Brace & World, Inc., New York, New York.

Hellegleyu§pellinggScale, Form 1, California Test Bureau,
Los Angeles, California.

 

 

criteria used in selecting the standardized tests included:

All tests received favorable reviews in the ygntalhflgasugg;
mgnts Yearbook, Volumes 4, 5, or 6.

No tests in experimental stages were considered.
All tests were accompanied by a manual determined adequate

by the Mental Measurements Yearbook giving information LBG‘
ful in test administering, scoring, and interpreting.

 

All tests were nonprojective and of the group variety.

No unusual training was required in test scoring or interpreting.

A local examiner, recommended by the department head of each

IDarticipating institution, was hired and trained to administer the

Standardized battery and the project details at each school.

A booklet, prepared by the investigator, giving specific directions

for administering each standardized test and other information relevant

to this investigation was utilized by the local examiner under the

guidance of the investigator (Appendix A).

Buros, Oscar (ed.), Mental Measurements Yearbook (Highland Park,
New Jersey: The Grypohn Press, Volume 4, 1953: Volume 5, 1959; Volume

6, 19o5).

44

Administering the Standardized Battegy. The five standardized
tests were administered by the local examiner according to the pro-
cedures Specified in each test manual during the first ten weeks of
class instruction. Provisions were made for absentees to make up each
test within a one-week period.

Students and instructors were assured that all information was
confidential and that no individual student, instructor, or school
would be identified in any way.

Scoring the Standardized Battery. Two standardized tests, the
Brown-Holtzman Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes and the Wellesley
Spelling Scale were machine scored by the Western Michigan University
{Testing Bureau. The remaining three tests were scored by two different
‘persons. In the event of a scoring discrepancy, the answer sheet was
rechecked and a correct score obtained. A raw score was obtained for
each standardized test.

A description of each standardized test will now be given.

lipown-Holtzman Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes (SSHA)

According to the manual:

The fact that some students with apparently high scholastic
aptitude do very poorly in school while others with only medi-
ocre ability do well has presented a challenge to many educa-
tors. The Survey of Studdeahits and Attitudes was developed
to help meet this challenge. It is an easily administered
measure of study methods, motivation for studying and certain
attitudes toward scholastic activities in the classroom.

The purposes of the SSHA are: (a) to identify students whose
study habits and attitudes are different from those of stu-
dents who earn high grades, (h) to aid in understanding stu-
dents with academic difficulties, and (c) to provide a basis

for helping such students to improve their study habits and

attitudes and thus more fully realize their best potentialities.2

2Brown, William F., and Holtzman, Wayne H., Survey of Study_fld§its
and Attitudes Manual (New York: The Psychological Corporation, 1956), p. 3.

 

 

43

The Survey consists of 75 items; each item is answered according
to a five-point scale: RARELY, SOMETIMES, REQUENT Y, GENERALLY, ALMOST
ALWAYS. The terms are defined on a percentage basis; for example,
RARELY means from 0 to 15 percent of the time. High scores on the
§§fld.are characteristic of students who get good grades; low scores or
the Survey tend to be characteristic of those who get low grades.

Deece believes:

. . . the inventory is very heavily pointed in the
direction of assessing motivation for study and atti-
tudes towards academic work. This emphasis provides
the most unique and valuable aspect of the Inventory.

The reliability coefficient for women was found to be .84 accord-
ing to the Spearman-Brown formula. The authors reported that the
Survey's correlation with the American Council on Education Psycholdgdgal
ggdm is low enough to indicate that the predictive powers of the §§§§
rest on its measurement of traits largely untouched by such aptitude

measures. Coefficients of correlations between the ACE and the SSHA

ranged from .08 to .37 based on a sampling of 480 female high school

students.4

California Psychological Inventory (CPI)
According to the manual:

The California Psychological Inventory was created in the
hope of attaining two goals of personality assessment. The
first goal, largely theoretical in nature, has been to use
and to develop descriptive concepts which possess broad
personal and social relevance. Many of the standard per-
sonality tests and assessment devices available previously
have been designed for use in special settings, such as the
psychiatric clinic, or have been constructed to deal with a

 

3Deece, James, "Review of the Brown-Holtzman Survey of Study Habits
and Attitudes," Fifth Mental Measurements Yeggbook, 1959, pp. 782-83.

453m Manual, p. 9.

4 6

particular problem, such as vocational choice. The present
endeavor has been concerned with characteristics of person-
ality which have a wide and pervasive applicability to human
behavior, and which in addition, are related to the favor-
able and positive aspects of personality rather than to the
morbid and pathological.5

The second goal for the CPI has been the practical one of
devising brief, accurate, and dependable subscales for the
identification and measuring of the variables chosen for
inclusion in the inventory. A further consideration has been
that the instrument be convenient and easy to use and Suit-
able for large-scale application.

The Inventory contains 480 items; subjects are asked to respond
to each item as "True" or "False" according to whether they agree or
disagree with the statement or feel that it is or is not true about them.

Kelley believes:

. . . the CPI, in this reviewer's opinion, is one of
the best, if not the best, available instrument of its
kind. It was deve10ped on the basis of a series of
empirical studies and the evidence for the validity

of its several scales is extensive.6

Each CPI scale is intended to cover one facet of interpersonal
psychology; the scales are grouped into four broad categories, seeking
to emphasize some of the psychological and psychometric clusterings
which exist among them.7

CLASS I. 'MEASURES OF POISE, ASCENDENCY, AND SELF-ASSURANCE

l. Dominance

2. Capacity for status
3. Sociability

4. Social presence

5

6

. Self-acceptance
. Sense of well-being

SCough, Harrison, California Psychological Inventory Manual (Palo
Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1964), p. S.

 

6Kelley, E. Lowell, "Review of California Psychological Inventory,’
Sixth Mental Measurements Yearbook, 1965, pp. 168-69.

7CPI Manual, p. 5.

47
CLASS II. MEASURES OF SOCIALIZATION, MATURITY, AND RESPONSIBILITY
7. Responsibility
8. Socialization
9. Self-control
10. Tolerance
11. Good impression

12. Communality

CLASS III. MEASURES OF ACHIEVEMENT POTENTIAL AND INTELLECTUAL
EFFICIENCY

l3. Achievement via conformance
14. Achievement via independence
15. Intellectual efficiency
CLASS IV. MEASURES OF INTELLECTUAL AND INTEREST MODES
l6. Psychological-mindedness
l7. Flexibility
18. Femininity
Names of the scales on the inventory were chosen to describe the
kind of behavior they are designed to reflect. For example, a person
scoring high on DOMINANCE would be expected to impress others as a
forceful, persistent, self-assured, dominant person; an individual
scoring low would be expecred to be retiring, unassuming, perhaps in-
hibited and lacking in self-confidence.8
Test-retest reliabilities based on 200 persons retested after one
to three weeks ranged from .49 to .87 with a median of .80. For high
school female subjects tested after one year, the median test-rates:
correlation is .68.9
Kelley states:
The manual does not report any reliability estimates
based on a single administration, but presumably these
would be higher than the test-retest consistency co-

efficients noted . . . hence sufficiently high for
both group and individual use.

8cm Manugl, p. 8. 9cm Manual, p. 19. 10Ke11ey, p. 1.69,.

48

The Minnesota Clerical Test LECT)

 

The Minnesota Clerical Test is a test of speed and accuracy in
performing tasks related to clerical work. The test consists of two
parts: Number Checking and Name Checking.11 '

In each part there are 200 items consisting of 100 identical
pairs and 100 dissimilar pairs. Students are asked to check the
identical pairs. The numbers in Number Checking range from three
through twelve digits and the names in Name Checking contain from seven
through seventeen letters. Separate time limits are used for the two
parts; eight minutes for the number checking and seven minutes for the
name checking.

Bait conducted a factor anilysis of seventeen clerical aptitude
tests and one general intelligence test measuring thirty-six different
variables. Forty-one percent of the total variance was accounted for
by three factors: perceptual analysis, speed, and comprehension of
verbal relations--all of which were found to have heavy loadings in the
‘Minnesota Clerical Test. He reports:

The Minnesota Clerical Test, which involves checking
pairs of numbers and names for similarities and differ-
ences, seems to be related positively to more general
types of clerical aptitude tests than any other tests
included in the battery.12

According to the manual, the determination of test reliability
by correlating scores on odd and even items would be inappropriate

because the test is a Speed test. However, three studies are cited in

which reliability coefficients are given; these ranged from .7b to .93

11Andrew, Dorothy M., and Paterson, Donald 6., Minnesota Clerical

 

Test Manual (New York: The Psychological Corporation, 1959), p. 3.

12Hair, John T., "Factor Analysis of Clerical Aptitude Tests,"
Journ§l_g§_Applied Psyghglggy, XXXV (August, 1951), 245-49.

49
based on the Spearman rank order coefficients and .56 to .7h based u"

the Pearson product-moment coefficients.13

The Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal consists of a series
of test exercises which require the application of some of the important
abilities involved in critical thinking.14

In developing the Appraisal, the authors viewed critical thinking
as a composite of attitudes, knowledges, and skills. The Appraisal con-
sists of five subtests designed to measure different, though inter-
dependent, aSpects of critical thinking: The subtests are:15

Test 1 Infeggnce. (20 items) Samples ability to discriminate
among degrees of truth or falsity of inferences drawn
from given data.

Test 2 Recognition 9f Assumptions. (16 items) Samples ability
to recognize unstated assumptions or presuppositions
which are taken for granted in given statements or
assertions.

Test 3 diuctiqg. (25 items) Samples ability to reason deduc-
tively from given statements or premises; to recognize the
relation of implication between prOpositions; to deter-
mine whether what may seem to be an application or a
necessary inference from given premises is indeed such.

Test 4 Interpretation.(24 items) Samples ability to weig.
evidence and to distinguish between (a) generalizations
from given data that are not warranted beyond a rea-
sonable doubt, and (b) generalizations which, although
not absolutely certain or necessary, do seem to be
warranted beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

Test 5 Evaluation of Argumeggg. (15 items) Samples ability to
distinguish between arguments which are strong and
relevant and those which are weak or irrelevant to a
particular question at issue.

 

The authors do not enourage the use of the part-score on the test

”hm -

Appraisal Manual (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1964), n. 2.

15Ibid., p. 2.

t” evaluate irdividual attainment since the part-scores are Jascd on c

‘e‘atively Small number or items and, thereiore, lack mufficieat re-

(1

C U 1
liability.
Hill nelieves:

If, as this reJiewer nelieves, critical trinking is

a central goal of education, serious efforts to
urderstatzd it and appraise it must he ercau‘aged.

The number of such efforts has been grcwirn in

recent years, and the Watsor-Glaser Critical Thinking
Appraisal is one of the useful instruments For this
plrpese.

In relating critical thinking to general ‘rtslligcnce, the manual
states:

By their very nature, measures of critical thinking
might be expected to show a relatively Pugh rela-
tionship to measures of verbal intelligence, such

as the OgiggQuick-Sgggipg,Mentalhfibility Tg§£_. .
However, an examination of the content of the various
tests show that the tasks imposed by the Criti§§l_
Thinking Apprgiggl are quite different from those
presented in commonly used intelligence measures."‘

The manual reports correlation coefficients between the Appraisal
and various verbal intelligence measures and concludes:

It appears, therefore, that a high level of 'intel-
ligence' as measured by conventional tests may be
necessary, but not sufficient, for high attainment
in critical thinking. The obtained correlations,
however, are not sufficiently high to warrant the
substitution of conventional tests for the Cgigiggl
ThinkingAppraisal.1

 

The manual reports reliability data consisting of split-half

161b1d., p. 9.

17Hill, Walker M., ”Review of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking
Appraisal," Fifth Mental Measurementg Yearbook, 1959, p. 796.

18Watson-Glaser Cgigical Thinking_Apprais§} flagugl, p. 10.

 

191b1d., p. 10.

Sl
reliability coefficients obtained from testing 20,312 students. Re-
liability coefficients ranged from .85 to .87 with a standard error of
measurement of 3.7 to 4.3.20
Ihe_W2llselsxiéaellins_$salsi_Ectnll

The Wellesley Spelling Scale consists of words that occur in the
customary written vocabulary of the high school graduate. According to
the authors, a person's score on this test is representative of the
spelling he will use in the course of ordinary school or business
writing.21

The test consists of fifty multiple-choice items. Each item
contains a sentence with one word omitted. Under the sentence are four
different spellings of the omitted word from which the correct spelling
is chosen. The manual states:

The three incorrect versions of the word, which are
offered together with the correct form, are, in
each case, those misspellings which appeared often
in samples of students' written themes.
The manual reports a reliability coefficient of the test for

grade 13 calculated by the Kuder-Richardson formula 21 as .76 with a

standard error of measurement of 3.43 (1,769 cases).23
T_h_e_-91.a§_8.1;0.qm -Ash 1939929335858.

A battery of classroom achievement tests was developed and admin-

istered to the beginning shorthand classes and the transcription classes.

 

~’—-,_.

201bid., p. 12

21Alper, Thelma C., and Mallory, Edith B., flgllgsley Spelling
lSca1e_Manual (Loa Angeles: California Test Bureau, 1957), p. 4.

~-——-

221bid., p. 4. 231bid., p. 3.

52
ngingi g $h2££2829_§iéfiE—AflhLCXPEfiH£_I£§£§n Three skill achieve-
ment tests were administered to the beginning shorthand classes: (1) a
theory test; (2) a brief form test; and (3) a shorthand reading test.
As both the Diamond Jubilee and Simplified Editions of the Gregg
Shorthand System were taught in the participating institutions, a
separate test was prepared for each edition.

TranscgiptigpfiClass Aghievementgzeggs. Two skill achievement

 

tests were administered to the transcription classes: (1) a series of
four letters to be written in shorthand and transcribed on a typewriter;
and (2) a straight-COpy typing test.

The method of developing, administering, and scoring each class-

room achievement test will now be described.

aroused, .Tthgt

A test of 100 stratified randomly selected shorthand theory words
was administered to the beginning shorthand classes. (Appendix I and J)

Isskpsyslsmesc

1. All the enumerated theory principles in a beginning Gregg
Shorthand Book were numbered (brief form and phrase paragraphs were
disqualified)?4

2. A total of 120 enumerated theory principles in 48 chapters of
the Diamond Jubilee Edition were identified. These principles were
consecutively numbered and listed; a table of random numbers was used

to select 50 principles from each half of the list.

 

24Leslie, Louis A., Zoubek, Charles E., and Hosler, Russell J.,
Gregg Shorthand fgr_§o11egengVolume QgeJinamggg_gubilee Series (New
York: Gregg Division, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1965); and giggg
Shorthand Simplified for Collgggs, Volume OneJ Second Editipg, 1958.

 

3. An example will illustrate how each specific theory word was
selected:

The word ending gigy (Lesson 39, enumerated principle 347) was
selected from the list of 120 identified theory principles. Each word
using the gi£y_principle in Lesson 39 was consecutively numbered; seven-
teen such words were identified. A table of random numbers was used to
select the word pgpglgrity to include on the theory test.

4. The same procedure was followed in deve10ping a 103 word
theory test for the Simplified Edition (138 enumerated theory prin-
ciples were identified).

Test Administratiog

l. The test was announced to the students several days in advance.

2. Within one week after completing all of the theory lessons in
the beginning college textbook, the classroom instructor dictated each
theory word at ten-second intervals.

3. Students transcribed the wo:ds in longhand in a 20-minute
time period on answer sheets providci.

Test Soggigg

1. Each test was scored by two different persons; in the event
of a discrepancy, the paper was rechecked and a correct score obtained.

2. Papers were scored on a basis of all-right or all-wrong; that
is, both the shorthand outline (dictionary accuracy) and the transcript
for the outline must be correct. If the shorthand outline had more
than one meaning, students were required to transcribe all meanings in
order to receive credit.

3. Spelling was not considered.

4. The test score was based on the total number of correct items.

Shorthand Br ief Form-[Egg

-1.

 

A list of 100 randomly selected brief forms was administered to
the beginning shorthand classes. (Appendix G and H)

Test Development

 

1. All the brief forms in both shorthand editions were consecu-
tively numbered (129 brief forms representing 149 meanings in the Hia-
mond Jubilee Edition; 184 brief forms representing 727 meanings in tle
Simplified Edition).

2. A table of random numbers was used to select 100 brief forms
for each edition.

33st-Administration

 

l. The test was announced to the students several days in advance.

2. Within one week after completing the last set of brief forms
in the beginning college textbook, the classroom instructor dictated
each brief form at eight-second intervals.

3. Students transcribed the brief forms in longhand in a twenty-
minute time period on answer sheets provided.

Test Scoring

1. Each test was scored by two difrerent persons; in the event
of a discrepancy, the paper was rechecked and a correct score obtained.

2. Papers were scored on a basis of all-right or all-wrong; that
is, both the shorthand outline (dictionary accuracy) and the transcript
for the outline must be correct. If the shorthand outline had more
than one meaning, students were required to transcribe all meanings in
order to receive credit.

3. Spelling was not considered.

4. The test score was based on the total number of correct items.

b1
1. 1

Shorthand Reading Test

 

A shorthand reading test was administered to the beginning short-
hand classes.

Test Development

 

1. A letter was selected for each shorthand edition from a text-
book not used by any of the beginning classes.25

2. The two letters were subjected to a wgitigg difficulty formula
and found to be of comparable diffiCUlty.26

3. Each textbook shorthand plate was photocopied, duplicated,
and prepared in booklet form.

Test Administration

1. Within two weeks after completing the last theory chapter in
the beginning college textbook, the class instructor distributed the
test booklet to each student.

2. Students were allowed 15 minutes to transcribe the shorthand

plate material into longhand.

Test Scoring

 

1. Each letter was scored by two different persons; in the event
of a discrepancy, the paper was rechecked and a correct score obtained.
2. One point was deducted for each of the following errors:

words omitted
words added
words substituted

3. Spelling errors were not considered.

25Letter 80, 154 words, g:egg TEéfiEEEiEFiQB.£9I~§9l1933fi4i212m995
Jubileg_55£igs, 1966; Letter 59, 154 words, QEFSBMI£§P§EFIP§£QR £9;
ggllegesJ_Simplifigd, 1959.

26Uthe, Elaine F., ”An Evaluation of the Difficulty Level of
Shorthand Dictation Material' (unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Uni-
versity of Minnesota, 1966).

Sb
4. Test scores were based on the percent of words correctly

transcribed (other than spelling).

Isaasstiasisn Letters
Four letters were dictated at Speeds of 60, 80, 100, and 120

words-a-minute for three minutes to the transcription classes. (Appendix D)

Testflgevglopment

l The four letters were prepared by Uthe of MSU and subjected

—_O

to a shorthand writing difficulty formula; according to this formula,

all of the letters were found to be of comparable difficulty.f7

Test Administration

1. The letters were dictated by the class instructor during the
last four weeks of class instruction.

2. No previews were given.

3. Students were permitted to use a dictionary, eraser, and a
secretarial manual while transcribing the letters on a typewriter.

4. The time required to complete each transcript was recorded
on each letter though not considered in the scoring or data analysis.

Tgstw§coring

1. Each letter was scored by two different persons; 1'n the event
of a discrepancy, the letter was rechecked and a correct score obtained.

2. One point was deducted for each of the following errors:

spelling errors
words omitted
words added

words substituted
typing errors

3. Papers were scored on a basis of 95 percent accuracy, an

 

27Ibid.

57
accepted busiress education practice. Thus, each rarscript was markri

"pass” (H"'fiil.”

Starfish e__8 t
A three-minute straight-COpy typing test was administered to measure
the gross typing speed and accuracy of the transcription classes.
According to Nest:
Ore, 2- or 3-minute timings furnish an adequate measure
of a person's stroking s eed, and longer timings are not
necessary when the objective is merely to determine the
status of students in relation to each other. The stu-
dent's ranking for speed on a short timing will very

o a o . . I Q
closely approx1mate his ranking on a longer t1ming.~‘

Test Development

 

l. The material to be typed was selected and photscopied from a

90
I—J

textbook not used in any of the participating schools.

Test Administration

 

1. During the tenth week of class instruction, each class
instructor administered the three-minute timing.

2. Students were given two attempts on the same copy and asked
to submit the best attempt.

Test Scoring

 

1. Each paper was scored for speed and accuracy by two different
persons; in the event of a discrepancy, the paper was rechecked and a
correct score obtained.

2. Each paper was scored for gross words-a~minute and total

El'l‘OlfS .

 

28west, Leonard J., ”Implications of Research for Teaching Type-
writing,” Delta Pi Epsilon Research Bulletin No. 2, 1962, p. 2 .

 

29Lessenberry, D. D., and Wanous, S. J., College Typewriting
(Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing Co., 1954), p. 136.

 

58

Personal Student Data

 

The following data were obtained from two student questionnaires
and from examining student records.

Office Work hpgrience Record. (Appendix 0) Office work experi-
ence was recorded according to job title and period of employment. A
special check-list provided space for indicating total hours Spent
each week in typing and in writing and transcribing shorthand.30

Student Information Eggm. (Appendix 8) Information obtained
from this form included: college major and class; number, place, and
duration of all shorthand courses previously taken; number, place, and
duration of all typing courses previously taken.

Student Records. Information obtained from examining institution
records of subjects included: point-average as of the end of the school
term under investigation; the college English composition grade; and
when possible, the verification of the shorthand and typing courses

reported on the student information form.
Summary of Variables bkalass

The nature and method of obtaining the research data is summarized
below:

The five standardized tests were administered in both the beginning
shorthand classes and the transcription classes; certain variables,

however, were obtained at one instructional level but not the other.

 

30Because a limited number of students had office experience
using shorthand and transcribing skills, this information will not
be reported.

Data

59

Obtained in the Beginning Shorthand and the Transcription Classes

 

9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.

27.

28.

Variable
College major

Year in college

Number of weeks of previous
shorthand instruction

Number checking
Name checking

Study habits and attitudes

Spelling ability

Critical thinking

Dominance
Capacity for status

Student questionnaire

Minnesota Clerical Test

Brown-Holtzman Survey of
Study Habits and Attitudes

Wellesley Spelling Scale,
Form 1

Watson-Glaser Critical Think-
ing Appraisal, Form YM

California Psychological
Inventory

Sociability

Social presence
Self-acceptance

Sense of well-being
Responsibility
Socialization

Self-control

Tolerance

Good impression
Communality

Achievement via conformance
Achievement via independence
Intellectual efficiency
Psychological-mindedness
Flexibility

Femininity

College grade-point average Student records

College English composition grade

Data Obtained in the Beginning Shorthgnd Classes Only

1.

2.

Random selection of 100
brief forms

Shorthand brief form test

Stratified random selection
of 100 theory words

Shorthand theory test

60
Variable Method

3. Shorthand reading test Transcribing a shorthand
plate into longhand

Data Obtgined in the Transcription Classes Only
1. Number of hours of office work Student questionnaire
experience involving the use
of a typewriter

2. Place of previous shorthand courses

3. Typing speed Three-minute straight-copy
timed writing

4. Typing accuracy

5. Number of weeks of previous Student questionnaire
typewriting instruction

6. Transcription ability Four 3-minute letters at
60, 80, 100, and 120 words-
a-minute and a typed
transcript

Summary of Variables Obtained
A. Total variables for the beginning shorthand classes 31

B. Total variables for the transcription classes 34

65
Statistical Procedures and Hypotheses Tested

The methods of statistical analysis used in this study were
Student's 5ftest, chi-square, and point-Discrial correlation.31

Student's t-test. The student's g-test was used to test the
hypotheses that there were no significant differences in the means in
the selected continuous variables and the successful and unsuccessful

college level beginning shorthand students and the successful and

 

31Downie, N.‘M. and Heath, R. w., Basic Statistical Methods (New
York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1965)

 

61
unsuccessful college level transcription students. These included:
Variables administered at both instructional levels:

A. The five standardized tests (twenty-three variables)
B. The college grade-point average

Variables administered at the beginninggshorthand level:

 

A. The shorthand brief form test

B. The shorthand theory test

C. The shorthand reading test
Variables_§dministered at the transcription level:

A. The speed on a straight-copy typing test
B. The accuracy on a straight-copy typing test

The 3 test was used to compare the variances of the two sample
groups. If the §_was significant at the .05 level, a computed g
formula was used; if not, the standard Student's s-test was used.

The formulas used were:

F test' P - 812
_. — T

Where s12 = the larger of the two sample variances

822 - the smaller of the two sample variances

Student's t-te_;: t : Kl ‘ x2

 

SDX

Where i1 = the means of group 1

X2 = the means of group 2

SD = the standard error of the difference
X between two means
a
S“ 2 (t1) + S-“ (t2)
Computed c: c.05 a __§1 ’2

 

_.2 _,2
8X1 + 8X2

Where t1 the 5% value for t at N - 1 degrees of freedom

1
the 5% value for t at N2 - 1 degrees of freedom

t2
Chi-Sgggge. The chi-square technique was used to analyze the

differences and the significance of these differences between the

62

successful and unsuccessful groups in the se3ected discrete variables;

 

These included:

Variables administered at bnth ins;rucuzonal levels:

 

The

The

UOOJB>

college major

The year in school

college English composition grade

The number of weeks of previous shorthand instruction

Variables administered at the transcription levgl:

 

A. The
B. The
C. The

the
D. The

number of weeks of previous typewriting instruction
place of previous shorthand instruction

number of hours of office work experience involving
use of a typewriter

transcription ability

In cases of df = 1 (degrees of freedom), the Yates correction

formula was applied. The Yates formula used was:

x2 = ( lo - E ]- .5)2
z,

 

The chi-sqpare formula used was:

x2 = 2i

<0 - a)?

E

Where 0 = the observed frequencies
8 a the expected frequencies

Point-Biserial Correlation. When one of the two variables in a

correlation problem is a dichotomy (successful versus unsuccessful

students), the point-biserial r is the appropriate type of correlation

coefficient to use.

The point-biserial correlation technique was used to determine

the correlation between the continuous variables employed at the two

achievement levels.

 

32Ibid.

63

The_point-biserial formula used was:

3(- - 3? r
rpb = p t .2
St q

Where X = the mean scores of the successful group

 

‘it = the mean of the total test scores

5t = the standard deviation of the test

p = the proportion of the total group answering
the item correctly

q =1-p

Since rpb depends directly upon the difference between the means,
a significant departure from a mean difference of zero also indicates
a significant correlation. A.£;test of the difference between means
was used to test the significance of the departure of the correlation
coefficient from zero. The formula used was:

(:3er N’Z

1-
rpb:
Where rpb 8 the point-biserial coefficient

N = the number of subjects in the total sample

fiypotheses

The hypotheses tested at the .05 level were:33

A. There is no difference in the successful and unsuccessful
college level beginning shorthand students and:

1. college major
2. year in school
3. number of weeks of previous shorthand instruction

4. college English composition grade

 

33If the hypotheses were rejected, the alpha level reported is
an approximation of the probability of the Type 1 error indicated by
the statistic used.

10.

ll.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

 

b4

knowledge of o:ief forms, according to a random
selection of brief forms

knowledge of shorthand theory, according to a
stratified random selection of theory principles

shorthand reading ability, according to a longhand
transcript of a shorthand plate

number checking, according to the Minnesota Clerical Test
name checking, according to the Minnesota Clerical Test

study habits and attitudes, according to the Brown-
Holtzman Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes

spelling ability, according to the Wellesley Spelling Scale

critical thinking, according to the Watson-Glaser
Critical Thinking Appraisal

dominance, according to the CPI34

capacity for status, according to the CPI
sociability, according to the CPI

social presence, according to the CPI
self-acceptance, according to the CPI

sense of well-being, according to the CPI
socialization, according to the CPI
responsibility, according to the CPI
self-control, according to the CPI

tolerance, according to the CPI

good impression, according to the CPI
communality, according to the CPI

achievement via conformance, according to the CPI
achievement via independence, according to the CPI

intellectual efficiency, according to the CPI

34California Psychological Inventory

 

28.

29.

30.

31.

05
psychological-mindedness, according to the CPI
flexibility, according to the CPI
femininity, according to the CPI

college grade-point average

B. There is no difference in the successful and unsuccessful
college level transcription students and:

1.

10.

11.

12.

13.

18.

 

college major

year in school

number of weeks of previous shorthand instruction
place of previous shorthand instruction

number of weeks of previous typewriting instruction

number of hours of office work experience involving
the use of a typewriter

college English composition grade

transcription achievement, according to four letters
dictated at 60, 80, 100, and 120 words a minute and
transcribed on a typewriter

number checking, according to the Minnesota Clerical Test

name checking, according to the Minnesota Clerical Test

study habits and attitudes, according to the Brown-
Holtzman Surxey of Study Habits and Attitudes

spelling ability, according to the Welltsley Spelling Scale

critical thinking, according to the Watson-Glaser Critical
rhinking Appraisal

dominance, according to the CPI35

.capacity for status, according to the CPI

sociability, according to the CPI
social presence, according to the CPI

self-acceptance, according to the CPI

35California Psychological Inventory

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

32.

33.

34.

M)
sense of well-being, according to the CPI
responsibility, according to the CPI
socialization, according to the CPI
self-control, according to the CPI
tolerance, according to the CPI
good impression, according to the CPI
commonality, according to the CPI
achievement via conformance, according to the CPI
achievement via independence, according to the CPI
intellectual efficiency, according to the CPI
psychological-mindedness, according to the CPI
flexibility, acco.ding to tle CPI
femininity, according to the CPI
college grade-point average
typing accuracy, according to a straight-copy typing test

typing Speed, according to a straight-copy typing test

CMHWIV

ANALYSIS OF THE SUCCESSFUL AND UNSUCCESSFUL COLLEGE LEVEL

BEGINNING SHORTHAND STUDENTS

The purpose of this chapter is to present an analysis of the
successful and unsuccessful college level beginning shorthand students
in regard to the selected variables.

The categories successful and unsuccessful were dependent on the
final grade received in the beginning shorthand classes. Students who
received a grade of A or B were classified as successful; students who
received a grade of D or B were classified as unsuccessful.

The chapter is divided into four parts: 1) a presentation of
the discrete variables using the chi-square technique of analysis;

2) a presentation of the continuous variables using the Student's 5ftest
of analysis; 3) a presentation of the continuous variables using the
point-biserial correlation technique of analysis; and 4) a summary of
the similarities or differences that may exist between the successful
and unsuccessful groups.

The letters §_and Q_have been used in the tables to denote the

successful and unsuccessful groups.

67

68

Part I

Discrete Variables

This section is concerned with an analysis of four discrete
variables using the chi-square technique. These variables are:
1) college major; 2) year in college; 3) number of weeks of previous

shorthand instruction; and 4) college English composition grade.
College Major - gypothegis Al

The hypothesis that there is no difference in the college major
of the successful and unsuccessful college level beginning shorthand
students was rejected at the .01 level.

Table 4 shows that 50 percent of the successful students were
two-year secretarial majors while 73 percent of the unsuccessful
students were two-year secretarial majors.

Twenty-four percent of the successful students were business
education majors while 15 percent of the unsuccessful students were
business education majors. Twenty-four percent of the successful
students, however, majored in other college programs.1

When considering the total sample of the beginning shorthand
students, 20 percent of all the students were business education majors;
59 percent were two-year secretarial majors; 5 percent were four-year

secretarial majors; and 16 percent majored in other college programs.

Table 4 indicates that business education majors and majors in

 

These include: Successful (l9), elementary education, 2; geo-
graphy, 1; English, 3; foreign language, 2; home economics, 2; general
college, 6; sociology, 3. Unsuccessful group (4), art, 1; physical
education, 2; and general college, 1.

09
"other” college programs were generally more successful in beginning

shorthand than two-year secretarial majors.

Table 4. Number and Percentage of the Successful and Unsuccessful
College Level Beginning Shorthand Students by College Major

 

Collgge Major

 

 

Business Two-Year Four-Year Total by
Category Education Secretarial Secretarial Other Category
N Z N Z N Z N Z N Z
S 20 24 41 50 2 2 19 24 82 57
U 9 15 44 73 4 6 4 6 61 43
Total by
Major 29 20 85 59 6 5 23 16 143 100

 

x2: 11.9002; significant at .01 level
df: 3

Year in College - Hypothesis A2

The hypothesis that there is no difference in the year in college
of the successful and unsuccessful college level beginning shorthand
students was not rejected at the .05 level.

Table 5 shows that 69 percent of the beginning shorthand students
were college freshmen; 25 percent of the beginning shorthand students
were college sophomores; 6 percent of the beginning shorthand students
were college juniors. These figures reflected the large percentage of
two-year secretarial students in the sample who began their shorthand
training immediately upon entering college. They further indicated
that business education students also started their shorthand training
early in their college careers.

Sixty-six percent of the successful students were college fresh-

men while only 28 percent of the successful students were college

70
sophomores. In the unsuccessful group, 72 percent were college fresh-
men and 21 percent college sophomores.

Table 5 indicates that the year in college was not a factor in
beginning shorthand success.

Table 5. Number and Percentage of the Successful and Unsuccessful
College Level Beginning Shorthand Students by Year in College

W #—

Year in College

 

 

 

Total by
Category Freshman Sephomore Junior Category
N x N 1 N 1 N 1
S 54 66 23 28 5 6 82 57
U - 44 72 13 21 4 7 61 43
Total by Yr.
in College 98 69 36 23 9 6 143 100
x2: .8435; not significant at .05 level
df: 2

Previggs Shorthand Instrgction - Hypothesis A3

The hypothesis that there is no difference in the number of week;
of previous shorthand instruction of the successful and unsuccessful
college level beginning shorthand students was not rejected at the .05
level.

Table 6 shows that 65 percent of the beginning shorthand students
in the total sample entered the beginning college shorthand class with
no previous shorthand instruction at any instructional level. Fifteen
percent of the total sample had some previous shorthand training (from
20-36 weeks) before entering the beginning college shorthand class.

Table 6 indicates that prior shorthand instruction did not seem
to be a significant factor in beginning shorthand success at the college

level.

71

Table 6. Number and Percentage of the Successful and
Unsuccessful College Level Beginning Shorthand
Students by Number of Weeks of Previous Short-
hand Instruction

 

 

Weeks of Previous Shorthand

 

 

No Previous 20-36 Total by

Category Shorthand Weeks Category

N Z N 1 N I

S 71 87 ll 13 82 57

U 51 84 10 16 61 43
Total by Previous

Shorthand 122 85 21 15 143 100

 

x2: .2477; not significant at .05 level
df: 1

College English Composition Grade - Hypothesis A4

 

The hypothesis that there is no difference in the college English
composition grade of the successful and unsuccessful college level
beginning shorthand students was rejected at the .001 level.

Table 7 shows that 12 percent of the successful group received
an English composition grade of A and that 41 percent received a grade
of B. Only one unsuccessful student received an English composition
grade of A and only one unsuccessful student received a grade of B.

Ninety-two percent of the successful beginning students received
an English composition grade of C or better in contrast to 48 percent
of the unsuccessful beginning students who received a grade of C or
better.

Eight percent of the 82 successful students received a grade of
D in the English composition course in contrast to 52 percent of the

unsuccessful group; 39 percent of the successful group and 44 percent

72
of the unsuccessful group received a grade of C.

Forty-one percent of the total sample received an English com-
position grade of C.

The findings of this study agree with other investigators who
reported that an English composition grade is a useful predictor of
shorthand success. The findings further indicate that the college
English composition grade was a significant discriminator of high and
low beginning shorthand achievement.

Table 7. Number and Percentage of the Successful and Unsuccessful

College Level Beginning Shorthand Students by College
English Composition Grade

 

College English Composition Grade

 

 

Total by
Category A B C D Category
N Z N E N 1 N Z N Z
S 10 12 34 41 32 39 6 8 82 57
U l 2 l 2 27 44 32 52 bl 43
Total by Eng.
Comp. Grade 11 7 35 25 59 41 38 27 143 100

x2: 54.7887; significant at .001 level
df: 3

Part II
Continuous Variables

The purpose of this section is to analyze by the Student's‘g-test
any significant differences between the mean scores of the successful
and unsuccessful college level beginning shorthand students in terms
of 27 continuous variables.

Nine continuous variables and their mean scores and g values are

presented in Table 8.

The 18 scales of the California Psychological

Inventory and their respective mean scores and £_values are presented

in Table 9.

Table 8.

Students and Nine Continuous Variables

‘g-test Analysis of the Differences Between the Means of the
Successful and Unsuccessful College Level Beginning Shorthand

 

Variable

Mean Scores

 

N:

§
82

L1
N: 61

Standard Dev.

§

9

 

1.

5.

6.

Classroom
Achievement Tests

a. brief form
b. theory

c. reading

. Minnesota Clerical

2555

a. number checking
b. name checking
Brown-Holtzman

§urvey of Study
flpbits and Attitudes

Wellesley Spelling
5.22.1.9.

Watson-Glaser

Cgitical Thinking
Appraisal

figsde-Point Average

1

1

2

98.02
67.75

97.30

32.20

43.42

31.24

36.25

67.95

56.93

86.70

34.34

76.13

126.03

123.63

24.01

30.27

61.93

149.78

2.58

18.58

3.21

25.89

27.68

10.58

5.57

9.49

48.16

15.20

22.34

25.78

24.83

25.53

8.55

6.09

8.24

57.75

6.62*

9.76*

7.36*

4.36*

4.37*

6.09*

3.96*

12.07*

 

*significant at .001 level

Classroqngchievement Tests - Hypotheses A5 - A7

of the successful and unsuccessful beginning shorthand students.

Three hypotheses were stated regarding the classroom achievement

74

A5. The hypothesis that there is no difference in the mean scores
of a shorthand brief form test (according to a test based on a random
selection of brief forms) of the successful and unsuccessful college
level beginning shorthand students was rejected at the .001 level.

A6. The hypothesis that there is no difference in the mean scores
of a shorthand theory test (according to a test based on a stratified
random selection of theory principles) of the successful and unsuccess-
ful college level beginning shorthand students was rejected at the
.001 level.

A7. The hypothesis that there is no difference in the mean scores
of a shorthand reading test (according to a test based on a longhand
transcript of a shorthand plate) was rejected at the .001 level.

The mean scores of each group according to the three classroom
achievement variables and the g values are listed in Table 8, page 73.

Thus, the classroom achievement tests administered as part of this
study appear to measure certain of the same abilities as those on which

the participating instructors based their final grades.
Minnesotp Clerical Tests - Hypotheses A8 and A9

Two hypotheses were stated regarding the subtests of the Minne-
sota Clerical Test.

A8. The hypothesis that there is no difference in the mean scores
of the number checking subtest of the'Hinnesota Clerical Test of the
successful and unsuccessful college level beginning shorthand students
was not rejected at the .05 level.

A9. The hypothesis that there is no difference in the mean scores

of the name checking subtest of the Minnesota Clerical Test of the

75
successful and unsuccessful college level beginning shorthand students
was rejected at the .001 level.

Both the successful and unsuccessful students fell into the
fiftieth percentile in number checking when compared with inexperienced
female typists and stenographers hired at banks (N: 300; mean: 129).2
When compared with the same normative group, the successful beginning
shorthand students, with a mean score of 143.42 (see Table 8) on the
name checking test, fell into the seventieth percentile; the unsuccess-
ful beginning shorthand students, with a mean score of 123.63, fell
into the fortieth percentile.

The findings of this study indicate that a significant relation-
ship exists between college level beginning shorthand success and the
name checking test of the Minnesota Clerical Test.

Brown-Holtgggp Survey_of Study Habits
and_Attitudes - Hypothesis A10

The hypothesis that there is no difference in the mean scores
of the Brown-Boltzman Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes of the
successful and unsuccessful college level beginning shorthand students
was rejected at the .001 level.

According to the authors of the Survey, high scores on the Survey
are characteristic of students who get good grades while low scores
tend to be characteristic of those who get low grades.3

The successful group (Table 8, page 73), with a mean score of
31.24, fell into the fiftieth percentile of the college women norms

(N: 1446; mean: 31.6). The unsuccessful group, with a mean score of

4

21m: Manual, p. 6. 3S§_HA Manual), p. 5.

76
24.01, fell into the twentieth percentile of college women norms.4
These same percentiles also apply to the high school female norms
(N: 1430; mean: 31.1).

Those students who did succeed in beginning shorthand had good
study habits as well as better attitudes toward school work according
to the characteristics measured by the Brown-Holtzman Survey of Study
Habits and Attitudes. The findings of this study support the belief
of many shorthand teachers who feel that it is necessary for beginning
shorthand students to spend a substantial amount of time each day in

thoughtful study.

The Wellesley Spelling_§g§1emfwfiyp9£hg§ishfill

 

 

The hypothesis that there is no difference in the mean scores of
the Wellesley Spelling Scale of the successful and unsuccessful college
level beginning shorthand students was rejected at the .001 level.

The successful group (Table 8, page 73), with a mean score of
36.25, fell into the sixtieth percentile of the Grade 13 norms (N: 1933,
both men and women included; mean not listed).5 The unsuccessful group,
with a mean score of 30.27, fell into the thirtieth percentile of the
same normative group.

Although other research studies found slight or no relation
between spelling achievement and shorthand success, no known study com-
pared the spelling achievement of high and low shorthand achievers.

The findings of this study indicate that spelling ability significantly

distinguishes high and low beginning shorthand achievers.

4Ibid.

SWellesley“Spelling_Sca1e HanuglJ p. 12.

77
Ibseflatssn:§lassri§ritiesliIhinrins
Appgpigal - Hypothesis A12

The hypothesis that there is no difference in the mean scores
of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal of the successful and
unsuccessful college level beginning shorthand students was rejected
at the .001 level.

The successful group (Table 8, page 73), with a mean score of
67.95, fell into the sixtieth percentile of a Grade 12 normative group
(N: 1800, both men and women included; mean: 65.6).6 The unsuccess-
ful group, with a mean score of 61.93, fell into the thirty-eighth
percentile of this same normative group.

When the mean scores were compared with the norms of 5,297 liberal
arts college freshmen men and women (mean: 70.2), the successful group
fell into the fortieth percentile and the unsuccessful group fell into
the twentieth percentile.7

The findings of this study indicate that a significant relation-
ship exists between college level beginning shorthand success and
critical thinking, as measured by the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking
Appraisal.

Qplifornia ngghological Inventory
(CPI) - Hypotheses A13 - A39

 

Eighteen hypotheses were stated that there were no differences
between the successful and unsuccessful college level beginning short-
hand students in regard to each of the scales of the California Psy-

chological Inventory (CPI).

5wgrson-clgser Manual, p. 5. 7lpig.

78

Ten of these hypotheses were rejected and eight were not rejected.
The CPI Scales and their respective mean scores and p values are listed
in Table 9.

The authors of the CPI do not imply that the scales are inde-
pendent of each other; they suggest that in interpreting these findings,
weight be given to the interaction of the scales and to the patterns of
individual profiles.8 Therefore, care must be exercised in comparing
group characteristics with those of individual characteristics.

The mean scores of the beginning shorthand students in this
study and those of high school and college female subjects cited by
the CPI Manual are given in Appendix K.9 Examination revealed that
the raw scores of the college students in this study approximate those
of the high school sample cited in the Manual. Appendix M lists 1
set of adjectives which describe high and low scorers on sac} CPI

10 . . .. . . .
Scale. Again, these adjectives ayn.y to inulJlduals rather than groups.

A

8CPI Manual, p. 9. 9;bid., p. 35. 101bid., pp. 10-11.

Table 9. gftest Analysis of the Differences Between the Means of the
Successful and Unsuccessful College Level Beginning Shorthand
Students on the Eighteen Scales of the California Psycho-
logical Inventory

 

 

 

-_- .._——.._..-- —-—.- .-...—.. - ....

 

Mean Scoreg Standard Dev.
Variable §_ Q §_ Q t

N: 82 N: 61
Dominance 24.10 23.36 6.33 6.00 .74
Capacity for status 18.39 16.80 3.72 4.16 2.39**
Sociability 23.24 23.01 5.11 5.29 .25
Social presence 34.15 33.91 5.99 7.16 .21
Self-acceptance 21.12 20.90 3.81 4.06 .33
Sense of well-being 33.80 31.59 5.69 6.33 2.19*
Responsibility 29.90 26.80 5.01 4.99 3.66****
Socialization 37.41 34.60 6.27 6.98 2 52**
Self-control 26.07 22.90 7.95 8.71 2.26*
Tolerance 19.74 18.09 5.51 5.38 1.78
Good impression 14.12 13.40 5.75 6.37 .69
Communality 25.90 24.54 2.01 3.50 2.92***
Achievement via
conformance 24.79 21.93 5.17 5.07 3.29****
Achievement via
independence 18.48 17.11 4.30 3.63 2.01*
Intellectual
efficiency 35.69 31.90 6.76 6.99 3.26***
Psychological-
mindedness 9.21 8.16 2.64 2.29 2.49**
Flexibility 9.82 10.31 3.69 3.97 -.74
Femininity 23.01 22.26 3.77 3.25 1.24

 

*significant at .05 level
**significant at .02 level

***significant at .01 level

****significant at .001 level

80
The hypotheses rejected at the levels indicated include:
A14. Capacity for status. Rejected at the .02 level.

The purpose of this scale is to serve as an index of
an individual's capacity for status (not his actual or
achieved status. The scale attempts to measure the
personal qualities and attributes which underlie and
lead to status.

A18. Sense of well-being. Rejected at the .05 level.

The purpose of this scale is to identify persons who
minimize their worries and complaints and who are
relatively free from self-doubt and disillusionment.

A19. Rpsponsibility. Rejected at the .001 level

The purpose of this scale is to identify persons of
conscientious, responsible, and dependable disposi-
tion and temperament.

A20. Sociglization. Rejected at the .02 level.

The purpose of this scale is to indicate the degree of
social maturity, integrity, and rectitude which the
individual has attained.

A21. Self-control. Rejected at the .05 level.
The purpose of this scale is to assess the degree and
adequacy of self-regulation and self-control and freedom
from impulsivity and self-centeredness.

A24. Communality. Rejected at the .01 level.
The purpose of this scale is to indicate the degree to
which an individual's reactions and responses correspond
to the modal ("common") pattern established for the
inventory.

A25. Achievement via conformance. Rejected at the .001 level.
The purpose of this scale is to identify those features
of interest and motivation which facilitate achievement

in any setting where conformance is a positive behavior.

A26. Achievement via independence. Rejected at the .05 level.

 

The purpose of this scale is to identify those factors
of interest and motivation which facilitate achievement
in any setting where autonomy and independence are
positive behaviors.

A27.

A28.

81

Intellectual efficiency, Rejected at the .01 level.

 

The purpose of this scale is to indicate the degree of
personal and intellectual efficiency which the indi-
vidual has attained.

Psychological-mindedness. Rejected at the .02 level.
The purpose of this scale is to measure the degree to

which the individual is interested in, and responsive
to, the inner needs, motives, and experiences of others.

The hypotheses not rejected at the .05 level include:

A13.

A15 0

A16.

A17.'

A22.

A23.

A29.

Dominance.

The purpose of this scale is to assess factors of
leadership ability, dominance, persistence, and social
initiative.

Sociability.

The purpose of this scale is to identify persons of
outgoing, sociable, participative temperament.

Socialgpresence.

The purpose of this scale is to assess factors such
as poise, spontaneity, and self-confidence in personal
and social interaction.

Self-acceptance.

The purpose of this scale is to assess factors such
as sense of personal worth, self-acceptance, and capa-
city for independent thinking and action.

Tolerance.

The purpose of this scale is to identify persons with

permissive, accepting, and non-judgmental social
beliefs and attitudes.

Good impression.

The purpose of this scale is to identify persons
capable of creating a favorable impression, and who
are concerned about how others react to them.
Flexibility.

The purpose of this scale is to indicate the degree of

flexibility and adaptability of a person's thinking and
social behavior.

82

A30. Femininity.

The purpose of this scale is to assess the masculinity
or femininity of interests. (High scores indicate more
feminine interests, low scores more masculine.)

Significant differences were found in the mean scores of all_of
the scales in the broad category "Measures of Achievement Potential
and Intellectual Efficiency." These scales included: Achievement via
conformance (.001); Achievement via independence (.05); and Intellectual
efficiency (.01).

Significant differences were found in the mean scores of four
scales in the broad category "Measures of Socialization, Maturity, and
Responsibility." These included: Responsibility (.001); Socialization
(.02); Self-control (.05); and Communality (.Ol).

Significant differences were found in the mean scores of two
scales in the broad category ”Measures of Poise, Ascendancy, and Self-
Assurance." These included: Capacity for status (.02); and Sense of
well-being (.05).

A significant difference was found in one scale in the broad
category "Measures of Intellectual and Interest Modes." This scale
was: Psychological-mindedness (.02).

No known research study has related psychological characteristics
to shorthand achievement at any instructional level. The findings of
this study indicate that a significant relationship existed between
college level beginning shorthand success or non-success and ten of

the scales of the California Psychological Inventory.
Grade-Point Average - Hypothesis A31

The hypothesis that there is no difference in the mean scores of

83
the college grade-point average of the successful and unsuccessful
college level beginning shorthand students was rejected at the .001
level (Table 8, page 73).

The grade-point was based on the accumulated average of each
student in this study at the close of the school term under investi-
gation.

The findings of this study agree with other investigators who
reported average grades to be one of the most useful factors in pre-

dicting shorthand success.
Part III
Point-Biserial Correlation

A point-biserial correlation coefficient was obtained for each
of the continuous variables to determine any significant differences
that may exist between the successful and unsuccessful college level
beginning shorthand students.11

The continuous variables and their respective coefficients and
£_values are listed in Table 10, page 84.

Those coefficients determined to be significant by the point-
biserial technique were also determined to be significant by the
Student's grtest.12

These included: Spelling, study habits and attitudes, critical

thinking, name checking, capacity for status, responsibility, sense of

 

11The point-biserial technique is used when one of the variables
in a correlation problem is a dichotomy; for example, successful versus
unsuccessful students.

12Other significant differences were found between the success-
ful and unsuccessful college level beginning shorthand students through
the use of the chi-square technique.

Table 10. Point-Biserfial Correlations Between

the Successful and

V

Unsuc essful College Level Beginning Shorthand Students

 

 

 

Variable Coefficient t

1. Classroom Achievement Tests

a. shorthand brief form test .485 6.585****

b. shorthand theory test .632 9.683****

c. shorthand reading test .523 7.324****
2. Nellesley Spelling Scale .455 6.067***k
3. drown-Holtzman Survey of Study Habits .344 4.350****
4. Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal .315 3.941****
5. Minnesota Clerical Test

a. number checking .12. 1.435

b. name checking . 4 4.350****
6. California Psychological Inventory

a. dominance .039 .731

b. capacity for status .197 2.386**

c. sociability .021 .249

d. social presence .018 .213

e. self-acceptance .027 .323

f. sense of well-being .130 2.172*

g. responsibility .293 3.638****

h. socialization .206 2.499**

i. self-control .186 2.247**

j. tolerance .147 1.764

k. good impression . 53 .689

1 . commuua 1i ty . 3? 2 . 9 O'?***

m. achievement via confoxmance .268 3.276***

r. achievement via independence .166 1.998*

0. intellectual efficiency .264 3.250***

p. psychological-mindedness .234 f.474**

q. flexihility -.062 -.737

i. ftwnirilzitjr ."W3 1.7?29
7. Collezt g'aic-point av;-cqe .710 11.972****

 

*significant at .05 level
**significant at .02 level

***significant at
****significant at

.01 level
level

well-being, socialization, self-control, communality, achievement via
conformance, achievement via independence, intellectual efficiency,
psychological-mindedness, grade-point average, brief form test, short-
hand theory test, and shorthand reading test.

Thus the significant differences between the successful and
unsuccessful college level beginning shorthand students as related to
the continuous variables cited above were verified by two statistical

techniques: the point-biserial correlation method and the Student's

g-test.
Part IV

Summary

Thirty-one variables were employed to identify certain similari-
ties or differences that may exist between the successful and unsuccess-
ful college level beginning shorthand students.

Three statistical techniques were used to test the significance
of any differences that were identified through a battery of standardized
tests, classroom achievement tests, and student information forms and
records.

The college level beginning successful and unsuccessful shorthand
students were found significantly different at the levels indicated by
category or mean score in:

Category (chi-square statistical technique)

1. college major (.01)

2. college English composition grade (.001)

Mean Scores (Student's gftest and point-biserial correlation)

3. shorthand brief form knowledge (.001)

10.

11.

12.

l3.

14.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

No

96
shorthand theory knowledge (.001)
shorthand reading ability (.001)
name checking, according to the Minnesota Clerical Test (.001)

study habits and attitudes, according to the Brown-Boltzman
Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes (.001)

spelling ability, according to the Wellesley Spelling
Scale (.001)

critical thinking, according to the Watson-Glaser Critical
Thinking Appraisal (.001)

capacity for status, according to the CPI (.02)

sense of well-being, according to the CPI (.05)
responsibility, according to the CPI (.001)
socialization, according to the CPI (.02)

communality, according to the CPI (.01)

self-control, according to the CPI (.05)

achievement via conformance, according to the CPI (.001)
achievement via independence, according to the CPI (.05)
intellectual efficiency, according to the CPI (.01)
psychological-mindedness. according to the CPI (.02)

grade-point average (.001)

significant differences were found between the successful and

unsuccessful college level beginning shorthand students at the .05

level by category or mean score in:

Category (chi-square statistical technique)

1.

2.

year in college

number of weeks of previous shorthand instruction

Mean Scores (Student's.g-test and point-biserial correlation)

3.

4.

number checking, according to the Minnesota Clerical Test

dominance, according to the CPI

10.

11.

sociability, according to the CPI
social presence, according to the
self-acceptance, according to the
tolerance, according to the CPI

good impression, according to the
flexibility, according to the CPI

femininity, according to the CPI

CPI

CPI

CPI

CHIPTLR V

ANALYSIS OF THE SUCCESSFUL AND UNSUCCESSFUL COLLEGE LEVEL

TRANSCRIPTION STUDENTS

The purpose of this chapter is to present an analysis of the
Successful and unsuccessful college level transcription students in
regard to the selected variables.

The categories successful and unSuccessful were dependent on the
final grade received in the transcription classes. Students who
received a grade of A or B were classified as successful; students
who received a grade of D or B were classified as unsuccessful.

The chapter is divided into four parts: 1) a presentation of
the discrete variables using the chi-square technique of analysis;

2) a presentation of the continuous variables tsing the Student's
Eftest of analysis; 3) a presentation of the continuous variables
using the point-biserial correlation technique of analysis; and 4) a
summary of the Similarities or differences that may exist between the
successful and unsuccessful groups.

The letters g and y have been used in the tables to denote the

successful and unsuccessful groups.

83

 

ll

I .III‘ III 3.!
'11; ’

'0
‘D

Part I

Dis rete Variables

 

This section is concerned with an analysis of eight discrete
variables using the chi-square technique. These variables are:
1) college major; 2) year in college; 3) number of weeks of preyious
shorthand instruction; 4) place of previ0us shorthand instruction;
5) number of weeks of previous typewriting instruction; 6) number of
hours of office work experience involving the use of a typewriter;

7) college English composition grade; and 8) transcription achievement.

Collegg Major - Hypothesis Bl

The hypothesis that there is no difference in the college major
of the successful and unsuccessful college level transcription students
was rejected at the .01 level.

Table 11 shows that 33 percent of the successful transcription
students were business education majors in contrast to 11 percent of
the unsuccessful group. Sixty-three percent of the successful group
were two-year secretarial majors in contrast to 80 percent of the
unsuccessful group.

0f the total sample, 22 percent of the transcription students
were business education majors; 71 percent were two-year secretarial
majors; and 7 percent were four-year secretarial majors.

Table 11 indicates that business education majors are generally
more successful in the college transcription class than two-year

secretarial majors.

 

Ill nut III. I I'll lull III .|\,

90

Table 11. Number and Percentage of the Successful and UnSuccessful
College Level Transcription Students by College Major

 

College Major

 

Business Two-Year Four-Year Total by
Category Education Secretarial Secretarial Category
N Z N 1 N Z N Z
S 22 33 42 63 3 4 67 51
U 7 ll 51 PO 6 9 64 49
Total by
Major 29 22 93 71 9 7 131 100

 

x2: 9.5659; significant at .01 level
df: 2

Year in Collegg - Hypothesis 32

The hypothesis that there is no difference in the year in college
of the successful and unsuccessful college level transcription students
was not rejected at the .05 level.

Table 12 shows that 51 percent of the total transcription students
were college freshmen while 37 percent were college sophomores. The
remaining 12 percent were either college juniors or seniors.

Fifty-eight percent of the successful students were freshmen in
contrast to 30 percent of the successful group who were sophomores.

While slightly more than half of the students were college fresh-
men, the particular year in college was not a factor in transcription
success.

Number of Weeks of Previous Shorthand
Instruction - hypothesis BB
The hypothesis that there is no difference in the number of weeks

of previous shorthand instruction of the successful and unsuccessful

 

I In“ I. it: I‘ l I

91

Table 12. Number and Percentage of the Successful and Unsuccessful
College Level Transcription Students by Year in College

 

Year in College

 

 

Total by
Category Freshman Sophomore Junior-Senior Category
N Z N % N I N Z
S 39 58 ' 20 30 8 12 67 51
U 28 44 29 4S 7 ll 64 49
Total by Yr.
in College 67 51 49 37 15 12 131 100

 

x2: 3.4588; 32; significant at .05 level
df: 2
college level transcription students was rejected at the .01 level.

Table 13 shows that 64 percent of the successful students had
68 or more weeks of shorthand instruction (the equivalent of two or
more school years) before entering the transcription course; only 33
percent of the unsuccessful students had the same number of weeks of
previous shorthand instruction.

Of the total group, 49 percent of the transcription students had
the equivalent of two or more years of shorthand instruction before
enrolling for the college transcription course; 51 percent of the
students had less than the equivalent of two years of shorthand in-
struction before enrolling for the same course.1

These figures indicate that students entering the transcription
class with less than two years of previous shorthand instruction seem

to be at a disadvantage.

While it is not surprising to experienced shorthand teachers to

 

1Grades received in previous shorthand courses were not con-
sidered in this analysis.

92

find students with as much as 68 weeks of previous shorthand instruc-

tion classified as unSuccessful, it is of great concern to both busi-

ness educators and guidance counselors.

Unsuccessful transcription

students are generally vocationally incompetent (at least in most

stenographic positions).

 

 

 

 

 

Table 13. Number and Percentage of the Successful and Unsuccessful
College Level Transcription Students by Number of Weeks
of Previous Shorthand Instruction
Number of Weeks of Previous Shorthand
20-36 37-52 53-67 68-82 83-97 98 weeks Total by
Category weeks weeks weeks weeks weeks or more Category
N I N Z N Z N Z N Z N Z N Z
S 7 11 9 13 8 12 26 39 ll 16 6 9 67 51
U 15 23 20 31 8 13 10 16 10 16 l l 64 49
Total by
Previous
Short-
hand 22 17 29 22 16 12 36 28 21 16 7 5 131 100
x2: 19.7013; significant at .01 level
df: 6

Place of Previous Shorthand Instruction - Hypothesis B4

The hypothesis that there is no difference in the place of pre-

vious shorthand instruction of the successful and unsuccessful college

level transcription students was not rejected at the .05 level.

Table 14 shows that 70 percent of the successful transcription

students received their previous shorthand training at both the high

school and college level before enrolling for the college transcription

class; 61 percent of the unsuccessful group fell into the same category.

Thirty percent of the unsuccessful transcription students received

93
their prior shorthand training entirely at the college level in con-
trast to 14 percent of the successful group.

0f the total sample, 66 percent of the students received their
previous shorthand training at both the high school and college level
before enrolling for college transcription; 21 percent of the students
received all of their training at the college level; and 13 percent of
the students went directly into the college transcription class from
high school.

While most students received their prior shorthand instruction
at both the high school and college level, the particular place the
previous instruction was received was not a factor in college level
transcription success.

Table 14. Number and Percentage of the Successful and Unsuccessful

College Level TranScription Students by Place of Previous
Shorthand Instruction

:—:

 

Place of Previous Shorthand

 

 

 

All in All in Both High School Total by
Category High School ,College and College Category
N Z N Z N Z N Z
S ll 16 9 14 47 70 67 51
U 6 9 19 30 39 61 64 49
Total by
Place of Prev.
Shorthand 17 13 28 21 86 66 131 100
x2: 5.7205; not significant at .05 level
df: 2

Number of Weeks of Previous Type-
writing Instruction - flypgthesis BS

The hypothesis that there is no difference in the number of weeks

94
of previous typewriting instruction of the successful and unsuccessful
college level transcription students was not rejected at the .05 level.

Table 15 shows that 71 percent of the successful students and 61
percent of the unsuccessful students had 68 or more weeks of typewriting
instruction before entering transcription (the equivalent of two or
more school years of typewriting instruction).2

Of the total sample, 66 percent of all the students had at least
the equivalent of two or more years of typewriting instruction before
enrolling for transcription; 34 percent of all the students had less
than two years of prior typewriting instruction.

Table 15 indicates that the amount of previous typewriting instruc-
tion did not seem to be a significant factor in transcription success
at the college level.

Table 15. Number and Percentage of the Successful and Unsuccessful

College Level Transcription Students by Number of Weeks
of Previous Typewriting Instruction

 

Weeks of Previous Typewriting Instruction

 

 

37-52 53-67 68-82 83-97 98 or Total by
Category weeks weeks weeks weeks more Category
N Z N N Z N Z N Z N Z
S 10 15 9 14 20 30 21 31 7 10 67 51
U 15 23 10 16 12 19 19 30 8 12 64 49
Total by
Prev. Type-
writing

Instruction 25 19 19 15 32 24 4O 31 15 11 131 100

 

x2: 3.1522; not significant at .05 level
df: 4

2Grades received or place of previous typewriting instruction
was not considered in this analysis.

95

Office Work Experience - Hypothesis 86

The hypothesis that there is no difference in the number of hours
of office work experience involving the use of a typewriter of the suc-
cessful and unsuccessful college level transcription students was not
rejected at the .05 level.

Table 16 shows that 51 percent of the 131 transcription students
had no office work experience involving the use of a typewriter; 49
percent of the total group had some office work experience using a type-
writer.

Table 17 shows the amount of the office work experience by hours.

The findings of this study indicate that the number of hours of
office work experience involving the use of a typewriter did not seem
to be a significant factor in transcription success at the college level.

Table 16. Number and Percentage of the Successful and

Unsuccessful College Level Transcription

Students by Office Work Experience Involving
the Use of a Typewriter

 

 

 

 

Students Students
with work without work Total by
Category experience experience Category
N Z N Z N Z
S 36 54 31 46 67 51
U 28 44 36 56 64 49
Total by Office
Work Experience 64 49 67 51 131 100

 

x2: .93621; not significant at .05 level
df: 1

96

 

m "up
Ho>mfi no. um unmoawficwfim uoc momma.m flux
OOH HmH w HH m a Ga Ma «H ma 0H ma Hm no mocowuoaxm

xuoz ouwmmo «0
munoz an amuoa

 

as as o a n m m m cm ms m m on on a

an no as a a a NH m m m as as as an m

a z s z u z a z x z s z a z
xuowuumo muse: ooHH muse: mason muaoz «woo: oo~ uaoz auowoumo
kn sauce can» «so: rooaa-aom , oom-~om oom-oo~ can» saws

 

oucwfiumaxW1xboB mowwmo mo meson

 

H

 

llll
1",

wouausunha m we om: can
wafi>~o>cu spec: an oocofiuoaxm xuoz mowwmo use oucwvsuw cowuafinoocwua
Hm>oa eonHoo Hawmmooosmca use Hawmmooosm osu mo wweucmuuom vow nopasz .m~ oHan

 

 

lilll' ll! l 1

97

College English Composition Grade - Hypothesis B7

 

The hypothesis that there is no difference in the college English
composition grade of the successful and unsuccessful college level
transcription students was rejected at the .01 level.

Table 18 shows that 60 percent of the successful transcription
students in contrast to only 27 percent of the unsuccessful students
received an English composition grade of A or 3.

Thirty-six percent of the successful group received a grade of C
while 59 percent of the unsuccessful group received a grade of C in
the English composition course.

0f the total transcription group, a college English composition
grade of A was received by 10 percent of the students; a grade of B
was received by 34 percent of the students; a grade of C was received
by 47 percent of the students; and a grade of D was received by 9 per-
cent of the students.

The findings of this study agree with other investigators who
concluded that an English composition grade serves as a valuable pre-
dictor of shorthand success.

Because transcription has been defined as a fusion of various
skills (English skills, typewriting and shorthand skills), these find-
ings further indicated that the college English composition grade

significantly discriminated between high and low transcription achievers.

Transcription Achievement - flypothesis 88

The hypothesis that there is no difference in the transcription
achievement of the successful and unsuccessful college level trans-

cription students was composed of four sub-hypotheses:

98

Table 18. Number and Percentage of the Successful and Unsuccessful
College Level Transcription Students by College English
Composition Grade

 

College English Composition Grade

 

 

 

Total by
A B C D Category
Category N Z N Z N Z N Z N Z
S 10 15 30 45 24 36 3 4 67 51
U 3 5 14 22 38 59 9 14 64 49
Total by
Eng. Comp.
Grade 13 10 44 34 62 47 12 9 131 100

 

x2: 15.6882; significant at .01 level
df: 3

83-1. The hypothesis that there is no difference in transcrip-
tion achievement according to a score on a letter dictated at 60 words-
a-minute and transcribed on a typewriter was not rejected at the .05
level.

38-2. The hypothesis that there is no difference in transcrip-
tion achievement according to a score on a letter dictated at 80 words-
a-minute and transcribed on a typewriter was rejected at the .001 level.

88-3. The hypothesis that there is no difference in transcrip-
tion achievement according to a score on a letter dictated at 100 words-
a-minute and transcribed on a typewriter was rejected at the .001 level.

38-4. The hypothesis that there is no difference in transcrip-
tion achievement according to a score on a letter dictated at 120 words-
a-minute and transcribed on a typewriter was rejected at the .001 level.

One hundred percent of the successful group passed the letters
dictated at 60 and 80 words a minute; 90 percent passed the letter

dictated at 100 words a minute; 27 percent passed the letter dictated

99
at 120 words a minute.

Thirty-four percent of the unauccessful transcription students
passed the letter dictated at 80 words a minute; 25 percent passed the
letter dictated at 100 words a minute; none of the 64 unsuccessful
transcription students passed the letter dictated at 120 words a minute.

Of the entire group, 99 percent passed the letter dictated at 60
words a minute; 73 percent passed the letter dictated at 80 words a
minute; 58 percent passed the letter dictated at 100 words a minute;
and 14 percent passed the letter dictated at 120 words a minute.

The letters dictated at 80 and 100 words a minute appear to meas-
ure certain of the same abilities as those on which the participating
instructors based their final grades. The letter dictated at 120 words
a minute was apparently too difficult for the entire group as only 27
percent of the successful transcription students passed this particular

test.

Table 19. Number and Percentage of the Successful and Unsuccessful
College Level Transcription Students and Transcription

 

 

 

 

 

Achievement
_ Successful Unsuccessful
'Letter N: 67 N: 64 x2

Pass Z Fail Z Pass Z Fail Z

60 words-a-min. 67 100 0 O 63 98 l 2 .00053

 

80 words-a-min. 67 100 O O 22 34 42 66 61.7403*
100 words-a-min. 60 90 7 10 16 25 48 75 53.3792*
120 words-a-min. 18 27 49 73 0 O 64 100 l7.7306*
df: 1

*significant at .001

100

Part II
Continuous Variables

The purpose of this section is to analyze by the Student's E-test
any significant differences between the successful and unsuccessful
college level transcription students in terms of 26 continuous variables.

Eight continuous variables and their mean scores and g values are
presented in Table 20. The 18 scales of the California Psychological
Inventory and their respective mean scores and g values are presented

in Table 21.
Minnesota Clerical Test - Hypptheses B9 and 810

Two hypotheses were stated regarding the subtests of the Minne-
sota Clerical Test.

B9. The hypothesis that there is no difference in the mean scores
of the number checking subtest of the Minnesota Clerical Test of the
successful and unsuccessful college level transcription students was
not rejected at the .05 level.

810. The hypothesis that there is no difference in the mean
scores of the name checking subtest of the Minnesota Clerical Test of
the successful and unsuccessful college level transcription students
was not rejected at the .05 level.

Mean scores of each group and the g values are listed in Table 20,
page 101.

The mean scores of both the successful and unsuccessful groups
fell into the sixtieth percentile in number checking when compared

with inexperienced female typists and stenographers hired at banks

101

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 20. g-test Analysis of the Differences Between the Means of the
Successful and Unsuccessful College Level Transcription
Students and Eight Continuous Variables
Mean Scoreg Standagdapgv;
Variable _s_ p _s_ p t
N: 67 N: 64

1. Minnesota Clericil

Test

a. number checking 137.58 133.23 32.04 24.52 .86

b. name checking 149.91 137.75 56.00 24.09 1.63
2. Brown-Holtzmgp

Survgy of Study

Habits and Attitud_§_ 32.14 30.14 9.88 9.33 1.19
3. Wellesley Spelling

Scale 39.38 34.35 3.73 5.39 6.23***
4. Watson-Glaser

Critical Thinking

Appraisal 70.22 65.96 8.22 9.83 2.69**
5. College Grade-

Point Averagpr 283.65 197.51 46.69 59.05 9.28***
6. Typewriting

Achievement

3. accuracy 3.98 5.54 2.34 3.79 -l.99*

b. speed 69.88 62.90 8.16 11.00 4.13***

 

*significant at .05 level
**significant at .01 level
***significant at .001 level

(N: 300; mean:

129).3 The successful transcription students, with a

mean score of 149.91 on the name checking test, fell into the seventieth

percentile of this same normative group; the unsuccessful students,

with a mean score of 137.75, fell into the sixtieth percentile.

 

3

 

MCT Manual, p. 6.

102
The findings of this study indicate that a significant relation-
ship did not exist between transcription success and the two Subtests
of the Minnesota Clerical Test.

Brown-Holtgman Survgy of Study Habits
and Attitudes - fiypothesis_§ll‘

 

The hypothesis that there is no difference in the mean scores of
the Brown-Holtzman Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes of the success-
ful and unsuccessful college level transcription students was not
rejected at the .05 level.

Mean scores of each group and g values are listed in Table 20,
page 101.

The successful transcription students, with a mean score of 32.14,
fell into the fiftieth percentile of college women norms (N: 1446;
mean: 31.6). The unsuccessful students, with a mean score of 30.14,
fell into the fortieth percentile of the college women norms. These
same percentiles apply to high school female norms as well (N: 1430;
mean: 31.1).4

The findings of this study indicate that study habits and attitudes,
as measured by the Brown-Holtzman Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes,
did not seem to be a significant factor in transcription success at

the college level.
The Wellesley SpgllingpScale - Hypothesis 812

The hypothesis that there is no difference in the mean scores of

the Wellesley Spelling Scale of the successful and unsuccessful college

AssaA Manual, p. 5.

 

103

level transcription students was rejected at the .001 level.

Mean scores of each group and the g values are listed in Table 20,
page 101.

The successful transcription group, with a mean score of 39.38,
fell into the seventieth percentile of the Grade 13 norms (N: 1933,
both men and women included; mean not listed).5 The unsuccessful tran-
scription students,with a mean score of 34.35, fell into the fiftieth
percentile of the same normative group.

The findings of this study indicate that spelling ability sig-
nificantly discriminates between the high and low college transcription
achievers.

The Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking
Appraisal - Hypothesis Bl;

 

 

 

The hypothesis that there is no difference in the mean scores of
the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal of the successful and
unsuccessful college level transcription students was rejected at the
.01 level.

The successful transcription group with a mean score of 70.22
(Table 20, page 101), fell into the seventy-second percentile of a
Grade 12 normative group (N: 1800, both men and wOmen included; mean:
65.6).6 The unsuccessful transcription students, with a mean score of
65.96, fell into the fifty-fourth percentile of this normative group.

When compared with the norms of 5,297 liberal arts college fresh-

men men and women (Mean: 70.2), the successful group fell into the

SWelleslcy Spelling Scale Manual, p. 12.

6Watson-Glaser Manual, p. 5.

 

104
forty-fifth percentile and the unsuccessful group fell into the thirtieth
percentile.7

The findings of this study indicate that a significant relation-
ship existed between transcription success on the college level and
critical thinking, as measured by the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking
Appraisal.

Californig_Psychologicgl Inventogy
(CPI) - Hypotheses Bl4 - B31

Eighteen hypotheses were stated that there were no differences
between the successful and unsuccessful college level transcription
students in regard to each of the scales of the California Psycho-
logical Inventory.

The eighteen hypotheses were not rejected at the .05 level; the
CPI Scales and their respective‘g values are listed in Table 21, page
105.

The raw mean scores of the transcription students in this study
and those of high school and college female subjects are listed in
Appendix L. Examination revealed that the raw scores of the college
students in this investigation approximate those of the high school
sample cited in the CPI Manual.8

The findings of this study indicate that the college transcription
students in this study were a homogerous group as characterized by the

18 Scales of the California Psychological Inventory.

 

Ibid.

80px Manual, p. 35.

105

Table 21. g-test Analysis of the Differences Between the Means of the
Successful and Unsuccessful College Level Transcription
Students on the Eighteen Scales of the California Psycho-
logical Inventory

 

 

 

Mean Scores

 

Standard Dev.

 

 

Variable _s_ p s p t
N: 67 N: 64
Dominance 23.22 24.04 6.19 6.10 -.76
Capacity for status 18.44 17.5] 6.81 4.41 .92
Sociability 22.07 23.10 5.26 4.67 -1.18
Social presence 32.41 33.96 6.20 5.35 -1.52
Self-acceptance 20.79 21.34 3.67 3.70 -.F5
Sense of well-being 33.86 33.96 6.08 5.79 -.09
Responsibility 30.13 29.32 4.00 4.33 1.10
Socialization 38.52 39.21 5.49 4.59 -.78
Self-control 26.86 26.87 7.57 7.34 0.00
Tolerance 19.71 19.59 5.07 5.77 .12
Good impression 13.64 14.87 5.61 6.06 -l.20
Communality 26.49 25.92 1.92 2.50 1 46
Achievement via
conformance 25.05 24.90 5.11 4.86 .17
Achievement via
independence 18.37 17.79 3.61 4.05 .85
Intellectual
efficiency 34.70 34.95 5.78 5.21 -.26
Psychological-
mindedness 8.88 9.03 2.78 2.78 -.30
Flexibility 9 38 8.87 3.18 3.64 .85
Femininity 23.80 23.73 3.37 3.30 .12

 

No significant differences at the .05 level were found between the suc-
cessful and unsuccessful transcription students and the 18 scales of
the California Psychological Inventory.

106

Gradg:Point Aveyaoc :_§ypgt§csis B3

-——. _.—.-.——..—

 

The hypothesis that there is no difference in he mean scores of
the college grade-point average of tie successful and unSuccessfnl
college lexel trarscription students was rejected at the .001 level.

Mew-1n scores of each group arr? the f; valmes are listed in Table 20,
page 101.

The findings of this study agree with other investigators who
concluded that average grades were one of the most useful factors in

predicting shorthand Success.
Typewriting Achievement - Hypotheses B33 and B34

Two hypotheses were stated regarding the typewriting achievement
of the successful and unsuccessful transcription students.

333. The hypothesis that there is no difference in the mean
scores in typewriting accuracy (according to a three-minute straight-
copy typing test) of the successful and unsuccessful college level
transcription students was rejected at the .05 level.

B34. The hypothesis that there is no difference in the mean
scores in typewriting speed (according to a three-minute straight-copy
typing test) of the successful and unsuccessful college level transcrip-
tion students was rejected at the .001 level.

The mean scores of each group according to the two typewriting
variables and the t,values are listed in Table 20, page 101.

Transcription is viewed as a fusion of skills: shorthand ability,
typewriting achievement, and the various English skills. The findings
of this study indicate that both typewriting accuracy and speed were

significant factors in transcription success at the college level.

107

Part III

Point-Biserial Correlation

 

A point-biserial correlation coefficient was obtained for each
of the continuous variables to determine any significant differences
that may exist between the successful and unsuccessful college level
transcription students.9

The continuous variables and their respective coefficients and
t_values are listed in Table 22.

Those coefficients determined to be significant by the point-
biserial technique were also determined to be significant by the
Student's yuan“)

These included: spelling ability, critical thinking, college
grade-point average, and typewriting accuracy and speed.

Thus the significant differences between the successful and
unsuccessful college level transcription students as related to the
continuous variables cited above were verified by two statistical

techniques: the point-biserial correlation method and the Student's

t-test.

9The point-biserial technique is used when one of the variables
in a correlation problem is a dichotomy; for example, successful
versus unsuccessful students.

10Other significant differences were found between the success-
ful and unsuccessful college level transcription students through the
use of the chi-square technique.

108

Table 22. Point-Biserial Correlations Between the Successful and
Unsuccessful College Level Transcription Students

 

 

Variable Coefficient t
l. Wellesley Spelling Scale .479 6.197****
2. Brown-Boltzman Survey of Study Habits .104 1.187
3. watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal .229 2.671***

4. Minnesota Clerical Test

a. number checking .076 .865
b. name checking .139 1.594

5. California Psychological Inventory

a. dominance -.067 -.762

b. capacity for status .080 .911

c. sociability -.103 -l.l76

d. social presence -.l32 -l.512

e. self-acceptance -.075 -.854

f. sense of well-being -.008 -.090

g. responsibility .096 1.095

h. socialization -.068 -.744

i. self-control .000 0.000

1. tolerance .011 .124

k. good impression -.105 -l.l99

l. commonality .127 1.454

m. achievement via conformance .015 .170

n. achievement via independence .075 .854

o. intellectual efficiency -.022 -.249

p. psychological-mindedness -.027 -.306

q. flexibility .075 .854

r. femininity .010 .113

6. College grade-point average .630 9.213****
7. Typewriting Achievement

a. accuracy .242 -2.832***
b. typewriting speed .340 4.106****

 

***significant at .01 level
****significant at .001 level

109

Part IV

Summary

Thirty-four variables were employed to identify certain similari-
ties or differences that may exist between the successful and unsuccess-
ful college level transcription students.

Three statistical techniques were used to test the significance
of any differences that were identified through a battery of standardized
tests, classroom achievement tests, and student information forms and
records.

The college level successful and unsuccessful transcription
students were found significantly different at the levels indicated by
category or mean scores in:

Category (chi-square statistical technique)

1. college major (.01)

2. number of weeks of previous shorthand instruction (.01)

3. college English composition grade (.01)

4. transcription achievement, according to three letters dic-

tated at 80, 100, and 120 words a minute and transcribed
on a typewriter (.001)

Mean Scores (Student's £ft¢8t and point-biserial correlation)

5. spelling,according to the Wellesley Spelling Scale (.001)

6. critical thinking, according to the Watson-Glaser Critical
Thinking Appraisal (.01)

7. college grade-point average (.001)

8. typewriting accuracy, according to a three-minute straight-
copy typing test (.05)

9. typewriting speed, according to a three-minute straight-copy
typing test (.001)

110

No significant differences were found between the successful and

unsuccessful college level transcription students at the .05 level by

category or mean score in:

Category (chi-square statistical technique)

year in college
place of previous shorthand instruction
number of weeks of previous typewriting instruction

number of hours of office work experience involving the
use of a typewriter

transcription achievement, according to a letter dictated
at 60 words a minute and transcribed on a typewriter

Mean Scores (Student's gftest and point-biserial correlation)

10.

ll.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

number checking, according to the Minnesota Clerical Test
name checking, according to the Minnesota Clerical Test

study habits and attitudes, according to the Brown-Boltzman
Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes

dominance, according to the CPI

capacity for status, according to the CPI
sociability, according to the CPI

social presence, according to the CPI
self-acceptance, according to the CPI
sense of well-being, according to the CPI
responsibility, according to the CPI
socialization, according to the CPI
self-control, according to the CPI
tolerance, according to the CPI

good impression, according to the CPI

communality, according to the CPI

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

111

achievement via conformance, according to the CPI
achievement via independence, according to the CPI
intellectual efficiency, according to the CPI
psychological-mindedness, according to the CPI
flexibility, according to the CPI

femininity, according to the CPI

CHAPTER VI

ANALYSIS OF THE SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES OF THE
SUCCESSFUL AND UNSUCCESSFUL COLLEGE LEVEL

BEGINNING SHORTHAND AND TRANSCRIPTION STUDENTS

The purpose of this chapter is to present an analysis of the
similarities and differences that may exist between the two instruc-
tional levels.

Although direct comparisons between the two instructional levels
cannot be made, certain conclusions may be drawn regarding the common-
alty that existed between the successful and unsuccessful beginning
shorthand and transcription students.

Table 23 lists the mean scores of the successful and unsuccess-
ful students in regard to the 24 continuous variables employed at both
instructional levels using the Student's grtest and point-biserial
correlation method. The four discrete variables employed at both
instructional levels using the chi-square technique are listed in

Table 24.1
Continuous Variables

The Minnesota Clerical Test. The Minnesota Clerical Test, a test

of clerical speed and comprehension, consists of two subtests: number

 

1The variables employed at one level only will not be discussed
in this chapter.

112

113
checking and name checking.

No significant differences at the .05 level were found in the
mean scores of the number checking test of the successful and unsuc-
cessful students at either instructional level.

A significant difference at the .001 level was found in the mean
scores in the name checking test of the successful and unsuccessful
beginning shorthand students. However, there was no significant dif-
ference at the .05 level in the mean scores of the name checking test
of the successful and unsuccessful transcription students.

Brown-Boltzman Survey of Study_ޤbits and Attitudes. A signifi-
cant difference at the .001 level was found in the mean scores of the
Brown-Holtzman Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes of the successful
and unsuccessful beginning shorthand students; however, no significant
differences were found at the .05 level in the mean scores of the suc-
cessful and unsuccessful transcription students.

The findings of this study indicated that study habits and
attitudes, as measured by this standardized instrument, did not seem
to be a significant factor in transcription success.

Wellesley Spelling Scale. Significant differences at the .001
level were found in the mean scores of the wellesley Spelling Scale of
the successful and unsuccessful students at both instructional levels.

Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking_Appraisal. Significant differ-
ences (beginning shorthand: .001 level and transcription: .01 level)
were found in the mean scores of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking
Appraisal of the successful and unsuccessful students at both instructional
levels.

California Psychological Invento‘y. The findings of this study

114

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 23. A Comparison of the Mean Scores of the Successful and Unsuc-
cessful Students and Twenty-four Variables Employed in the
College Level Beginning Shorthand Classes and Transcription
Classes
Mean Scores Egan_§gg£3§_
Beginning Shorthand Transcription
Variable Students Students
i 9 §. ll
N: 82 N: 61 N: 67 N: 64
l. Minn. Clerical Test
a. number checking 132.20 126.03 137.58 133.23
b. name checking l43.42**** 123.63 149.91 137.75
2. Brown-Holtaman Sggygy
of Study Habits and
Attitudes 31.24**** 24.01 32.14 30.14
3. Wellesley4§pell. Scale 36.25**** 30.27 39.38**** 34.35
4. Watson-Glaser Criticgl
ThinkingyAppraisgl_ 67.95**** 61.93 70.22*** 65.96
5. Calif. Psychological
Inventory
a. dominance 24.10 23.36 23.22 24.04
b. cap. for status 18.39** 16.80 18.44 17.51
c. sociability 23.24 23.01 22.07 23.10
d. social presence 34.15 33.91 32.41 33.96
e. self-acceptance 21.12 20.90 20.79 21.34
f. sense of well-being 33.80* 31.59 33.86 33.96
g. responsibility 29.90**** 26.80 30.13 29.32
h. socialization 37.41** 34.60 38.52 39.21
i. self-control 26.07* 22.90 26.86 26.87
3. tolerance 19.74 18.09 19.71 19.59
k. good impression 14.12 13.40 13.64 14.87
1. communality 25.90*** 24.54 26.49 25.92
m. ach. via conform. 24.79**** 21.93 25.05 24.90
n. ach. via independ. 18.48* 17.11 18.37 17.79
0. intell. efficiency 35.69*** 31.90 34.70 34.95
p. psy. mindedness 9.21** 8.16 8.88 9.03
q. flexibility 9.82 10.31 9.38 8.87
r. femininity 23.01 22.26 23.80 23.73
6. Grade-Point Average 256.93**** 149.78 283.65**** 197.51

 

*significant at .05 level
**significant at .02 level

***significant at .01 level
****significant at .001 level

115
indicated that the transcription students were a homogenous group as
characterized by the 18 scales of the CPI.

The ten scales of the CPI that significantly discriminated be-
tween the successful and unsuccessful beginning shorthand students
were generally indicative of those characteristics usually necessary
for successful classroom behavior. Those scales which identified the
similarities between the two beginning achievement groups were generally
indicative of social behavior and adjustment.

College Grade-Point Averag‘. Significant differences at the

 

.001 level were found in the mean scores of the college grade-point
average of the successful and unsuccessful students at both instruc-
tional levels.

The findings were in agreement with other research studies that
concluded thataverage grades were one of the most useful factors in

predicting shorthand success.

Discrete Variables

 

College ngor. Significant differences were found in the college
major at the .01 level of the successful and unsuccessful students at
both instructional levels.

The findings of this study indicated that business education
majors were generally more successful thar.two-year secretarial rajors.

Year in College. No significant differences at the .05 level

 

were found in the year in college of the successful and unSuccessful
students at either instruction level.

Number of Weeks of Previous Shorthandalnstructign. A significant

 

difference at the .01 level was found in the number of weeks of

116
previous shorthand instruction of the successful and unsuccessful
transcription students. However, there was no significant differ-
ence at the .05 level in number of weeks of previous shorthand instruc-
tion and successful and unsuccessful beginning shorthand students.

The findings indicated that students entering the transcription
class with less than two years of previous shorthand instruction seemed
to be at a disadvantage. On the other hand, prior shorthand instruc-
tion did not seem to be a significant factor in beginning shorthand
success.

Table 24. A Comparison of the Chi-square Results of the Successful
and Unsuccessful Students and Four Discrete Variables

Employed in the College Level Beginning Shorthand Classes
and Transcription Classes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Beginning Shorthand Transcription
Students Students
Variable Level of Significance Level of Significance
Between the g and g Between the g and g
Groups Groups
1. College major .01 .01
2. Year in collegg, Not sign. at .05 Not sign. at .05
3. Number of weeks of
previous shorthand
instruction Not sign. at .05 .01
4. College English
composition ggadg_ .001 .01

 

 

College English Composition Gradg. Significant differences
(beginning shorthand: .001 level; transcription: .01 level) were
found in the college English composition grades of the successful and

unsuccessful students at both instructional levels.

The findings agreed with other investigators who reported that

117

an English composition grade is a useful predictor of shorthand success.

Summary

A number of significant differences were identified between the
successful and unsuccessful college level beginning shorthand students
as related to the variables employed in this study. There were few
significant differences between the college level successful and un-
successful transcription students, however. With few exceptions,
successful achievement in transcription was apparently based on factors
directly related to the transcription process and classroom achieve-

ment.

 

1"! Ill 1' II II

CHAPTER VII

SUMMARY, FINDINGS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

/

This chapter is divided into four parts. Part I includes a
summary of the problem and the procedures followed in this investiga-
tion; Part II is concerned with the similarities and differences that
may exist between the successful and unsuccessful college level begin-
ning shorthand students; Part III is concerned with the similarities
and differences that exist between the Successful and unsuccessful
college level transcription students; Part IV presents a series of
recommendations for further studies.

Parts II and III are divided into two sections: Section I
presents a list of similarities and differences that pertain to the
instructional level under discussion; Section II includes a discussion
of certain of the findings and implications for guidance counselors

and business education teachers.

Part I

Summary of the Problem and Procedures

 

The problem was to identify the similarities or differences
according to selected variables that may exist between the successful
and unsuccessful college level beginning shorthand students and the

successful and unSuccessful college level transcription students.

118

 

.l.tl.rl‘ 'lll In 1. If

11’)

The students in this study were tested and/or analyzed in terms

1. certain psychological characteristics
2. clerical speed and comprehension

3. critical thinking

4. spelling ability

5. study habits and attitudes

6. number of weeks of previous shorthand and typewriting
instruction

7. place of previous shorthand instruction
8. college major

9. college grade-point average

10. year in college

11. number of hours of office work experience involving the
use of a typewriter

12. college English composition grade
13. skill achievement at the two instructional levels

Seven public-Supported Michigan institutions offering secretarial
and/or business education programs participated in this study. These
included: three junior colleges, one four-year college, and three
universities.

The subjects of this study were female students enrolled in nine
beginning shorthand classes and nine transcription classes during the
winter and spring school terms of 1967.

Students who received a grade of A or B were classified as
successful; students who received a grade of D or E were classified
as unsuccessful. A total of 82 successful and 6] unsuccessful begin-

ning shorthand students were identified; a total of 67 successful and

129
64 unsuccessful transcription students were identified.

Three statistical techniques were used to test the significance
of any differences on the selected variables that were identified
between the successful and the unsuccessful students. The Student's
g-test and the point-biserial correlation technique were used to
analyze the continuous variables; the chi'square technique was used

to analyze the discrete variables.

Part II

Section I
The College Level Beginning Shorthand Studengs

Thirty-one variables were employed to identify certain similari-
ties or differences that may exist between the successful and unsuccess-
ful college level beginning shorthand students.

The findings are based on high and low beginning shorthand
achievers; moreover, the findings are related to group rather than
individual characteristics.

The successful and unsuccessful college level beginning short-
hand students were found significantly different at the levels indi-
cated by category or mean score in:

Category (chi-square statistical technique)

1. college major (.01)

2. college English composition grade (.001)

Mean Scores (Student's grtest and point-biserial correlation)

 

3. shorthand brief form knowledge (.001)

4. shorthand theory knowledge (.001)

161
S. shorthand reading abilitv (.001)
o. name checking, according to the Minnesota Clerical Test (.001)

7. study habits and attitudes, according to the Brown-Holtzman
Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes (.OOl)

8. spelling ability, according to the Wellesley Spelling
Scale (.001)

9. critical thinking, according to the Watson-Glaser Critical
Thinking Appraisal (.001)

l0. capacity for status, according to the CPI (.02)

ll. sense of well-being, according to the CPI (.GS)

12. responsibility, according to the CPI (.001)

13. socialization, according to the CPI (.02)

14. communality, according to the CPI (.Ol)

15. self-control, according to the CPI (.05)

16. achievement via conformance, according to the CPI (.001)
17. achievement via independence, according to the CPI (.05)
18. intellectual efficiency, according to the CPI (.Ol)

19. psychological-mindedness, according to the CPI (.02)

20. college grade-point average (.DOl)

No significant differences were found between the successful and
unsuccessful college level beginning shorthand students at the .05
level in:

Category (chi-square statistical technique)

1. year in college

2. number of weeks of previous shorthand instruction

Mean Scores (Student's Eftest and point-biserial correlation)

3. number checking, according to the Minnesota Clerical Test

4. dominance, according to the CPI

5. sociability, according to the CPI

1?:
6. social presence, according to the CPI
7. self-acceptance, according to the CPI
8. tolerance, according to the CPI
9. good impression, according to the CPI

‘0. flexibility, according to the CPI

ll. femininity, according to the CPI

Section II

Implications for Guidance Counselors

 

and Business Education Teachers

 

The purpose of this investigation was to provide information
useful for guidance counselors and business educators who are responsible
for advising college level beginning shorthand students in course and
occupational planning. The need for this information is apparent as
past research indicated that a large number of students failed or
dropped shorthand. 0f the 224 students enrolled in the beginning short-
hand classes at the seven participating institutions during this inves-
tigation, 27 percent of them were classified as "unsuccessful” by
their teachers; 36 percent of them were classifed as "avc:age" by
their teachers; and 37 percent of them were considered ':successful"
by their teachers.

A secondary purpose of this investigation was to provide data
that may be useful in identifying prognostic factors for research of
counseling purposes.

Past research findings have generally agreed thrt Eng‘ish :4wpo=i-
tion grades and oVurall grade-point average are among t‘e best nre~

dictors of beginning shorthand success. flhile these factors did

L.‘
to

significantly mistinguish the Successful and unsuccessful beginning
shorthand students in the present study, they are not particularly
useful on the college level. A large percentage of the students enroll
in beginning shorthand immediately upon enteang college--before an
English composition grade or college grade-point average becomes avail-
able for diagnostic or redictive purposes. Thus, other guidance

factors are needed.

English Skills

_‘

Because the mean scores on the two variables related to English
skills significantly discriminated between the successful and unsuccess-
ful beginning shorthand students (English composition grade and spelling
ability), these factors deserve the attention of both the guidance
counselor and the shorthand teacher. Because past research indicates
that high school English compostion grades are useful predictors of
shorthand success, collegiate guidance counselors should consider the
use of this high school grade when college English grades are not
available for counseling purposes.

A standardized English usage test may be useful in discovering
deficiencies in English skills before the students enroll in beginning
shorthand. Students with these deficiencies should be required to
enroll for remedial work before entering or while enrolled in tie
beginning shorthand class.

A standardized Spelling test should be administered to all

students enrolled in beginning shorthand. Students who fall below

appropriate norms1 should be encouraged or required to seek special

 

1In the present investigation, for example, the nnSnccessful

help. Additional research slould be conducted to establish norms or
scales specifically useful for counseling students interested ‘n
beginning shorthand.

Beginning shorthand teachers may also want to consider a certain
amOunt of formal spelling instruction as an integral part of the class

assignments.

Critical Thinking

 

Critical thinking is viewed as a composite of attitudes, traits,
knowledges and skills.2 The findings of this investigation indicated
that a significant relationship existed between beginning shorthand
success and critical thinking.

Because careful and analytical thinking is an important facet
in the career of the executive secretary or business teacher, a
critical thinking measurement may be a useful tool to use for occupa-
tional planning and counseling.

A critical thinking appraisal instrument may also be a useful

prognosticator of beginning shorthand success.3 Additional research

 

students fell below the thirtieth percentile of the Grade 13 vorms of
the Wellesley Spelling Scale. The successful students, on the other
hand, fell into the sixtieth percentile.

2The Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal used to measure
critical thinking in this study consists of five subtests designed to
measure different, though interdependent aSpects of critical thinking:
inference, recognition of assumptions, deduction, interpretation,
evaluation of arguments. These subtests are described on page 49.

3In the present investigation, for example, the successful begin-
ning shorthand students fell into the sixtieth percentile of a Grade 12
normative group cited in the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal
Manual; the unsuccessful group fell into the thirty-eighth percentile
of this same normative group.

125
should be conducted to establish norms or scales specifically useful

in counseling students interested in enrolling for beginning shorthand.

Classroom Achievement

 

Because a significant relationship existed between knowledge of
shorthand theory and brief forms and success in beginning shorthand,
continued emphasis should be placed on these factors throughout the

beginning shorthand course.

Study Habits and Attitudes

 

Good study habits and attitudes have long been recognized by
shorthand teachers as an important factor in beginning shorthand
success. The findings of this investigation confirm this belief.

Students with poor study habits and attitudes should be identified
prior to or upon entering the beginning shorthand class. Those iden-
tified as having poor study habits and attitudes4 should receive special
counseling and perhaps remedial work. In addition, special teaching
techniques should be developed to overcome those poor study habits and
attitudes as they relate to shorthand success.

The Brown-Holtzman Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes may be a
useful prognosticator of beginning shorthand success. Additional
research should be conducted to establish norms or scales specifically
useful in counseling students interested in enrolling for beginning

shorthand.

 

4In the present investigation, for example, the successful begin-
ning shorthand students fell into the fiftieth percentile of the college
women norms cited in the Brown-Boltzman Survey of Study Habits and
Attitudes Test Manual. The UHSUCCESSLUl group, on the other hand, fell
into the twentieth percentile.

126

Previous Shorthand Instruction

 

Collegiate shorthand teachers are concerned about students who
wish to repeat the beginning shorthand course. It is frequently stated
‘that these students are simply trying to get an "easy grade."

Although most of the beginning shorthand students in this study
had no prior shorthand instruction, previous shorthand instruction was
not a factor in successful beginning shorthand achievement.

Greater use should be made of placement tests for guiding students

in selecting the most apprOpriate shorthand course.

Clerical §peed and Comprehension

 

The Minnesota Clerical Tests, a test of clerical speed and com-
prehension, consists of two subtests: number checking and name checking.
A significant relationship existed between the name checking
subtest and success in beginning shorthand.

The name checking subtest of the Minnesota Clerical Test may be
a useful prognosticator of beginning shorthand success.S Additional
research should be conducted to establish norms or scales specifically
useful in counseling students interested in enrolling for beginning

shorthand.

 

5In this investigation, for example, the successful beginning
shorthand students fell into the seventieth percentile of one normative
group cited in the Minnesota Clerical Test Manual; the unsuccessful
group, on the other hand, fell into the fortieth percentile.

There were no significant differences between the two achieve-
ment groups and the number checking subtest of the Minnesota Clerical
Test.

127

Psychological Characteristigs-

 

The ten scales of the California Psychological Inventory that
significantly discriminated between the successful and unsuccessful
college level beginning shorthand students were generally indicative
of those characteristics usually necessary for successful claserOm
behavior. Those scales which identified the similarities between the
two achievement groups were generally indicative of social behavior
and adjustment.

Because all of the scales in the CPI Category ”Measures of
Achievement Potential and Intellectual Efficiency" significantly dis-
criminated between the successful and unsuccessful beginning shorthand
students, guidance counselors may wish to concentrate their efforts
on this one broad category.

Business teachers should recognize the interdependency of the
scales as they relate to individual achievers and make use of the
Inventory only with the aid of a trained counselor or as a confidential

research device.

Part III

Section I

The College Level Transcription Students

Thirty-four variables were employed to identify certain similari-
ties or differences that may exist between the successful and urSucc-
ful college level transcription students.

The findings of this study are based on high and low transcrip—

tion achievers; moreover, the findings relate to group rather than

individual characteristics.

The college level successful and unsuccessful transcription

students were found significantly different at the levels indicated

by category or mean scores in:

Category (chi-square statistical technique)

1.

college major (.01)

number of weeks of previous shorthand instruction (.01)
college English composition grade (.01)

transcription achievement, according to three letters

dictated at 80, 100, and 120 words a minute and transcribed
on a typewriter (.001)

Mean Scores (Student's E-test and point-biserial correlation)

 

5.

6.

No

spelling,according to the Wellesley Spelling Scale (.001)

critical thinking, according to the Watson-Glaser Critical
Thinking Appraisal (.01)

college grade-point average (.001)

typewriting accuracy, according to a three-minute straight-
copy typing test (.05)

typewriting speed, according to a three-minute straight-
copy typing test (.001)

significant differences were found between the successful and

unsuccessful college level transcription students at the .05 level of

significance in the following characteristics:

Categggy (chi-square statistical technique)

year in college
place of previous shorthand instruction
number of weeks of previous typewriting instruction

number of hours of office work experience involving the
use of a typewriter

transcription achievement, according to a letter dictated
at 60 words a minute and transcribed on a typewriter

Mean Scores (Student's g-test and point-biserial correlatiOn)

 

b.

7.

10.

ll.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

number checking, according to the Minnesota Clerical Test
name checking, according to the Minnesota Clerical Test

study habits and attitudes, according to the Brown-Holtzman
Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes

dominance, according to the CPI

capacity for status, according to the CPI
sociability, according to the CPI

social presence, according to the CPI
self-acceptance, according to the CPI

sense of well-being, according to the CPI
responsibility, according to the CPI
socialization, according to the CPI

self-control, according to the CPI

tolerance, according to the CPI

good impression, according to the CPI
communality, according to the CPI

achievement via conformance, according to the CPI
achievement via independence, according to the CPI
intellectual efficiency, according to the CPI
psychological-mindedness, according to the CPI
flexibility, according to the CPI

femininity, according to the CPI

Section II
Implications for Guidance Counselors

and Business Education Teachers

 

The purpose of this investigation was to provide information

130
useful for guidance counselors and business educators who are responsible
for advising students in course and occupational planning.

The need for this information is apparent as past research indi-
cated that a large number of students who complete a shorthand sequence
are not capable of producing vocationally acceptable letters. Of the
207 students enrolled in the transcription classes at the sever parti-
cipating institutions, 31 percent of them were classified as "unsuc-
cessful" by their transcription teachers; 32 percent of them were
classified as "successful” by their transcription teachers; and 37
percent of them were classified as "average” by their transcription
teachers.

While there were many significant differences between the success-
ful and unsuccessful college level bggiflgigg shorthand students as
related to the variables employed in this study, there were fewer
significant differences between the college level successful and unsuc-
cessful transcription students.

Unlike the beginning shorthand students, the significant differ-
ences identified between he successful and unsuccessful transcription
students apparently were directly related to the transcription process.
With only a few exceptions, successful achievement in transcription
was based on factors directly related to classroom achievement.

Successful transcription achievement was significantly related
to achievement in English, shorthand, and typewriting skills.

In general, successful transcription students were able to write
and transcribe shorthand at vocationally acceptable speeds; they had
significantly higher mean scores on the college English composition

grade and a standardized Spelling test; the successful and unsuccessful

131
groups were significantly different in typewriting accuracy and speed.
Past research findings have generally agreed that English compo-

sition grades and overall grade-point average were among the best

predictors of shorthand success. While these factors did significantly
distinguish the successful and unsuccessful transcription students in
the present investigation, they are not generally useful on the college

level. Many students enroll in the transcription class immediately

upon entering college; therefore, other guidance factors are needed.
English Skills

Because two variables related to English skills produced signifi-
cant differences in the mean scores of the successful and unsuccessful
transcription studexts (English composition grade and spelling ability),
these factors deserve the attention of both the guidance counselor and
the transcription teacher. Because past research indicates that high
school English composition grades are useful predictors of shorthand
success, collegiate guidance counselors should consider the er of
this high school grade when college English grades are not available
for counseling purposes.

As an English composition grade may or may not be available for
guidance purposes on the college level, a standardized English usage
test should be used in discovering certain deficiencies in English
skills. Students with these deficiencies should be required to enroll
for remedial work before entering r‘r while enrolled in the t unscrip-
tion class.

Spelling proficiency is also a necessity for vocational competency.

A standardized spelling test should be administered to all students

laZ

enrolled in the transcription course. Students who fall below certain
norms6 should be enc0uragcd to seek special help.

Research should be conducted to establish norms or scales
specifically useful in counseling students interested in enrolling
in the transcription class.

Transcription teachers should also consider a certain amount of
formal spelling instruction as an integral part of the transcription

course.

Critical Thinking

 

Critical thinking is viewed as a composite of attitudes, traits,

7

m

The findings 0

knowledges and skills. _ this investigation indicated
that a significant relationship existed between transcription success
and critical thinking.

Because careful and analytical thinking is an important facet in
the career of the executive secretary or business teacher, a critical
thinking measurement may be a useful tool for occupational plannirg

and counseling. A critical thinking instrument may also he a useful

prognosticator of transcription success.8

 

61n the present investigation, for example, the unsuccessful
students fell into the fiftieth percentile of the Grade 13 norms of
the Wellesley Spelling Scale. The successful students, on the other
hand, fell into the seventieth percentile.

7The Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal, used to measure
critical thinking in this investigation, consists of five subtests
designed to measure different, though interdependent,aspects of
c:itica1 thinking: inference, recognition of assumptions, deduction,
interpretation, evaluation of arguments. These subtests are described
on page 49.

81n the present investigation, for example, the successful
transcription students fell into the seventy-second percentile of a

Research should be conducted to establish norms or scales
specifically useful in counseling students interested in enrolling
in the transcription class.

Research should also be conducted in developing te ching methods

that may develop and strengthen the critical thinking abilities of the

transcription students.

Office Work Experience

 

Fifty-one percent of all the transcription students in this study
had no office work experience of any type; 10 percent of all of the
transcription students had less than 230 hours of actual o¢fice work
experience involving the use of a typewriter.

Shorthand teachers should not assume that transcription students
recognize ”world-of-work" responsibilities and the expectations and
obligations of the college-trained secretary. In addition, future

office education teachers may not be aware of many office routines

and. job requirements .

Number of Nests of Previous Shorthand Instruction

 

Forty-nine percent of all the transcription students in this
study had the equivalent of two or more years of shorthand instruction
before enrolling for the college transcription course (21 percent oi
them had 83 weeks or more of previous shorthand instruction).

While it is not surprising to experienced shorthand teachers to

find students with as much as the equivalent of two years of instruction

Grade 12 normative group cited in the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking
lfippraisal Manual; the unsuccessful group, on the other hand, fell into
the Ffifty-fourth percentile of this normative group.

134

ful" (33 percent of the unsuccessful crnnp had

classified as ”unsrceess
this much trainirg), it is of great conscrn to both business teachers
and guidance counselors. Unsuccessful transcription students are
generally vocationally incompetent, at least in most etenographic
positions.

Students enrolling For transcription with less than two years of
previous shorthand training seem to be at a tisad‘artage. Yet, those

students who take all of their shorthand training at the colle : level

3
may come to the transcription course with only two semester (or the
equivalent) of preparation.

It seems paramount that students receive careful guidance in

selecting the most appropriate shorthand course to elec'. reater

use should be made of shorthand placement and proficxency examinations.

humps; of Weeks of Previous Iypewriting Instruction

 

The number of weeks of previous typewriting instruction was not
a significant factor in successful tcarscription achieverent. There
were, however, significant differences in the mean-scores of the type-
writing accuracy and speed of the cuccesstul and unsuccessful tran-
scription students.

Seventy-two percent of the successtul students and 61 percent of
the unsuccessful students had the equivalent of two years of type-
writing instruction before entering the transcription class.

Because the amount of typewriting instruction was net a signifi-
cant factor in Successful transcription achievement, business educators
may wish to re-evaluate the typewritirg requirements and number of

typewriting courses offered at the college level. Many stu7ents mrv

he takirg more typewritirg tion is necessa"y (though the quality of
the class work was not analyzed).
Business education departments shOuld consider greater use of

typewriting placement and proficiency examinations, allowing proticicrt

students to make more valuable use Cf instructional time.

Part IV

Recommendations for Further Study

 

The following recommendations for further studies are made:

1. A study of vocational choice should be made to determine
those factors that influence students to major in collegiate secretarial
or business education programs.

2. A group should be identified, through the Brown-Holtzman
Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes, as having poor study habits and
attitudes. These selected students should then be placed in a special
beginning shorthand class to determine if special teaching techniques
could overcome poor study habits and attitudes and lead to successful
beginning shorthand achievement.

3. FUrther research should be conducted with certain scales of
the California Psychological Inventory, the Watson-Glaser Critical
Thinking Appraisal, and the name-checking subtest of the Minnesota
Clerical Test to verify their high relationship to beginning shorthand
success. Norms or scales specifically useful for counselors in coun-
seling students interested in enrolling in beginning shorthand should
be deve10ped as part of this research.

4. A study should be conducted to determine the extent to which

(unantity and quality of previous office work experience affects

136
transcription achievement.

5. A study shOuld be conducted to determine what similarities
or differences exist between successful shorthand students and success-
ful students majoring in collegiate programs unrelated to shorthand.

6. A study should he conducted to determine the extent to which
the emphasis of spelling through formal classroom instruction has on
beginning shorthand and transcription achievement.

7. A study should be conducted to determine the extent to which
a required remedial English composition class has on beginning shorthand
and transcription achievement.

8. A study should be conducted to determine the relationship of
critical thinking and success in the transcription class and success
on the job.

9. Follow-up studies should be conducted to determine the degree
of job success of the shorthand students classified as successful or
unsuccessful according to final class grade or selected classroom

achievement or standardized tests.

APPENDIX A
GENERAL GUIDE FOR RESEARCH EXAMINERS

General Information

Your part in this state-wide research project is an important
one. It will be up to you to uniformly administer all of the
standardized tests, keep track of all data collected and transmitted,
and act as a liaison between me and the class instructors.

Each instructor is foregoing class time because they feel this
project is an important one. Thus, it's your real responsibility to
maintain cordial relations--and administer each of the tests at the
convenience of each instructor. Remember: without the willingness
and cooperation of these faculty members, our project would not be
possible.

Develop good working relations with the students. If they have
confidence in you, they'll answer more confidently and honestly. Do
all you can to reduce any test anxiety that might occur--and be certain
to always stress that all of this information is strictly confidential
and will not have any bearing on their class grade or standing.

You've been selected as an examiner because of your ability to
work effectively. Organize your time and material so that every minute
of class time is efficiently used.

The attached material should provide answers to any questions
you may have; please contact me immediately, however, should you have

any additional questions or problems.

137

WHAT TO TELL THE STUDENTS

Naturally, students will be curious about why they are taking these
tests. Tell them this:

They are part of a state-wide research project that is being
conducted in seven colleges throughout Michigan.

And be certain you stress this:

All of the information that is gathered for this research
project is confidential. They, their instructor, or their
school will not be identified in any way; thus, every
student should answer confidently and honestly.

MAKING ARRANGEMENTS FOR TESTING

Always discuss several days in advance with each instructor the most
convenient day for administering the standardized tests. Exact time
required for each test will usually depend on the speed at which the
students are able to work and the time needed to give directions.
Discuss the time needed with the instructor. Because some time may
be available after the testing is completed, some regular classroom
activity can take place.

TIME SCHEDULE
These minimum time requirements should be kept in mind:

. Minnesota Clerical: actual test time is 15 minutes

. Wellesley Spelling: about 15 minutes is needed

. Study Habits and Attitudes: about 20 minutes is needed
. California Psychological: about 45 minutes

. Critical Thinking: about 45 minutes (often less)

U'IDUNH

Plan your schedule for the most effective and efficient use of class
time. Give as many tests as possible in one class meeting. And
remember, the above time requirements do not include time for giving
instructions (minimal on some, more complex on others).

ADMINISTERING THE TESTS

It's important to keep in mind that you are giving a test (although
please don't call them ”tests")--not directing a learning activity.

After giving the directions and answering any specific questions re-
lated to each test and the use of the answer sheet, no advice should
be given that may influence the student's response in any manner. Do
not walk around the room or look over any student's shoulder while
the test is underway. Stand in front of the room.

139

A separate instruction sheet for administering each standardized
test is attached. AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AND AGAIN BEFORE ADMINISTERING
EACH TEST, PLEASE READ EACH SHEET CAREFULLY.

Should you have any questions, write or call me collect at:
Home: 616-349-5093 WHU: 616-383-1908

Please do not improvise; if you're not certain of what to do, find
out. It's important that you follow the directions.

RECORD KEEPING AND DATA TRANSMITTAL

Keep an individual control sheet (that will be supplied) for each
class. Immediately after each test, record the data gathered on these
control sheets and send the answer sheets to me:

L. H. Hoskovis

Business Education Department
School of Business

Western Michigan University
Kalamazoo, Michigan 49001

As soon as possible, please supply me with a carbon copy of each of
your control sheets.

Keep track of all the postage and bill me.

ABOUT THOSE ABSENTEES

If there is an unusually heavy class absence the day that you plan to
administer a test, it would be more sensible to postpone the test.
Discuss this possibility with the instructor when making your arrange-
ments.

Absentees should make up each test within one week. To conserve time,
you should schedule a general make-up session.

PAYMENT SCHEDULE

I appreciate your willingness to participate in this project; your
role is an important one. Please keep track of all time spent and
other expenses; you may want to be paid at the end of all your work,
half-way through, or some other method. Whatever you decide, just
bill me for the amount--and you'll hear from me via a check in the
return mail......with many, many thanks!

140
DIRECTIONS FOR ADMINISTERING

Brown-Holtzman Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes

 

Materials Needed

1. A copy of the Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes for each student
2. A machine-scoring answer sheet for each student (labeled WMU testing)
3. A #2 pencil for each student

4. A piece of chalk for writing directions on the board

Special Requirement

Immediately upon entering the room, the following information should he
clearly written on the chalkboard in several places so that it may
easily be read from any seat in the r00m:

Mark 1 for RARELY, which means 0 to 15% of the time

Mark 2 for SOMETIMES, which means 16 to 35% of the time

Mark 3 for FREQUENTLY, which means 36 to 65% of the time

Mark 4 for GENERALLY, which means from 66 to 85% of the time

Mark 5 for ALMOST ALWAYS, which means from 86 to 100% of the time

Time Requirements

While there is no time limit, most students should finish in about 20
minutes; after 20 minutes, unusually slow students may be urged, if
necessary, to work a bit more rapidly.

T E S T A D M I N I S T R A T I O N

Remind students that they are participating in a state-wide research
project. Assure them that this survey has absolutely no bearing on
their grade or their standing at this college and that all information
is confidential.

1. Distribute the answer sheets and #2 pencils. Ask students to com-
plete the information section of the answer sheet.

2. Then say:

Please notice that this answer sheet is numbered hori-
zontally rather than vertically. Be certain that the
question in the test booklet corresponds with the number on
your answer sheet.

Note: please illustrate this method of answering on the

141

board; most students are in the habit of using
vertical-type answer sheets. Ask for_guestiors.

 

Be certain to use the #2 pencil in marking your answers.
3. After this is done, as :

I'm now going to distribute your survey booklets--please
do no; make any marks in this booklet; all answers are to
be marked on the answer sheet. Do not turn the page until
told to do so.

4. When each person has a booklet, say:

Please read the directions on the front of the booklet
silently while I read them aloud (do so)

Stress: A. This is not a test
B. There are no right or wrong answers
C. 'Mark each statement on the basis of
what you actually think or do--not
what you think you should do
D. All information is completely confidential

EXPLAIN IN DETAIL THE METHOD OF USING ANSWER SHEET

Let's look at Question 1. It asks, "I FEEL THAT TEACHERS
DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE STUDENT'S PROBLEMS."

Notice the key I have written on the chalkboard. If your
answer is rarel , you would mark the small number 1; if
your answer is lmost alwa 8, you would mark the small
number 5.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS????

Remember: every question should be answered on the basis of
how you actually feel or what you actually do. It's very
important that you answer on this basis.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS about using the answer sheet. Notice
the key is also indicated in your test booklet.

If there are no further questions, you may begin.
5. When all examinees have finished, collect the booklets, answer

sheets, and pencils. BE CERTAIN THAT EACH PERSON HAS WRITTEN HIS
NAME ON THE ANSWER SHEET and that all material is accounted for.

l4?

DIRECTIONS FOR ADMINISTERING

The California Psychological Inventory

Materials Needed

1. A copy of the California Psychological Inventory for each student.
2. A special California Psychological Inventory answer sheet; 23
special pencil is required for completing this answer sheet.

Time Requirements

While there is no time limit, most students should finish in about 45
minutes.

LEST ADMINISTRATION

Remind students that they are participating in a state-wide research
project. Assure them that this test has absolutely no bearing on their
grade or their standing at this college and that all information is
confidential.

1. Distribute the answer sheets and ask the students to complete the
information section.

2. After this is done, as :

Notice that this answer sheet is numbered horizontally
rather than vertically. Read the directions for completing
the answer sheet very carefully.

If your answer to a question is true, mark a dark X above
the number; if your answer is false, mark a dark X below
the number. (Please illustrate on the board)

3. Distribute the booklets, saying:

Do not make any marks in this booklet; all answers are to
be marked on the answer sheet. Do not open the booklet
until I tell you to do so.

Please read the directions on the booklet silently while
I read them aloud. (do 30)

Stress: A. This is not a test
B. There is no right or wrong answer
C. All answers are completely confidential

4. After all questions have been answered, students should begin. If
questions arise about the definition of a word while the test is

143

in process, the examiner may answer them. Questions requesting
explanation of a concept or interpretation of a test item are
usually dealt with by encouraging the student to use his own
judgment. If any item seems particularly troublesome to a student,
he may be advised to leave it blank.

When all examinees have finished, collect the test books, answer
sheets being certain that all are returned and that each student
has written his name on the answer sheet.

1&4

DIRECTIONS FOR ADMINISTERING

The Minnesota Cleriggl Test

Materials Needed

1. A copy of the Minnesota Clerical Test for each student
2. A stop-watch or other satisfactory timing device

Note: NQIanswer sheets are used for this test; students write
directly on the test booklet. Any kind of pencil may be used.

Time Reguirements

THIS TEST MUST BE STRICTLY TIMED. Fifteen (15) minutes is required
to complete this test; the time is divided as follows:

Test 1 Number Checking exactly 8 minutes required
Test 2 Name Checking exactly_l minutes required
exactly 15 minutes required

TEST ALLMLNISTRATION

Remind students that they are participating in a state-wide research
project. Assure them that this test has absolutely no bearing on their

grade or their standing at this college and that all information is
confidential.

1. Distribute the test folders, warning the students not to open them;
as soon as all the tests are distributed, as :

Write your name, student number, and school on the first page.

Now read the instructions very carefully and work the samples
=as directed at the bottom of the first page.

2. After the students have completed the samples and understand the
directions, read the correct answers to the sample questions.

ASK FOR QUESTIONS.

3. When all questions have been answered and students understand
specifically how to proceed, say:

Be ready to open the folder, and when I give the signal,
start. Begin checking those numbers that are the same;
those numbers that are different should be left blank.

When I give the signal to STOP, stop immediately and draw
a line under the last one you are looking at.

145
Now open your folder and begin. (begin timing for exactly
8 minutes)
4. At the end of exactly eight minutes, say:

STOP. . . and draw a line under the last number you were
looking at.

Close your folder and turn it over so you are looking at
the back where it says "Ready for Test?"

5. When everyone has turned over his folder, sa :

Be ready to open the folder; and when I give the signal,
start. Begin checking those names that are the same; those
names that are different should be left blank. When I give
the signal to STOP, stop immediately and draw a line under
the last one you are looking at.

Now open your folder to Test 2 and start. (begin timing for
exactly seven minutes)

6. At the end of exactly seven minutes, sgy:

STOP. . . and draw a line under the last name you were
looking at. Please turn back to the front page.

7. Collect the test booklets being certain that each person has
placed his name on the test booklet.

146
DIRECTIONS FOR ADMINISTERING

The Wptson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal

Materigls Needed

 

l. A copy of the watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal for each
student

2. A special W-G Critical Thinking answer sheet for each student; pp
special pencil is needed.

3. Stop-watch

Time Reguirements

While there is no time limit, most students should finish in about 35
minutes. Every student should be allowed to finish. If any student
has not finished when time is called, this fact should be recorded on
his paper and the total time Spent.

Each individual test is timed in order to pace the students; the
breakdown to follow is:

1. Inference 13 minutes maximum
2. Recognition of ASSumptions 6 minutes maximum
3. Deduction 10 minutes maximum
4. Interpretation 9 minutes maximum
5. Evaluation of Arguments 6 minutes maximum

44 minutes maximum

T E S T A D M I N I S T R A T I O N

Remind students that they are participating in a state-wide research
project. Assure them that this appraisal has no bearing on their grade
or their standing at this college and that all information is confi-
dential.

l. Distribute answer sheets and ask students to complete information
section.

2. Distribute test booklets, saying:
Please do not make any marks in this booklet; all answers
are to be made on the special answer sheet. Do not turn
the page until you are told to do so.

3. When each person has a test booklet, say:

This booklet contains five tests designed to find out how
logically and analytically you can think.

147

Each test is preceded by its own specific directions. When
I tell you to begin, you will read the directions for the'

first test and study the sample questions until you know
what you are to do.

If you cannot readily determine what the directions mean,
raise your hand and I will explain them to you. Do not ask
questions about a test after you start to answer it.

For each question, decide what you think is the best answer;
then record your choice by making a black mark between the
appropriate pair of dotted lines on the answer sheet.

You may answer a question even when you are not perfectly
sure that your answer is correct, but you should avoid wild
guessing. Do not spend too much time on any one item. When
you finish a page, go right on to the next one. If you
finish all of the tests before time is up, go back and check
your answers. Work as rapidly and as accurately as you can.

In marking your answers, always be sure that the answer space
is numbered the same as the question in the test booklet.

You will be allowed 13 minutes for the first test. This is
ample time for all of you to answer every question without
hurrying if you do not take too long on any one question.
When you finish Test 1, go right on to Test 2 without waiting.

80 that you will have a guide in spacing your time, I am going
to stop any of you who have not finished each test in the
usual time and start you on the next test. Those who run a
bit short of time on some tests may have time left at the

end. When you finish Test 5, the last test, you can go back
and answer any questions that you skipped, and check your
answers to the other questions. If you finish a test before
time is called, go right ahead to the next test.

Remember, you are to start reading the directions when I tell
you to start and continue working on the successive tests
until I tell you to stop.

When this information has been given, please review what you just
said; then, ask students for questions.

When all questions have been answered, students may begin. Keep
track of the time and announce the time after 13, 6, 10, 9, 6 min-
utes have elapsed (see time requirements). Remind students that
they may go back and complete any unanswered questions later.

At the end of the available time, please collect test booklets and
answer sheets being certain that all are returned and that each
student has written his name on answer sheet.

l4?
DIRECTIONS FOR ADMINISTERING

The Wellesley Spelling Scale

Materials Needed

1. A copy of the Wellesley Spelling Scale for each student
2. A machine-scoring answer sheet (labeled WMU testing)
3. A #2 pencil for each student

Time Requirements

While there is no time limit, most students should finish in about 15
minutes. After 15 minutes, unusually slow students may be urged, if
necessary, to work more rapidly.

T E S T A D M I N I S T R A T I 0 N

Remind students that they are participating in a state~wide research
project. Assure them that this scale has absolutely no bearing on their
grade or their standing at this college and that all information is

confidential.

l. Distribute the answer sheets and the #2 pencils; ask students to
complete the information section of the answer sheet.

2. After this is done, say:
Please notice that this answer sheet is numbered hori-
zontally rather than vertically. Be certain that the answer
in the test booklet corresponds with the number on the

answer sheet.

Please illustrate this type of answer sheet on the board; most
students are in the habit of using vertical-type answer sheets.

Be certain to use a #2 pencil in marking your answers.

3. After this is done, distribute the booklets, sa in :
Do not make any marks in the booklets; all answers are to
be made on the answer sheet. Do not turn the page until
told to do so.

4. When each person has a booklet, say:

Please read the instructions written on the booklet silently
while I read them aloud. They are:

l4Q

This is a spelling test. After each of the sentences in
this booklet there are four spellings of the word which has
been omitted in the sentence. Decide which form of the word
is correctly Spelled and mark its number.

Look at Sample A: A good leader is a friend of the people.
Number 2 is correctly Spelled--so the small 2 would be
heavily marked on your answer sheet.
Look at Sample B. (continue in same manner)
If there are no questions, you may begin.

When all examinees have finished, collect the booklets, answer

sheets, and pencils. Be certain that each person has written his
name on the answer sheet and that all material is accourtcd for.

APPENDIX B

STUDENT INFORMATION FORM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Name Age School
Local Address Phone
Home Address City State Zip
Major: Business Teacher Education Class: Freshman Female
Two-year Secretarial Sophomore Male
Four-year Secretarial Junior
Other (specify) Senior
Other

List all the shorthand courses you have ever taken. Include courses
taken in high school, evening school, business school, junior college,
university. Please specify number of weeks, quarters or semesters.

Do NOT include the shorthand course you are now taking.

 

Amount of Time

 

Course Place Taken No. of No. of Other
Quarters Semesters (less than qr.
or sem.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

List all the typing courses you have ever taken. Include courses taken
in junior high, summer school, evening school, business school, junior
college, university. Please specify number of weeks, quarters, semes-
ters. Do Np: include the typing course you are now taking.

 

Amount of Time

 

Course Place Taken No. of No. of Other
Quarters Semesters (less than qr.
or sem.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

150

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

nous: ceaquuOMBH

msqmmwumao
has new ommofimv

mBZMZZUU

On On ON OH
away 0» cu coco

one: cm on mama

 

 

 

om
own»
one:

 

on em OH
on so scam

ON 0H moon

I

 

 

_

 

 

wmconuuocm

mcwnwuuuoouu can
wouuwus woman 30% man
sees m undo: mama so:

 

 

 

Aooaunfiuumamuu

comnuuona cmnu wosuov
«wowomu woods :05 can

 

mass m

mmmmm acme sow

 

wxuo3 30%
man xooa

a wuss;
some sex

 

«one; xuos
30> can
nausea
home 30m

 

saggy
now

 

 

.soooauoaxm xuos ouwmwo mm m>m£ sou wH

uoonw aswunsoo one 50% mu

 

Hooaom

 

amocmm mozuHmmmxm MUHhmo

o NHn2umm<

.H «can so mzoz some

 

 

.cOwuusm myzmzxuo us» ca Amwumfio can gem any umwfi mucosa .n0n moo
.AOm commons woo; moavsHooauacHes uu>o o>s£ so» anon muaumo usu HHm mafia seesaw

oauz

lSl

APPENDIX D

DIRECTIONS FOR ADMINISTERINGg

The ngpscripti n Letters

 

These letters are intended for the transcription classes only. Four
letters to be dictated at speeds of 60, 80, 100, and 120 words a
minute are attached. All student transcripts are to be typed. All
letters are three minutes long.

Egon to Administer

These letters should be given within the last four weeks of the school
term.

DictatiggrProcedurgg

All letters are marked in 15 second intervals. The diagonal line
indicates each 15 second interval.

NO PREVIEW SHOULD BE GIVEN. Warm-up drill on other dictation material
is permitted, however.
Transcribing Procedure

1. Each student should type her name and school in the upper right
hand corner of each transcript.

2. No inside address is needed; only the salutation is necessary.
3. Students should double space.

4. Students should erase all errors and may use a dictionary and a
secretarial manual.

5. The shorthand notes should be stapled to each transcript.

Transcribing Time

While there is no time limit for transcribing these letters, please ask
students to indicate transcription time on each transcript. Normally,
one letter a day should be given along with other class work. Depend-
ing on the time available in each class, it may be feasible to dictate
the 60 and 80 letters in one day and have them transcribed. The 100
and 120 letters will probably need to be given on separate days.

152

153

SIXTY WORDS A MINUTE

Dear Mr. Smith:

The sale of new automobiles was extremely low last week even/
though we advertised a special price on each model. However, it was
not due to/ a lack of advertising. As you know, the weather was
mainly responsible.

After/ the heavy snow on Thursday and Friday, we did not
expect our sale on that Saturday (1) to be successful. In fact,
neither the salesmen nor the customers could reach/ our place of
business.

Therefore, we are now expecting to feature the same low prices/
on each model for this coming Saturday. We sincerely hope the
weather cooperates/ ,this time!

Every car in stock will be reduced in price by ten per cent,
and we (2) have almost every model in stock. In some cases the
choice of color is limited] but each car is available with a variety
of accessories. You/ may wish to drop in earlier in the week and
Spend more time examining each car./ Plan today to visit our place
of business Saturday to make a deal.

Yours truly, (3)

154

EIGHTY WORDS A MINUTE

Dear Miss Smith:

Did you read any good books in the last month? Have you read
the latest novel? Probably not, because/ libraries seldom buy more
than two or three copies and there is usually a waiting list for
the latest/ novels.

People have solved the problem of reading the new books by
joining the Readers Book Club. As a member you/ receive a weekly
newSpaper about new books, not only novels but other kinds of books
also. A group of (l) experts reviews selected books and writes
short summaries of them. Each month you receive a card on which
you merely mark/ your choice of one of nine books at the special
membership price of $3. If you prefer, you may purchase other]
monthly selections at the same $3 rate. To keep your membership
active, you need purchase only six/ books every twelve months. So
without leaving your home, your membership in the Readers Book Club
keeps you up with news (2) of current books and provides oppor-
tunities to build up your personal library at an extremely low/
cost.

Perhaps you are interested in only one type of book, such as
mysteries. If so, just indicate your/ desires on the enclosed
questionnaire and receive only the notices about this specific type.

If you do decide/ to terminate your membership, we will take
care of the matter promptly and without question. Join today.

Yours, (3)

155
ONE HUNDRED WORDS A MINUTE

Dear Teacher:

Are you interested in increasing the efficiency of your teaching?
Are you worried about the amount of knowledge and/ understanding that
students display about the events occurring in our great country
daily? If so, please continue reading.

The American] Publishing Company has been concerned about this
problem for a long time. We desired to help young Americans in our
country but/ we were not sure about an appropriate way to help.

In the past seven years, however, a considerable number of teachers
have (1) written to us suggesting ways they thought we might aid
them. Consequently, we decided that now is the right time to act.
After months in/ interviewing applicants, we employed Mr. Sam Jones
for the position of educational director. Mr. Jones was formerly a/
teacher but has been working as a report writer for a large publisher
for the past three years. He comes to us with very high recommenda-
tions/ from his past employer.

A committee was organized to advise Mr. Jones in his new pro-
gram. They carefully analyzed the (2) problem and studied all
incoming suggestions.

American Publishing Company will begin publishing a weekly
bulletin for/ high school students. The bulletin contains articles
giving important news of the past week. Each article is written so
that it is clear/ and understandable to the student and has illus-
trations to bring out important aSpects of each story. Please read
the sample capies/ of our newspaper.

We would very much appreciate any remarks or suggestions that
would help us improve this program.

Sincerely yours, (3)

 

II E i. I.) fihl

156

ONE HUNDRED TWENTY WORDS A MINUTE

Dear Mr. Anderson:

Do you know what you expect to acnieve when you read a book?
Some people strive only for romance while others read to gain knouled c.
A few people! do not read at all or find it too exhausting to real.
These people avoid reading anythirg and No not even read the daily
newspaper. Whether you enjoy reading/ romances or whether you prefer
to read about the lives of famous people, the Great Books Club always
provides several important sclecriors each moith. As a/ member, you
receive a pcnphlet that describes the selections around the beginning
of each month. All that you need to ”o is mark your choice on the
erclcoed order blank and (1) send it to our company. In ten days
you will receive the book in the mail. 3750, you car order more thar
ore hook each month or none at all. Members take a twenty-five/ per
cent discount on every book purchased, and you need purchase oily four
books a year to retain your membership.

The Great Books Club offers a wide variety of/ selections for
old members. The Club has also included a feature that no other book
club offers. Outstanding offers are constantly made to attract new
readers/ but the usual book club never offers these outstanding
selections to their regular members.

As a Great Books Club member you also have this advantage:
Our introductory (2) offer to new members changes at the beginning
of each calendar year. If you as a regular subscriber purchased nine
books during the past year, you/ receive the special offer free.
If you are a regular subscriber but have not purchased nine books
during the past year, you may purchase the Special offer selection/
at the regular twenty-five per cent discount.

We hOpe you enjoy reading whether reading for pleasure or
knowledge. We hope that you decided to enroll as a subscriber/ of
the Great Books Club today. If so, the introductory book will be in
your possession in ten days. Our readers are usually satisfied.

Sincerely y0urs, (3)

APPENDIX E

DIRECTIONS FOR ADMINISTERING

The Shorthand ReadinggTest

 

This is a timed test and is intended for the beginning shorthand
classes only.

When to Administer

This test should be given to the beginning classes within a two-week
period following the last theory chapter in the textbook.

Materials Needed

 

1

2.
3.
4.

A test booklet for each student

A stop watch or other timing device

Each student should provide her own pencil or pen

Each student should provide her own sheet of 8% x 11 lined paper.

S T A D M I N I S T R A T I O N

Ask each student to write her name and school in the upper right
hand corner of a sheet of 8% x 11 lined paper.

Advise students to have a Spare pen or pencil available.
Before distributing the test booklets, say:
Please do not open this booklet until you are told.

When each person has a booklet and the materials for transcribing,
say:

This is a test that will require you to transcribe from
shorthand into longhand. Please write neatly.

When I give the signal, open the test booklet and begin
transcribing into longhand. Please skip every other line
on your paper for ease of scoring. You may not use a
dictionary during this test.

You will have exactly 15 minutes to complete this test.

Are there any questions?

When all the questions are answered and the students know exactly
what to do, begin timing the test. At the end of exactly 15

157

158

minutes, call time and collect all test booklets and transcripts.
Please be certain that each person has turned in a booklet and
has written her name on the transcript.

APPENDIX F

DIRECTIONS FOR ADMINISTERING
The Three-Minute Straight-Copy Timed Writing Test
When to Give
This timed writing is intended for the granscription classes only_and

should be given during the tenth (10) week of class instruction.

Duration of Time

 

This is a three-minute timed writing; two efforts should be allowed.

Directions for Administering

For students: A. Type your name, class, school and instructor's
name in upper right hand corner.

B. Double space.
C. Set tab for indenting paragraphs.

D. Set left margin at 13 and throw carriage at
the end of each copy line.

E. Do not erase during the timing.

F. Should you finish the copy before time is
called, begin again.

G. STOP immediately at the signal.

For instructors: A. Each timed writing should be given for
exactly three minutes.

B. NO previews should be given.

C. Two attempts on the same copy should be allowed;
the second try should be typed on the back
of the first.

D. Students may circle all errors on the timing
they wish considered. The timing not to be
considered should be crossed out with a dark
diagonal line.

E. Speed may or may not be figured--depending on
yOur personal wishes.

159

 

APPENDIX C

DIRECTIONS FOR ADMINISTERING
The Diamond Jubilee Brief Form Tea;
When to Administer: This test should be given within one week after the

completion of Chapter 3; in the beginning textbook. The test should be
previously_announced.

 

Dictation Speed: Please dictate one brief form every eight (8) seconds;
each word may be repeated once.

Transcription Time: No more than twenty (20) minutes should be
allowed for transcribing (in pencil or pen); caution students: If the
brief form has more than one meaning, all must be included.

Please use the answer sheet provided for this test.

1. how, out 35. they 68. thank

2. yesterday 36. those 69. public

3. work 37. have 70. opinion
4. object 38. correspond, 71. newspaper
5. during correspondence 72. glad

6. important, importance 39. idea 73. request
7. satisfy, satisfactory 40. character 74. of

8. their, there 41. manufacture 75. Mr.

9. responsible 42. envelope 76. why

10. company 43. advantage 77. over

11. throughout 44. regular 78. where

12. order 45. state 79. next

13. send 46. never 80. recognize
14. our, are, hour 47. speak 81. railroad
15. probable 48. could 82. immediate
16. difficult 49. between 83. at, it
17. particular 50. were, year 84. circular
18. purpose 51. about 85. publish,
19. advertise 52. several publication
20. acknowledge 53. present 86. Mrs.

21. with 54. situation 87. put

22. will, well 55. govern 88. was

23. than 56. big 89. such

24. world 57. street 90. organize
25. part 58. from 91. experience
26. good 59. in, not 92. but

27. value 60. upon 93. I

28. should 61. when 94. ordinary
29. quantity 62. use 95. shall

30. success 63. yet 96. thing, think
31. regard 64. suggest 97. short

32. wish 65. business 98. enclose
33. which 66. morning 99. general
34. progress 67. won, one 100. subject

160

APPENDIX H

DIRECTIONS FOR ADMINISTERING

The Simplified Brief Form Test

 

When to Administer: This test should be given within one week after
the completion of Chapter 52 in the beginning textbook. The test should
be previously announced.

Dictation Speed: Please dictate one brief form every eight (8) seconds;
each work may be repeated once.

Transcription Time: No more than twenty (20) minutes should be allowed
for transcribing (in pencil or pen); caution students: If the brief
form has more than one meaning, all must be included.

 

Please use the ggswer sheet provided for this test.

1. worth 35. individual 68. unable

2. want 36. character 69. go, good

3. after 37. between 70. opportunity
4. prosecute 38. never 71. allow

5. request 39. let, letter 72. matter

6. body 40. the 73. you, your

7. ordinary 41. thing, think 74. conclude

8. like 42. gone 75. every

9. with 43. order 76. regular

10. what 44. why 77. advertise
11. correspond, 45. am, more 78. that

correspondence 46. big 79. throughout

12. where 47. great 80. world

13. opinion 48. could 81. glad

14. under 49. been 82. regard

15. business 50. did, date 83. merchandise
16. consider, considerationSl. idea 84. otherwise
17. likewise 52. difficult 85. remainder
18. quantity 53. part 86. there, their
19. necessary 54. satisfy, 87. which
20. about satisfactory 88. circle

21. won, one 55. bill 89. side

22. always 56. yet 90. deliver

23. experience 57. several 91. have

24. please 58. must 92. stand

25. yesterday 59. right, write 93. upon

26. purpose 60. direct 94. are, our, hour
27. future 61. else 95. refer, reference
28. return 62. enough 96. should

29. etc. 63. will, well 97. remit, remittance
30. how, out 64. long 98. question
31. morning 65. number 99. speak
32. when 66. suggest, suggestion
33. any 67. all 100. put

34. general
161

When to Administer:

DIRECTIONS

APPENDIX I

FOR ADMINISTERING

The Diamond Jubilee Theory Test

completion of Chapter 48 in the beginning textbook.

be previously_announced.

 

Dictation Speed:

 

each word may be repeated once.

Transcription Time:

allowed for transcribing (in pencil or pen).

No more than twenty (20) minutes

Please use the answer sheet provided for this test.

\ooouomwar-t

10.

14.

29.

31.
32.
33.
34.

prOperly
appliance
penalty
usual

tax
increasingly
vice versa
anxious

. self reliant

specifications

. container

worthwhile
judged
further
employees
total
immodest

. yellow

October

foe

unable
proceedings

. readily

stood
afterwards

. urge
. gleam
. while

gratitude

. congratulate

either

consumer
likelihood

five hundred dollars

35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.

54-

55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.

strength
result
promptly
patient
ought
electric motor
postpone
assortment
freedom
confidently
definite
devised
induce
necessary
child
thermometer
assistance
mark
neighbors
files

equal
confirm
electricity
friendly
subscribed
swell
waited
permission
lecture
always

aim
although

mystery

162

68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.

This test should be given within one week after the
The test should

Please dictate one word every ten (10) seconds;

ShOuld be

awoke
calculations
appoint
leadership
Thursday
privilege
thorough
committee
transcribe
uncertain
economical
diploma
beautiful
attempt
superlative
meant
believe
popularity
changed
associates
executives
fine
assumption
advertisement
Evansville
hair
discouragement
ease
auditors
perhaps
financial
reason
advisable

APPENDIX J

DIRECTIONS FOR ADMINISTERING

The Simplified Theory Test
When to Administer: This test should be given within one week after
the completion of Chapter 53 in the beginning textbook. The test

should be previously announced.

Dictation Speed: Please dictate one word every ten (10) seconds;
each word may be repeated once.

Transcription Time: No more than twenty (20) minutes should be allowed
for transcribing (in pencil or pen).

Please use the answer sheet provided for this test.

 

1. rated 35. figure 68. careful

2. efficiently 36. tonight 69. vexation

3. pending 37. call 70. earth

4. imposition 38. shipped 71. southern

5. shortly 39. unit 72. selfish

6. equal 40. card 73. upward

7. Thursday 41. assume 74. favor

8. supervision 42. Pittsburgh 75. almost

9. flame 43. within 76. circumstantial
10. indicate 44. wheel 77. toil

11. dispose 45. resist 78. five hundred
12. announce 46. wash thousand (500,000)
13. aftermath 47. thoroughly 79. fellowship
14. physical understood 80. cruelty

15. extreme 48. Open 81. radio

16. tedious 49. adult 82. regent

17. improve 50. outline 83. agreement
18. oxford Sl. clutch 84. awake

19. engineer 52. financial 85. furniture
20. last 53. hastily 86. strained
21. provide 54. parking 87. require
22. piano 55. credit 88. demand

23. electric motor 56. sensible 89. strange

24. projected 57. dismiss 90. security
25. positive 58. mistake 91. complain
26. helpless 59. surprisingly 92. strenuous
27. entrance 60. classification 93. include
28. framed 61. tax 94. earliest
29. debate 62. examine 95. information
30. appliance 63. transplant 96. truck
31. misunderstood 64. quick 97. program

32. receive 65. temper 98. trunk
33. resumption 66. A. H. 99. resort
34. post office 67. carpenter lOO. yellow

163

APPENDIX K

Raw Score Means of the Successful and Unsuccessful College Level

Beginning Shorthand Students and Those of High School an
Female Student Samples on the Eighteen Scales of the CPI

q College

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean Scores Mean Scores Mean Scores
Scale N=82 N=61 N = 4,056 N = 2,120
g g H.S. Students Col. Students

Dominance 24.10 23.36 23.7 28.5
Capacity for status 18.39 16.80 16.0 22.2
Sociability 23.24 23.01 21.4 26.0
Social presence 34.15 33.91 31.1 37.0
Self-acceptance 21.12 20.90 18.9 19.5
Sense of well-being 33.80 31.59 34.6 37.5
Responsibility 29.90 26.80 30.0 33.3
Socialization 37.41 34.60 39.4 39.5
Self-control 26.07 22.90 27.6 30.8
Tolerance 19.74 18.09 18.7 25.0
Good impression 14.12 13.40 15.7 19.1
Communality 25.90 24.54 26.1 25.5
Achievement via

conformance 24.79 21.93 24.1 28.8
Achievement via

independence 18.48 17.11 15.5 21.9
Intellectual efficiency 35.69 31.90 34.4 41.4
Psychological-

mindedness 9.21 8.16 8.7 11.4
Flexibility 9.82 10.31 8.9 11.6
Femininity 23.01 22.26 24.1 22.8

 

1“CPI Manual, p. 35

 

164

APPENDIX M

ADJECTIVES DESCRIBING THE HIGH AND LOW SCORERS
ACCORDING TO THE EIGHTEEN SCALES OF THE CPI

Dominance

High Scorers: Aggressive, confident, persistent, and planful,
as being persuasive and verbally fluent; as self-reliant and
independent; and as having leadership potential and initiative.

Low Scorers: Retiring, inhibited, commonplace, indifferent,
silent and unassuming; as being slow in thought and action; as
avoiding of situations of tension and decision; and as lackizé
in self-confidence.

Capacity for status

High Scorers: Amoitious, active, forceful, insightful, resource"
ful, and versatile; as being ascendant and self-seeking,
effective in communication; and as having personal scope and
breadth of interests.

Low Scorers: Apathetic, shy, conventional dull, mild, simple,
and slow; as being stereotyped in thinking, restricted in out-
look and interests; and as being uneasy and awkward in new or
unfamiliar social situations.

Sociability

High Scorers: Outgoing, enterprising, and ingenious; as being
competitive and forward; and as original and fluent in thought.

Low Scorers: Awkward, conventional, quiet, submissive, and
unassuming; as being detached and passive in attitude; and as
being suggestible and overly influenced by others' reactions
and opinions.

Social presence

 

High Scorers: Clever, enthusiastic, imaginative, quick, informal,
spontaneous, and talkative; as being active and vigorous; and
as having an expressive, ebullient nature.

Low Scorers: Deliberate, moderate, patient, self-restrained,

and simple, as vacillating and uncertain in decision; and as
being literal and unoriginal in thinking and judging.

166

167

Self acceptance

 

High Scorers: Intelligent, outspoken, sharp-witted, demanding,
aggressive, and self-centered; as being persuasive and verbally
fluent; and as possessing self-confidence and self-assurance.

Low Scorers: Methodical, conservative, dependable, conventional,
easygoing, and quiet; as self-abasing and given to feelings of
guilt and self-blame; and as being passive in action and narrow
in interests.

Sense of well-being

 

High Scorers: Energetic, enterprising, alert, ambitious, and
versatile; as being productive and active, and as valuing work
and effort for its own sake.

Low Scorers: Unambitious, leisurely, awkward, cautious,
apathetic, and conventional; as being self-defensive and apolo-
getic; and as constricted in thought and action.

Responsibility

High Scorers: Planful, reSponsible, thorough, progressive,
capable, dignified, and independent; as being conscientious
and dependable, resourceful and efficient; and as being alert
to ethical and moral issues.

Low Scorers: Immature, moody, lazy, awkward, changeable, and
disbelieving; as being influenced by personal bias, spite, and
dogmatism; and as under-controlled and impulsive in behavior.

Socialization

 

High Scorers: Serious, honest, industrious, modest, obliging,
sincere, and steady; as being conscientious and responsible;
and as being self-denying and conforming.

Low Scorers: Defensive, demanding, opinionated, resentful,
stubborn, headstrong, rebellious, and undependable; as being
guileful and deceitful in dealing with others; and as given to
excess, exhibition, and ostentation in their behavior.

Self-control

High Scorers: Calm, patient, practical, slow, self-denying,
inhibited, thoughtful, and deliberate; as being strict and
thorough in their own work and in their expectations for others;
and as being honest and conscientious.

Low Scorers: Impulsive, shrewd. excitable, irritable, self-
centered, and uninbitied; as being aggressive and assertive;
and as overemphasing personal pleasure and self-gain.

168

Tolerance

High Scorers: Enterprising, informal, quick, tolerant, clear-
thinking, and resourceful; as being intellectually able and
verbally fluent; and as having broad and varied interests.

Low Scorers: Suspicious, narrow, aloof, wary, and retiring; as
being passive and overly judgmental in attitude; and as dis-
believing and distrustful in personal and social outlook.

Good impression

High Scorers: Co-Operative, enterprising, outgoing, sociable
warm, and helpful; as being concerned with making a good
impression; and as being diligent and persistent.

Low Scorers: Inhibited, cautious, shrewd, wary, aloof, and
resentful; as being cool and distant in their relationships

with others; and as being self-centered and too little concerned
with the needs and wants of others.

Communalipy

High Scorers: Dependable, moderate, tactful, reliable, sincere,
patient, steady, and realistic; as being honest and conscien-
tious; and as having common sense and good judgment.

Low Scorers: Impatient, changeable, complicated, imaginative,
disorderly, nervous, restless, and confused; as being guileful
and deceitful; inattentive and forgetful; and as having
internal conflicts and problems.

Achievement via conformance

High Scorers: Capable, co-operative, efficient, organized,
responsible, stable, and sincere; as being persistent and
industrious; and as valuing intellectual activity and intellec-
tual achievement.

Low Scorers: Coarse, stubborn, aloof, awkward, insecure, and
opinionated; as easily disorganized under stress or pressures
to conform; and as pessimistic about their occupational futures.

Achievement via indppendence

High Scorers: nature, forceful, strong, dominant, demanding,
and foresighted; as being independent and self-reliant; and as
having superior intellectual ability and judgment.

Low Scorers: Inhibited, anxious, cautious, dissatisfied, dull,
and wary; as being submissive and compliant before authority;
and as lacking in self-insight and self-understanding.

 

It'll It!

.169

Intellectual efficiency

High Scorers: Efficient, clear-thinking, capable, intelligent,
progressive, planful, thorough, and resourceful; as being alert
and well-informed; and as placing a high value on cognitive and
intellectual matters.

Low Scorers: Cautious, confused, easygoing, defensive, shallow,
and unambitious; as being conventional and stereotyped in think-
ing; and as lacking in self-direction and self-discipline.

Ppychological-mindedness

High Scorers: Observant, spontaneous, quick, perceptive, talka-
tive, resourceful, and changeable; as being verbally fluent and
socially ascendant; and as being rebellious toward rules,
restrictions, and constraints.

Low Scorers: Apathetic, peaceable, serious, cautious, and
unassuming; as being slow and deliberate in tempo; and as being
overly conforming and conventional.

F1exibili§y_

 

High-Scorers: Insightful, informal, adventurous, confident,
humorous, rebellious, idealistic, assertive, and egoistic; as
being sarcastic and cynical; and as highly concerned with
personal pleasure and diversion.

Low Scorers: Deliberate, cautious, worrying, industrious,
guarded, mannerly, methodical, and rigid; as being formal and
pedantic in thought; and as being overly deferential to authority,
custom, and tradition.

Femininity

High Scorers: Appreciative, patient, helpful, gentle, moderate,
persevering, and sincere; as being respectful and accepting of
others; and as behaving in a conscientious and sympathetic way.

Low Scorers: Outgoing, hard-headed, ambitious, masculine, active,
robust, and restless; as being manipulative and opportunistic

in dealing with others; blunt and direct in thinking and action;
and impatient with delay, indecision, and reflection.

APPENDIX N

Tables 1 2 3 and 4 list the raw scores on the continuous
’ 9 9

variables of the successful and unsuccessful college level beginning

 

 

shorthand and transcription students. The variables are keyed as
follows:
yariable

l Wellesley Spelling

2 Brown-Holtzman survey

3 Watson-Glaser

4 Number checking, NET

5 Name checking, MDT

6 Dominance, CPI

7 Capacity for status, CPI

8 Sociability, CPI

9 Social presence, CPI

10 Self-acceptance, CPI

ll Sense of well-being, CPI

12 Responsibility, CPI

l3 Socialization, CPI

l4 Self-control, CPI

15 Tolerance, CPI

16 Good impression, CPI

l7 Communal ity , CPI

18 Achievement via conformance, CPI
l9 Achievement via independence, CPI
20 Intellectual efficiency, CPI
21 Psychological-mindedness, CPI

22 Flexibility, CPI
23 Femininity, CPI

24 Grade-point average

25 Typing accuracy (total number of errors)
26 Typing speed (gross)

27 Brief form test (percent)

28 Theory test (percent)

29 Reading test (percent)

170

171

 

 

 

NMo MM NM: NM.M NN M0 NM NM NH MN NN Mo MN NH MM NN MM NN MM MN .N MN MMH MHH HM MN 0M
NMo MM MMo Mo.M MN NH NH MM MN MH MN Mo oN MH MM MN MN MH MM MH oN MH HoH MHH MM MN N
MMo MM ooH MM.N MN Mo No MN MH MN MN Mo NH MN MM NM MM MH MN MH HH HN MMH MMH 0M MM MN
MMo MM MMH MM.N NN MH HH NM MN NN MN MH MN HM MM HM MM NN MM MN NN MN HMH NoH MM NN 0M NN
MMo MM MMo MM.N MN Mo NM NM MH MN NN MH MN MM HM MM NM MH NM MH MH HH MoH NNH MM HN MN
MMo NH NMo MM.H MN No MH NM MH MN oN MH HN MN MM NN MM MN 0M MN MH NN MMo MMo MM MN MN
MMo NM MMo MM.N NN oH NH MM oN MN MN MH MN MN MM MM MM MH MM MH NH MH MoH MoH HM NN MN
ooH NM MMo MM.N MH oH HH MM ON MN MN MH NN HM MM NM OM MH MM MN oN NN MMH HNH MM MM MN
NMo MM ooH oH.N MH NH HH MM HN MN MN MH NH NN MM MN NM HN MM MN MN MN MMH NNH oN HN NN
MMo MN ooH MM.M MN Mo HH MM MN MM MN MH NN oM MM MM OM HN MM NN MH NM HNH NMH HM MM MM HN
MMM MM NMo MM.N NN MH oH HM MN MN MN HH MN MN MM MN MM NN HM MN NH MN NHH MNH oN MM oN
MMo MM MMM HM.N MN MH oH NM MN MN MN HH MN NN MM OM MM NN MM MN NN oN MMH MMH HN MM MH
ooH NM ooH MM.M MN Mo MH OM HN MM MN MN MN MM MM MM MM NN MM MN MN NM MMH MMH HN HM MH
Mac HM NMM NN.N MN M0 M0 NN oH MN MN MM Mo OH HM NM MN MN HM NN MH NN MNH MMH MM MH NH
MM: MM MMo MM.M NN Mc oH HM MH HM MN oN MH MM HM MM NM NN MM MN MN NN MMH MNH MM NM MH
MMo MM MMc MM.N MN M0 M0 MN NH HH NN M0 M0 M0 HM MM MN NN MM HN MH MN MMH HNH MM MN MM MH
MMM MN ooH oH.M MN NH NH MM NH MN NN HH MN .MN NM MN MM MN MM MN MN MN MMH MMH NN MM MH
MMo NM MMo MM.N Mo MH Mo OM MH MN MN No MH MH HM OM MM MN MM HM MN MM NMH MMH MM HN MH
MMM MM ooH MM.M MN MH oH MM MH MN MN MN MN NM HM NM MM NN MN MN oN MN MNH HMH oN MM NH
MMo M MMo MM.N MH 0H 0H NM MH MM NN MH 0N MN MM NM MM NN MM oM MN MM MMH MMH MM NM HH
NMo NM MMo MN.N MN Mo oH MM MN NM MN NH MN MN MM HM MM NN NM 0M MN OM MMH MHH MM MM oH
MMo MM MMo _MM.N MN cH HH MN MH MN MN NN MH NM NM MM MM MH MN MH NH NH MNH HMH HM NM M
MMo MM ooH MM.H NN HH No MM HN NN MN oH 0N MN HM MN MM MN OM MN MN NN MMH MMH NM MN NM M
MMo MN MMo HM.N MN Mo oH NM HN MM MN MN MN OM MM MM HM MH MM MN HN MN MMH MNH MM MM N
NMo NN MMo HN.N MN M0 M0 MM HN NN MN MH MN OM NM MM MM NN HM NN MN MM MMc MMo MM MM M
NMo NN MMo MM.N NN No Mo MM MH MN MN NH 0N NM MM MM MM MN MM NN MH MN MMH MMH MM 0M M
MMo MN ooH NM.M HN MH MH NM MN OM NN MN oM MM MM MM HM MN NM NN MH NN NHH HNH MM MM M
NMo MM ooH NH.N MN Mo oH OM 0N MN MN MH MH MH MM MN MM MN MM HM MN MM NMH MMH NM NM OM M
NMo HM MMo MM.N MN NH HH NM MN NM MN HN MN MM HM NM HM MN MM NN NN MM NNH MMo NM NM N
MMo MM MMo MM.N NH No HH MM MH MN MN Mo MH MH NN MN HM NN 0M NM MH MM MMH HMH NM MM H
MN MN NN MN MN NN HN oN MH MH NH MH MH MH MH NH HH oH M M N M M M M N H been

oHMwHum> -suM

oucowoum Mawsuuonm McHaaHmuM Hu>oH oMoHHoo Hammaouoom «Mu we museum 3mm .H oHMmH

172

\I\\

 

 

 

 

n:. ma rt, MH.N CN co oH or H. NN NN MN Mp NH MM HN NM Ha rm MN H MH MMH NNH ca N. MM MM
MOM NM No0 MM.N MH Mo oH MM MH as MN Mo MH HN MM N NM HN MM MN MH MN MMH HMH MN HN NM CM
Nag NM Moo MN.H MN Me MO MP MH MN MN MH .H MH MM Hc MM an N. MN M. :N Ho. .NH NM .H MM .
who NM +30 MN.. MN uh CH no M. NN Mr MH OH in mM NN HM .c N N M NN MMH MMH Md MN MM NM
rmo s 00H MN.N N HH HH MN NH HN NN Mo MH ON MM MN MM NN NM NH NH MH MHH HMH HM MM MM MM
NMo NN MMo MM.N HN Mo 00 M NH MN MN cH MN MN NM MN 0M MN MM MN MN MN NMH MMH MM MM MM MM
Mao NM MMo MM.N NN Mo No NN MH HN MN MH MH HM HM NM MN MH MH Mo MH NH MMH MMH 0M MN MM MM
MMo MM MMo MM.N NN MH MH NN MH MN MN MH HN MM MM MM MM HH MM NH MH NN MMH MMH NM HH 0M MM
MMo MM MMo NM.N NN M0 M0 MM NH MN MN NH MH MN MM NN MM MH MN oN MH MH MMo MoH MN HN MM NM
ooH MM ooH MM.N MN M0 N0 MN MH MN MN NH MH oM MM NM MM MH NM NN MH MH MMH MMH oN MN 0M HM
MMo NM ooH Ho.N MN oH HH NM HN NN MN MH ON ON MM NM MM HN MM MN MH MN MNH MHH MM HM MM oM
MMo oM MMo MM.N NN MH NH MM MH MH MN Mo MH MH MN NN NM MN NM MN MN 0M MMH HMH HM NN MM MM
MMo MN NMo MH.N NN Mo NH NN HH MN MH MH MH MN MM NN NN NH NM HN MH HN MoH MMo MM HH MN MM
Moo MM MMo MM.M MN No oH OM HN OM MN MH MN MM NM MM MM MN MM MN HN MN MHH MNH MM MM MM NM
MMo MM MMo NM.M NN Mo No MN MH MH MN No CH CN MN MN NN 0N HN MH MH MH NMH MMH MN MN 0M MM
Moo 0M MMo Mo.M 0N NH No MM MH MN MN HH NH oN MN MN MM MN NM MN MH MN MMH MMH NN OM NM MM
MMo NM ooH MN.H NN Mo oH MM Mo NN NN MH NH NN MM HM MM MN 0M MN MH MN MMH NMH MM MM oM MM
MMo HM ooH MM.H NN MH Mo NM NH NH MN MH oN NM MM MN MN MH HM MN MH MH MMH MHH MN MN MM MM
MMo MN ooH MH.N MN No Me MM NH MN MN Mo MH MH MM MN NM om MM NN HN MN MNH MNH MM MN NM NM
MMo NN ooH NM.N MN Mo oH HM MN MM MN MH NN MM MM NM MM MN MM MN NN NM MHH MNH HM 0M NN HM
MMo HM HMo MM.N NN MH Mo MN MH oN MN Mo NH NH MN MN MH MH MN NH MH Mo NNH MMH MM 0M NM MM
MMo MM MMo Mo.N NN NH No MM MH MN MN NH MN NM MM MN MM MH MM MH MH MH MMH MNH NM oN HM MM
NMo oM NMo NM.H oN MH Ho MM MH MN MN MH MH MN MM NN MM NN MN NN MH HN MMH MMH MM MH NM MM
NMo NM MMo MM.N MH Mo No MN MH oN MN Mo NH MH MH MH NN MH NM NN MH NH MMH MMH MM MH MM NM
MMo MM MMo MM.N HN MH Mo 0M MH HN MN Mo MH MH NM MM 0M MH MN NN MH MH NMH MMH MN MH MM MM
NMo NM MMo NN.N MH Mo HH MM MN MN MN MH oN NN MM NM HM HN NM MN MN NN MMH MMH NM MM MM MM
MMo NM ooH MM.M MN MH oH NM MN MM MN NN NN MM HM MM MM MN MM HM NN NN MHH MNH MM MM HM MM
oMo MM ooH NM.N MH M0 N0 NN MH MN MN MH NH MN MM HN NN MH 0M oN oH MH NMH MNH MM HN MM MM
MMo HM MMo oH.M HM M0 M0 0M MH MN MN NH MH NN MM MM MN MN MM MN NN NM MMH oHH MN HM HM NM
MMo MM MMo MN.M HN oH No MM NN MN NN Mo NN oM MM MM MM MN MM MN MH NN MMH MMH MM OM MM HM
MN MN NN MN MN NN HN 0N MH MH NH MH MH MH MH NH HH oH M M N M M M M N H upon
oHMwHuo> isuw
E I!
HuoacHu:OUv mucocsum Momsuwonm MchcHMoM Ho>oH omoHHou Hsmmmoounm one No mouoom 3mm .H oHMmH

173

 

 

 

 

MMo HM 0M0 MN.N 0N Mo Mo HM MH MN MN 0H NH HN MM MN MM oN MM HN NH MN MNH HHH NM NM NM NM
NMo oN MMo MM.N MN 00 Mo MN MH oH MN Mo 0H MH MN NN HM oN 0M NH oH HN oMH MMo No NN HN HM
ocH MM Mmo HM.N MN MH NH HM MN MN MN NH MN oM MM HM 0M oN OM MN MH NN 00H HHH 0M MM NM 0M
MMo MM MMo MM.N MN NH co MN MH HN MN MO MH MN HM NN MN HN MN oH MH NH NMH MHH MM MN NM MN
MMo NN MMo MM.N MH NH NH HM HN OM MN MN MN MM HM MM MM 0N 0M MN MN MM MNH MNH MN MM MM MN
ooH MM MMo MH.N MN 00 MH mM HN MM MN MN MN MM MM NM MM MN 0M HM NN MM MNH MNH Mo MM NM NN
ooH MM ooH MN.N MN M0 M0 MM oN MN MN oH HN MN MM MM HM MH MN MH MH oN MMH MNH NM MM NM MN
OOH MM ooH NM.N HN NH HH NM NN MN MN NN MN MM MM MM OM NN MM MN 0N MN MMH MoH HN MM MM MN
MMo MM MMo MH.N NN MH Mo NH NH NH NN M0 M0 oH HN MH NH MN MM HN MH MN MMH MMo Ne MH HM MN
MMo HM MMo MN.N MN 0N NH NM MN MN MN MN NN NM MM NM NM MN HM MN NN MN NNH 0M0 NM MM MM MN
NMo NM MMo oo.M NN NH Mo MM 0N MN oN 0H 0H MN MM MN NM MH MN MH MH MH MMH MoH co 0M MM NN
ocH MM ooH MM.N MN NH HH MM MN 0N MN NN NN MM MM MM OM HN MM MN oN MN MMH MoH HN NM 0M HN
ooH NN MMo NM.N MN Mo MH MM MN CM NN MH MN oM MM MM MM MN NM NM HN HM NMH. HMH MN MM MM oN
ooH 0M MMo MM.N MN NH NH NM ON MN MN NH MN MM NM 0M MM 0H MN NH oN oN MMH NMH cw MM MM Mo
ooH HM NMo Hw.N MN Mo co HM MH MN MN MH MH NN MM MN NN MH MN MN MH MN OMH MNH MM NH wM we
MMO Me ooH HM.N MH MH No MN MH MH NN MH MH NN MM MN MM NN oM NN MH NN 00H Mmo Ne MH NM NM
MMo oN ooH Mo.N HN oH Mo MN oN MH NN N3 MH MH HM MN 0N MH MN HN MH NH oHH MoH MN MN MM MM
ooH MM ooH Ho.M MN OH Mo MM MN om MN NH MN MM MM NM MM NN MM MN oN HM oNH MMH Mo MM mM Mo
MMc OM ooH MM.N MN 00 Mo NM MH om MN MN NN MM MM MM HM NH MN NN MH MN MMH OMH NN mM NM MM
ooH HM MMo MM.N MH HH Mo NM MH NN MN Mu MN NN HM MN MM 0N MM HN oN MN MMH MMH Mo MN MM MM
MMo NM ooH oN.N MN MH 00 ON Mo MH MN HH Mo M 0M MN MN MH MN MH oH MH OMH ooH Ho CM MN No
Noo MN MMO NM.N 0N NH oH MM MH MH MN NH MH MH MN NN NM MH MN MN MH MH MoH ooH MN MH MM Ho
MN MN NN MN MN NN HN oN MH MH NH MH MH MH MH NH HH oH M M N o M M M N H ucmm

mHanum> unum

AcmacHucoov mucmmsum vanguuorm MchcHMmm Hm>vH oMmHHoo Hummmmousm osu we maneum 3mm .M mHamH

174

 

OOO HN OOH Mo.H ON OO OO MM OH MN ON OH NN OM MO NM OM NN HO ON OH MN MNH OMH MM NH NH HM
NOO NO OOO OO.H ON NH OH MO MN ON MN HN MN ON MM OM OM ON OO OM MN MM ONH OOH OO MO ON OM
OOO NM NOO OO.H MN OH OO MN OH OH ON OH NH ON MM ON MN NH MN OH OO OH OHH MHH OO MH ON ON
OMO OO MOO HO.H NN NH OO ON MH MN ON NO OH MH MO MN NM ON MM HN OH NM ONH OMH OO NH NM ON
OOO ON OOO MO.N OH MH OO MO MN ON ON OH ON OM OM NN OM ON MO ON HN MN OMH OOH MN HM NN NN
OOO MN MOO OO.H ON OH OO ON MH OH NN MO NH HN OO ON HM HN OM OH OO NH MMO NOO OM ON HM ON
MNO OO OOO MM.O HN OO OH MM NH OH ON HH OH OH MN ON MM NN OO NN NH ON MNH HNH MO ON HM MN
OOO OO OMO NH.H OH OO OH MO OH OM NN ON ON MM OO NM OO MN NM NM MN MM HOH HHH MO MM NM ON
MOO NO MOO MO.N OH NO MH ON HN NN HN MH ON HM HO HM NM OH HM ON OH MN MNH HOH NM NM ON MN
OMO MH HOO O0.0 MN OH OO OM MH ON NN OH NH ON NM ON OM ON NM HN MH OH OOH OOH NM ON OM NN
MNO OH OOO ON.H NN OO OO OM NH NN ON OH ON NN OM ON ON OH MM MN OH ON NMH NOH NN ON MM HN
MOO OO OOO ON.H OH OH OO OM NH NH OH OH OH HH HN OH OM ON OO ON ON ON MNH OHH NO MM NM ON
NNO OH MOO NN.N ON OH HH MO HN OM ON ON OM HO MO NM NO OH NM ON HN ON OOH OOO OO OM OO OH
OOO OO OOO NO.N HN OH HH NM ON NH HN NH OH OH NN NN OM NH NM NH OH OH MNH OHH HO NN HO OH
OMO ON MOO ON.H ON OO HH OM OH MN ON OH HN ON MM MN OM ON OM ON HN NN NNO OOH MN HN ON NH
OOO MM ONO MO.N ON OO MO OM MH HN ON NO OH NH OM ON ON ON OO ON ON MN MOH OOH MO MN OM OH
MOO NH NOO NO.H ON OO OO HM NH HN NN HN OH OM NM MN OM OH MN OH MH ON OHH MOH OM NN ON MH
OOO HO MOO MM.H MN MH OO ON HN ON MN OH MN OM OO ON HM NH ON OH NH ON OOH MNH HO OH NN OH
MOO OH NMO MO.H NN OH OO OM NN ON NN OO NN ON MM MM NM HN mO MN OH ON OHH MHH NO NN ON MH
OOO HO OOO OO.H ON HH MO NN OH ON ON MH OH NN OM ON OM NH ON ON NH OH ONH MMH NO ON MN NH
OHO HO ONO ON.H ON OO OO ON NH NN HN NO MH NH ON OH ON ON OM ON OH ON OOO ONH MM ON OH HH
NOO MM OOH ON.H MN OH OH OO ON HN ON OH ON HM OM MM OM ON OM MN HN ON MOH NNH OO MN MM OH
OMO NH HOO NO.H OH HH OH NM NH HN ON OH HH HN NM ON OM NN OM MN OH NN OOH OHH MO OM MM O
HOO OH MOO OO.H MN OH MO MM MH OH ON MH NH OH NM MN HM NN NM HN OH OH ONO MOH OM OH MN O
NNO OM OOO HO.H NN MH NO MN OH NH ON NO OH MH ON MN NN MN NM OH MH OH NHH OOH OM NH HM N
HMO NO OOO OO.H ON MH OO MM MH NH MN OO NH HH MM NH HM ON OM ON MH NM OOH OOH OO OH OM O
ONO HN ONO ON.H OH MH OO MM ON OH NN NO HN NO MN MN NM ON OM OM MN NM NMH MMH NN HM OM M
OOO OO HOO MH.H MN OO NH OM NH OH MH OH OH ON MN NN HN ON MM ON MH ON OOH OHH OM OO MN O
OOO OO OOO OO.H OH OO MO HH OO OH ON NH HH MN NM ON MM MH NN HH HH OH OOO NOO MO MH ON M
OOO ON OOO ON.H OH HH NO NM OH NN ON ON NH HM HO ON OM MH MN NH NH NH OMH OOH HO NH MO N
NOO OO HOO OO.H ON NO OO NN OO OH ON OO OO NH OM HN OH NH NN OH NH OH MMH OOH OM OH OM H
ON ON NN ON MN NN HN ON OH OH NH OH MH OH MH NH HH OH O O N O O M O M N H ucwv
mHanum> usum

 

 

mucuvaum Osmsuuocm OcHsaHOoO Ho>mH uOmHHoo Haummmoosmcs ocu O0 mouoom 3mm

.N uHOmH

175

 

 

OOO NM OOO MO.N NN MH OO OM NH ON ON OO NN OH ON ON MN MN ON MN NH NN OHH OOO NN ON MN HO
OO HO OOH O0.0 ON Mo NO OM MH MN ON HN HN NM OO MM HO MH ON ON OH MN OOH ONO MM ON NN OO
OOH NO HOO MO.H MN MH OH OM OH OH ON OO OH MH MN HN HM HN MO ON NH ON OOH MHH MN ON NM OM
OOO NN OOO OO.H ON MH OH OM MH OM MN OH NN OH MM ON OM OH OM MN ON NM OH NMH OO NH NM OM
OOH ON NOO MH.N MN MO OH OM OH NM ON ON NN MM MO HM NM ON OO ON NH MN OOH OOH OO MO OM NM
NOO OM OOH HM.N MN OH NH HN NN NN OH NO NH HN MN ON HN ON OM HN MH OH NOH ONH OO NH MN OM
OOO HM HOO OO.H OH NH OO MN OH NH MN OO NH HH MH OH HN NH OM OH HN MN MOH HOH NN OH NM MM
NOO OM OOO OO.H MN MH OO MM OH MH MN NO MH ON MN ON ON ON OM NH HH OH MHH HHH HN OM NM OM
NOO OO NOO HO.N ON HH OO NM HN ON ON NO OH MH OM ON MM NN NO HM ON MN OOH OOH OO NM OM MM
OOO MM NOO OO.H NN OO OO NM OH ON MN OH OH OM OO OM HM MN MN OH MH NN MOH OMH OO ON HO NM
OOO NN MOO OM.O ON NO HH OM OH ON MN OM NH OO NO ON NM OH NN NN OH ON OOH NHH MM MM ON HM
NMO OH NMO N0.0 ON OO OO ON OH NH NN MO OO NH OM MN MN NH NN NH NO OH NOH OOH NM MN MN OM
NOO MM OOH OO.N OH OH OO MM ON MN ON HN ON NN HM ON OM NN ON ON OH ON HHH NNH MO NN ON OO
NOO OO OOH HM.H ON OO NO NO OH ON ON HH ON NN OM HM OM HN OO HM OH OH OOH ONH OM NM NM OO
OOO OO NOO OO.H ON OO OO HN OH MN MH NH HN HM ON OM OH OH OH OH NH OH ONH HHH HN OH OM NO
MOO OM MOO OH.H HN OH OO OM OH MN MN MN ON HO NO MM NO NH MN ON MH MN ONH OOH OO MN HM OO
OHO NH OOO NH.H MN OH HH OM NN ON MN OH ON ON HO OM OM NH OM ON MN ON OMH HMH NO NH ON MO
OOO MM NOO O0.0 ON OH OO OM OH NN ON NH ON ON .OM NM OM MN ON NN NH ON HHH MMH NO ON MN OO
NOO NM OOH HO.H HN HH OO OM HN OM NN HH OH MN HO MN MM NN MM ON OH OH MMH OOH NO MM MM MO
NOO OO OOO OO.N MN MH OO MN OH NH NN OO MH OH OM NN ON NH ON MH NH NH HNH NMH MO ON ON NO
NOO OO OOH OO.H ON NO OO OH ON MN MH HH OH MN MN MN MN ON OM ON NH OH OOO NNH NM NM HN HO
ONO HM OOO OM.O ON MO OO MN NH HN NN MO OH OH OM ON NH ON MM NM OH NN NOH OOH OO NH ON OO
MOO OO NOO OO.H ON OH OH HO OH ON NN MH OH ON OM NN OM OH HO OM OH ON NOH MOH OM OH OM OM
NOO OM OOO OM.H ON NO OH MM NH ON MN MN HN OM NM NN OO OH MM MN NH ON ONH OMH OM ON HN OM
MOO OO NOO NM.O MN OO OO MM OH OH ON OH MH NH OM ON ON HN OM ON MH MM OOH HNH OM ON MM NM
OOO MO HOO OO.H ON MH NO ON NH OH ON OH OH MN MM ON NM OH ON OH MH OH MHH OMH HN NH MM OM
OOO OO OOO O0.0 OH OH HH NO ON MN ON MH MN OH OM ON OM ON OO OM ON OM ONH MOH NO NM OM MM
NOO NM OOO O0.0 NN OH OH OM OH ON ON OO NN OH OM NM OM ON ON OH OH MN OOO OOH OM MN ON OM
MOO OO NOO OM.H MN OH OO HM OH HN ON OO NH OH OM MM HM OH OM HN OH MN NMH MOH OO NN ON MM
HOO OM HNO OH.O MN NO NO NM MH NN ON MH MH OH MO ON MM ON HO ON ON OM NOH OMH OM ON ON NM
ON ON NN ON MN NN HN ON OH OH NH OH MH OH MH NH HH OH O O N O M O M N H ucov
oHOwHum> unum

 

 

HuoacHuaoov muaocsum nawnuuozm OaHscHOoO Ho>oH oOoHHoo HammmmousmaO «cu mo mouoom BOO .N oHOmH

.10

1| .

 

 

 

 

HO OO MO.N ON MH MH OO NN MN NN NH ON OM MM NM MM ON N ON NN NM OMH MNH MO OM OM OM
ON NO OM.N ON OH OH OM MN ON NN OH NN ON NO OM OM HN OM HN ON ON NOO OOH HO NM OM ON
MO Mo OO.N MN OO oH MM OH ON NN MH ON ON OO HM NM HN NM ON ON NN MOH OOH NO MO MM ON
OO OH HO.N HN NO OO NM OH OM ON NH ON MN HO ON MM MN NM ON NN NN OOH ONH MO MM OM NN
MO HH MO.M OH HH Oo NO NN ON ON OH MN NN HO ON NM ON NO HM ON MM OMH OHH NO MM NO ON
OO MO NH.M ON HH HH OM HN NN NN OH NN MN MM OM OM MH OM NH NH ON OMH OHH HN MM OO MN
OO MO NN.N ON OO MO OM MH NH NN OH NH MN OM MN NN NH OM MN NH NN ONH OOH ON ON HM ON
NN NO ON.N ON OO NO ON MH OH NN OO HH ON NO OM ON OH NN OH MH NH OHH MMH NO NO MM MN
NO MO NM.N NN MH OH OO MN MN ON OH ON MN MM HM NM NN NO HM ON MM MMH NMH HN OM OM NN
HN MO OO.M MN OH HH OM HN NN ON MH NH OM OO ON HM NH MN MH MH HN OOH OOH ON OM HO HN
OM No MM.N MN OO OH MM NH ON ON OO HN OH OM OM OM HN OM NN OH HN NOH OHH NO NH NM ON
HO Oo OO.N MH MH OO NO OH NN NN MH HN OH OM NN HM MN OM ON NN HM OOH OMH MO OO OO OH
OO Oo NO.M MN OH OO NO ON MN NN MH NN ON NO MM MO MN OM HN NN ON MOH NMH MN OM NO OH
OO NO NH.M NN NO OH NM NH OM ON OH NH OM OM HM HM NN NN OH OH MN HOH OHH OO OM NO NH
OO NO NO.M OH OH HH HO ON ON NN NH ON MN HO MM OM MN OO ON ON NM ONH OOH HN MO OO OH
HN OO MH.M ON MO OH OM OH ON ON MH OH ON OM HM OM ON OM MN HN HM NMH OMH ON OM OM MH
NN OO OO.N ON OO OH OM HN HM ON OH MN OM NO NM NM NN OM ON ON NN NHH ONH OO HN MM OH
HO MO NO.N MN MO NO NM NH NN ON OO HH HN OM NN OM NN OM MN OH OH OOH OOH MN MN MO MH
OO OO NO.M OH MO OO MM ON HM ON NH NH NN OO MM OM HN NM ON ON ON ONH OOH OO HM HO NH
NO NO OO.N ON OO OH OM OH ON ON HN ON ON MO HM OM ON OM NN OH MM ONH OOH OO OM OM HH
NN OO MO.M MN OH NH NM ON NN NN MH ON ON MM NM OM NN OM HN OH ON MOH NMH OO OM NO OH
NN MO HN.M ON OO MO OM MH MN NN MH NH ON OO ON NM HN ON OH MH NH OOH OOH ON MM OM O
OO NO OO.M ON OO NO OM NH ON ON NH ON MM NO OM OO OH NN OH OH OH OOH OHH ON NN OM O
OM Oo OM.N HN OH OO NO ON MN. MN OH MN MN ON HM NM ON MM HN OH MH HHH NOO ON MM OM N
OM NO MO.M ON NO NO MM OH MN NN ON OH NM HO NM OM MH ON NH MH HN MOH OMH NO OM OO O
MN 00 ON.N HN MO HO ON OO HH NH OO OH OO ON MN OO NH HM NH MH ON MMH ONH OO MH OM M
OM NO MM.N OH MO MO OM OH ON MN OO HH OH NM MN ON OH ON OH NH MH MOH OMH OO HM OO O
NN HO NN.M MN OO OH MO OH MN ON NH MN OM OM OM MM ON MM ON HN NN OOH OHH OO HO MO M
ON NO HM.N NN HH MH OM MN ON ON MN ON NM OM MM NO MN MM ON ON HN ONH OHH OO NM OO N
ON OO MO.H MN _MH NH OM OH NN ON NH ON ON OM ON MM MN NM MM HN ON OHH NNH OO NM MO H
ON MN ON MN NN HN ON OH OH NH OH MH OH MH NH HH OH O O N O M O M N H usmv

mHOwHuw> usum

musmcaum coHuOHuomcwuH Ha>wH mOmHHoo Haummouuam mzu mo mwuoom 3mm .M mHOmH

177

 

 

 

 

 

NM MO OH.M MN OO OO MM NH MN ON MH NH HM MO NN OM NN ON OH OH NN MOH NMH ON NO NM OO
NN OO MH.M ON NO MH MN OH OH HN NO HH MH ON MN NH NN HM ON OH MN MOH MNH OO OM MO OM
OM MO OM.N ON NO NH MM OH OH ON MO NH HN NO MM OM OH MM OH OH NN MOH HOH NN NM MO OM
OM NO MM.N ON MH OH HM HN NH MN HH OH ON OM OM NM ON OM ON OH NN OHH MOO OO MN OO NM
NN HO OH.N MN HH HH OM HN ON ON OO OH MN MO HM NM ON NM NN OH OM HMH NMH NO MM HO OM
ON NO OO.M ON OO OO NO HN MM ON OH MN OM OO HM OM NN OM HM ON ON MOH OOH NN HM OO MM
ON MO HO.N MN OO OO ON OH MN NN ON HN NM NO OM OM MH HN NH NH OH OOH OOH OO OM NO OM
MN OO HM.N HN OO OH MM ON MN NN ON MN OM MM NM HO OH ON ON ON OM MNH NHH OM OM HM MM
OO NO OO.N NN NO MO OM OH MN NN OH MH NM MO NM MM OH OH MH MH MH OHH OMH OM NM OM NM
OO OO NO.M MN OH MO MN MH ON ON OO MH OH OM ON NN MN NN HN OH OH MOH OMH OM OH OM HM
MN NO OO.M MN NH OH OM ON ON ON MH MN OM OM HM MM HH HN MH MH OH OOH NMH ON NN OO OM
HO OO O0.0 OM HH NO HM ON MN NN OO OH ON OM MN NN NH HN OH OH MH MMH OOH ON MM OM OO
ON NO OO.N OH NH MH OO MN NM ON NN ON OM OO OM NO MN MO ON ON NN NOH OOH OO NO OM OO
HO NO ON.N ON OH HH OM OH HN ON OH ON ON OM MN OM OH NM MN ON NN OMH MMH ON ON OO NO
MN OO OO.N MN HH OO MM OH MN NN MH NH MN OO OM OM NN OM ON OH MN MNH ONH OO ON NM OO
ON MO OO.N MN HH OO NM OH NN ON MH HN HN OM OM MM NN OM ON HN ON ONH OMH NO MN ON MO
OM MO NO.H ON MH OO NN OH MH ON HH MH OO MN OH NN NN MO MN NH OH OOH OOH NO OO HO OO
NO Mo NN.N HN MH NO N NH MN ON OO HH OH OM ON ON MN MM NH MH OH OOH NMH OM NH OO MO
OO OO ON.H NN MH OO HM OH ON MN OH MH ON OM ON OM ON HM ON MH ON MOH NOH HO OM OM NO
MO NO OH.M ON OO OO OM ON ON ON OH ON ON OO HM MM NN ON ON OH NN OMH OHH OO MM NO HO
OO HO ON.M NN NO OO OM OH NM NN OH ON OM OM NN HO HN NN HN HH ON OMH OMH HO OO MO OO
MN NO MN.N NN MO NO MM OH NN ON ON MN MM HO ON NM MH OM OH OH NH MNH OOH MO ON MO OM
ON MO MN.M NN NO OO OM OH ON NN MH OH NN OM ON NM MH OM ON MH MH OMH OOH HN OO OM OM
ON OO OO.M MN HH OO OM ON HN NN OO HN MN OM ON OM HN OO ON HN NN NMH NOH NO MN OM NM
ON OO MN.N ON NO OO MO MN NM ON OH NN NM OO OM OO NH NM NN OH MN OOH OMH ON MN OO OM
MO MO NO.M NN OO OO MN OH OH ON OH NH ON NO MM OM OH MN OH MH NH NOO MOO MO HN OM MM
HO OO MO.M NN MO MO OM NH ON ON MH OH ON NO OM MM OH ON MH HH MH ONH NHH MO ON OM OM
OO MO ON.N NN OH MO ON OH MN NN NH MH NN .OO NN OM ON OM MN NH MN MMH NOH OO NH OM MM
OO NO OO.N ON MH OH NO ON MM ON MN OM OO OM OM MO HN .MM ON ON ON OOH NMH MO OO OO NM
ON HO OM.N MN OO OO MM OH MN ON OO OH ON OO ON NM ON OM ON NN HM OOH OOH OO OH HO HM
ON MN ON MN NN HN ON OH OH NH OH MH OH MH NH HH OH O O N O M O M N H yawn

anmHum> usum

AnuaaHuGOOO «unavaum :oHuOHuuuamua Hm>mH oOmHHou Hammnuousm oau mo mouoow Sam .M mHAmH

178

 

 

ON NO OO M MN OO OH MM NH ON ON OO OH ON OO NM OM OH NN OH MH NN ONH OOH MN OO OM NO
OO MO MM.M MN OO MH MM OH MM NN ON ON HO OO OM OM OH ON NH OH NN OMH NOH ON HO OM OO
ON NO OO.N MN OO OO OM ON NN NN OO OH OH NM MN NM OH ON MH OH NH ONH HMH NO ON NO MO
MO OO HM.N MN OO NH MO HN NM NN ON ON OM OM MM OO NN NM HM MN OM ONH OOH ON NO HO OO
MO NO OM.N MN OH OO OM MH MM ON HH MN ON HO OM NM MN OM ON OH ON NMH OHH NO OO OM MO
MN MO ON.N NN OO MH HO NN MM ON NN ON MO MO OM NO ON ON ON HN OM MOH mOH NM OO mO NO
MO MO MN.N NN OO MO ON MH MH MN OH OH OH ON NN OM ON ON OH NH MN NMH HMH OO ON OO HO
ON MN ON MN NN HN ON OH OH NH OH MH OH MH NH HH OH O O N O M O M N H uamw

0Hanum> ISOO

 

 

 

HOOOCHOGOOV Outwvsum GOHunHuumcmuH Hm>mH wOwHHoo stwwmooam may no mmuoom 3mm

.m «Hama

179

 

MO NH OO.H ON NH O OM OH MN NN HH OH ON OO ON MN ON NM ON HN NM OOO NOO ON OM MN N
MO MO MO.H ON OH NO ON HH OH N OO OO OH NO ON ON HN NM HN OH MN MOH OOH OM OH OM HM
O MO OO.H MN HH MO HM ON OH MN O0 O0 OH MM NH NH ON NM MN OH NN OHH OOO MO OH HO OM
MN 00 ON.M NN NH OO MM HN ON NN OO ON OH NM OM NM OH OM NH NH OH OMH NOH HO NM ON ON
OM NO OO.N ON OO OO OM OH MN MN OH OH OM MM HM HM MN HM ON NH OH OOH OOH OM MM NM ON
MM OH ON.H MN OH OH HM HN MN NN HH ON MN MM HM HM MN HM MN MH ON HNH ONH NM N NO NN
OO MO ON.N NN M NH OM MN OM NN OH ON OM MM OM HO ON NN ON ON MM MOH NMH ON OM OM ON
OM OO O0.0 MN OH OO ON NH ON ON OO OH OH OM HN ON MN NM MN MH ON MOH NOH MO MH OO MN
OO MH OM.H ON OO MO MM OH ON NN OO MH OH OM ON NM NN NM MN NH HN NNH OMH OM NH OM ON
OO NO MO.H ON OO OO HM OH MN ON NH ON ON OM NM ON NH MM OH OH OH OMH NOH MN ON NM MN
OO HO MM.N ON NH MH NO NN ON ON NH ON NN MO HM OM OH OM NN OH MN OMH MOH OO OM OM NN
ON OO MO.N ON HH OH OO OH MN MN MH MN NN NO ON OO MN OM ON ON HM OHH HOH MN OM ON HN
NM NO HO.N ON OO OH OM NH ON ON OO OH NN NO HM HM ON MM MN OH NN OMH NOH ON ON OM ON
NO NO NO.N NN OO OO OM OH MN NN OO HN ON MM HM NM ON MM ON HH OM OMH OMH NN MN OM OH
NO OO OO.H ON OO OO OM OH MN MN MH MH NN MO ON NM ON MM ON OH NN OOH MOH NO NN OM OH
NM OO HH.N NN OO OH NN MH HN ON OH HH NH OM ON OM MN NM NN OH MM HMH MOH MO OH NM NH
MO OO NO.H ON OO OO ON HH OH ON OO OO OH OM ON OM OH ON HH HH ON OMH OOH MM MN HO OH
MO Oo NN.N OM OH OH OM NH HN ON MH NN MN MO HM MM MN NM ON OH MN NNH MMH OM MH OM MH
HO NO OO.N NH OO NH NO ON ON NN MH MN NM OM ON NO MN MO ON NN OH MMH NNH HN HO OO OH
HN NH MO.N MN MH HH OO NN HM ON ON ON OM MO OM NO ON OM ON MN ON OMH HHH ON OO NM MH
NO OO OO.N HN NH NO HM OH MN HH OH ON ON NM MN MN MN OM ON NN NH OHH NOH MN MM NM NH
HO OO OO.N MN MH OH OO ON MM NN MN OM OM OM MM NO MN NO OM MN MN NOO OOO MO OM ON HH
MO NO OO.N MN OO HH OM MN HM ON OM NN NO MO OM NO OH HM ON OH NM OMH NMH ON HO OM OH
MO NO OH.N HN OH NO HM NH MH NN NO OH MH MM NN NM NN OO ON OH OH MMH OOH MO OH NO O
ON MO MO.N ON MH MH OM HN OM ON OH ON ON OM MM OM MN MO ON OH MM OOH OOH OO ON OM O
HO OO MO.H ON OH OO MM OH MH NN MO NH ON OM MN OM NH OM OH OH NH OOH NOH OO OH HO N
ON MO OO.N MN NO OO OO OH ON NN OO HN NN MO NN NM HN NM MN OH HN OHH OOO OO NN HO O
HO OH ON.N OH NH OO OM OH NN ON OH OH HN OM ON HM ON ON NN HN NN NOH HHH ON ON ON M
MO OO MH.N HM MO MH OM OH ON ON OH ON NM MO HM OM MN MM HN NH ON NNH OMH NN OM MN O
NO MH NM N ON MH MO NM OH ON HN NH OH MN NM OH OM NN NM HN MH OH OOH NMH OO ON OM M
MM OO ON.N ON OO OH OM NH MM NN ON ON NM MO OM NO NN OM ON HN ON OOH OMH OM NM NM N
MM OO HO.H ON NO OO OM HH NN NN MH MH ON OM NN NN MN MM ON MH OM ONH MNH OM MN ON H
ON MN ON MN NN HN ON OH OH NH OH MH OH MH NH HH OH O O N O M O M N H ucmn
mHanum> -aum

 

 

muamcsuw OOHunHuomcmuH Ho>mH mOmHHou HDOOOOUUSOCD mau mo mmuoum 3mm

.O «HOma

ll‘ II'4 I'll-

I- .l!'

"l‘ln'tu-\l‘ 'Il‘.‘ .|-

It‘ll" tII-

I'I’IIIIII'.

 

 

 

MO N NO.N ON mo OO MN MH MN NN HH MH ON HO MN ON OH NM OH MH OH OMH OMH NM ON MM OO
OM OO O0.0 ON 00 MH OM OH HM NN MN MN MM NO OM OM ON OM NN MN NM NOH NNH NM OO NN MO
nu NO MO MO.N ON NO OO OM HH ON ON OH OH NN MM HM MM MN OM ON NN NN MOH MOH MO NO MM NO
w“ MM MO MN.N MN OO HH MM OH MN NN MH OH ON NO OM MM ON MM NM MN OM ONO ONO NN OM OM HO
OO Mo MO.N HM NO HH MM OH NM ON MH ON MM NO MM MM HN ON OH OH ON NOH ONH ON NM HO OO
ON NO MO.N ON OO MH MO HN ON ON OH NN ON OO OM NM NN MM ON OH NN NOH OOH NO OO MO OM
OO NO OO.N NN NH OH NM MN MN MN MN NN OO MM OM NM MH OM ON HN ON NNH OOH OM OO MM OM
MO NO OO.N OH NO OH OM NH ON MN H ON OM OM ON OO NH ON ON NH OH OOH OMH OM O OM NM
NN MO OO.N OH OO OH NM OH MN Nu MH OH OM mO ON NM ON NM ON OH MN OOH HMH NO ON MM OM
MM HO 00.: MN NO HH OM OH MN ON MH OH ON MM ON OM MN NM ON ON ON MHH OOH NO NM OM MM
NO we NO.H NN NO NH OM OH NM NN ON NN NM NM NM OM OH OM MN OH NN MMH MNH ON MO NN OM
mO NO ON.N HN OH OO NO OH MN NN NO ON OH OM OM MM OH HO ON OH MN MOH OMH NO OO OM MM
MM NO ON.O OH OO NO NM NH N MN NH MN HN OM HN .M M MM MN HH OH OOH OOH OO MN ON NM
ON MO HO.N N NO OO OM OH MM NN ON ON NM OO OM OM ON MM OM MN OM MMH MHH MO NM NM HM
OO NO OM.H NN OO. OO OM OH MN ON NH MH OM OO NM OM OH HM OH OH OH NHH HNH OO ON NM OM
OM NH HM.H ON MO MO HM MH ON NN MH ON NM OO NM NO NH ON OH MH NN OMH OOH ON OO OM OO
NM OO OO.H ON OH MO ON OH NN ON OH OH HM OM ON MM OH ON OH OO OH OMH OMH MM MM NN OO
MO NO HM.H HN OO OO OM ON NN NN OH OH MM OO NM MM HN ON MH OH NH HNH MNH ON MO NO NO
OM MO OO.N MN OO NH NM OH NN NN ON MN OM OO NM HO OH ON MN OH ON MNH MNH OO OM ON OO
OM MO ON.O HN OH OO HM OH OH ON OO OH ON OM MN ON OH MM MH NH NN MOH OHH OM MN OM mO
OO MO MO.N NN MH OO OO HN MM ON OH MN OM HO NM MM NN HO OM NN OM OHH OHH OO MM ON OO
MO OO OO.N ON OO MH MO MN NM NN MN NN HM HO OM HO ON NO ON ON OM NMH HMH NO OO OM MO
NO NO m0.0 MN OO NO OM MH MN NN OH MN ON OO HM NM OH NM MN MH MN OOH MOH ON NH MO NO
HO NO ON.H NN OO OH OM NN OM ON ON MN NO OO OM NO MH OM OH NH OH OOH MOH OO HM OM HO
NM MO OO.H NN OH MO OM OH ON NN NH OH HN OM OM HM OH ON MH OH HN HMH OMH HN NN HM OO
HO NO HO.N OH MH OO OO NN MN NN OH MN ON NM OM OM MN OO MN NH OHO OMH OMH OO MN HO OM
OO NO H0.0 ON NH OO OM OH MN ON HN NN ON OO ON MM ON NM MN OH HN MMH OHH OM MM ON OM
NO MO OO.N NH OH NH OM MN ON MN ON MN OM OM HM NM ON OM HN NN HN ONH OMH MN HN MM NM
NM OO HN.H ON NO OO ON OH MH MN NH OO OH MN ON NN OH NN NN OH ON OMH OMH NM HN ON OM
MO MO NO.N HN HH OH OO OH MN NN OH NN NN OO ON OM OH OM MN NN ON MHH NOH OO HM OM MM
ON MH OM.H MN MO MO OH OO MN NN HH OO HN NM MN OH OH NH HH OO MH NNH NOH OO OO NM OM
MO OO ON.N ON OO NO OM NN ON ON NH MN ON OO OM NM NN OM ON ON NM OHH OOH ON OM OM MM
ON MN ON MN NN HN ON OH OH NH OH MH OH MH NH HH OH O O N O M O M N H quO
mHOmHum> :Dum
AcmchuQOOv mucwvnum coHuaHuomcmuH Hw>oH mOoHHoo HSOmmmousmCD man we mmuoom 3mm .O mHOmH

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Test Manuals

Alper, Thelma G. and Mallory, Edith B. Wellesley,Spelling Manual,
Los Angeles: California Test Bureau, 1957.

Andrew, Dorothy M. and Paterson, Donald G. Minnesota Clerical Test
Manual. New York: The Psychological Corporation, 1959.

 

 

Brown, William F. and Holtzman, wayne H. Survey of Study Habits and
Attitudes Manual. New York: The Psychological Corporation, 1956.

Gough, Harrison. California Psychological Inventory Manual. Palo
Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1964.

Watson, Goodwin and Glaser, Edward M. Critical ThinkinggAppraisal
Manual. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1964.

Textbooks and Yearbooks

Anderson, Ruth 1. "Significant Implications of Research in Shorthand
and Transcription," Secretarial Eduggtion With a Future, The
American Business Education Yearbook, 1962.

Arnstein, George E. ”The Impact of Automation on Occupation Patterns,”
Recent and Projected Developments Affecting Business Education,
National Business Education Yearbook, 1964.

Burros, Oscar (ed.). Mental Measurements Yearbook. Highland Park,
New Jersey: The Gryphon Press, Volume 4, 1953; Volume 5, 1959;
Volume 6, 1965.

Downie, N. M. and Heath, R. H. Basic Statistical Methods. New York:
Harper & Row Publishers, 1965.

 

Douglas, Lloyd V. Business Education. Washington, D. C.: Center for
Applied Research in Education, Inc., 1963.

 

Hosler, Russell J., Grubbs, Robert L. and Wagoner, George A. Greog
Transcription for CollegesJ_Diamond Jubilee Series. New York:
Gregg Division, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1966.

181

182

Hosler, Russell J., Grubbs, Robert L. and Wagoner, George A. Gregg
Transcription for Colleges,gSimplified. New York: Gregg
Division, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1959.

 

Leslie, Louis A., Zoubek, Charles E. and Hosler, Russell J. Ggegg
Shorthand for Colleges,_Digppnd Jubilee Serigg, Volume One.
New York: Gregg Division, MbGraw-Hill Book Company, 1965.

Gregg Shorthand Simplified for Colleges, Volume One.
2d ed. New York: Gregg Division, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1958.

 

 

Lessenberry, D. D. and Wanous, S. J. Cpllege Typewriting. Cincinnati:
South-Western Publishing Co., 1954.

 

Reynolds, Helen. "Shorthand and Transcription Now and In the 1970's,”
EB§12§§§.E§PE§EEQP Now andaln thg_1219:§J Business Education
Association of Metropolitan New York, 1963-1964 Yearbook.

 

Tonne, Herbert A. ffiflgifll§§19f_§D§193§§JEQEE&QLQE' New York:
Gregg Division, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1961.

Toune, Herbert A., Popham, Estelle L. and Freeman, M. Herbert. Mgthodg

of Teaching Business Subjects. New York: Gregg Division,
MCGraw-Hill Book Company, 1965.

Periodic Lg

 

Bair, John T. ”Factor Analysis of Clerical Aptitude Tests," qurpal
of Applied Psychology, XXXV (August, 1951), 245-49.

 

Barrett, Dorothy M. "Prediction of Achievement in Typewriting and
Stenography in a Liberal Arts College," qurnal 051A2211£§
Psychology, XXX (December, 1946), 624-30.

 

Bills, M. A. ”Methods for the Selection of Comptometer Operators and
Stenographers,” Journal of Applied Psyghplpgy, V (1921), 283-85.

. ”A Test for Use in the Selection of Stencgraphers,”
Journal of Applied Psycholo , V (1921), 275-83.

 

 

Blanchard, Clyde 1. "Results of a Study of the Validity of the Hoke
Prognostic Tests of Stenographic Ability," The American Shoptpapg
2333235, X (January, 1930), 196.

 

Cheney, Truman M. and Goodish, Naomi. "Analysis Between Certain
Variable and Achievement in Beginning Shorthand, Journal_p§
Busine§§_§dpg§£igp, XXXVIII (May, 1963), 317-19.

DiBona, Lucille J. ”Predicting Success in Shorthand," Jpg;g§l-9£
Business Edugation, XXXV (February, 1960), 213-14.

 

193

Duncan, Margaret E. "Prognostic Testing in Shorthand," Jppppal p:
Busingss Edqugipp, XII (April, 1936), 15-16.

Duchand, Simon A. "Can we Predict Superior Achievement in Shorthand?”
Business Education World, XXXIII (February, 1953), 276-77, 303.

 

 

 

Eyster, Elvin S. "The Case for Secretarial Education in Colleges,
Journgl of Business Educatipp, XXXIX (November, 1963), 48-50.

 

"Prognosis of Scholastic Success in Shorthand,” The
National Business Education Quarterly, XVII (December, 1938),
31-34.

 

 

Gallagher, Ralph P., Albert, Elizabeth N. and Stryker, Barbara.
"Advisory Criteria for Selecting Pupils for Shorthand,” Bpgipess
Education Forpm, IV (May, 1950), 25, 30.

 

Hosler, Russell J. "Aptitude Testing in Shorthand," Journg1_pj
Busineps Edpggtion, XXII (May, 1947), 25.

 

 

Hutson, Billy T. and Vincent, Nicholas M. "Motivation and Prognosis
in Shorthand," Journal of Business Education, XXYTTI (October,
1957), 30-31.

 

 

Jack, Melvin C. ”Can We Predict Success in Shorthand?" The Balance
Sheet, XXXIII (January, 1952), 212-19.

 

Jessup, E. M. "Application of Prognostic and Achievement Tests in
Shorthand," Journal of Commercial Educgtion, LVII (June, 1928),
173-74.

 

Leslie, Louis A. "A Suggested Prognostic Test for Shorthand,"
American Business Education, IV (December, 1947), 91.

 

Malueg, Evelyn and Snyder, Louise M. "Shorthand Success in College,“
The Journal of Business Education, XV (February, 1940), 17-18.

 

Rodgers, Herbert W. "Psychological Tests for Stenographers and
Typists," Journal of Applied Psycholpgy, I (January, 1917),
268-74.

 

Sherman, Marsden A. "A Study of Prognosis in Shorthand," Business
Education World, XXII (April, 1942), 696-97.

Stroop, Christine. "Research Conclusions for Teaching Stenography,"
Journal of Business Educggipp, XXIX (October, 1953), 15-16.

 

Turse, Paul L. "Prognostic Studies in Business Education," Nggional
Business Educgtion Qparterly, XXXV (Winter, 1966-1967), 53.

 

 

Virginia Business Education Bulletin. "Implications of a Survey of
Shorthand Drop-Outs and Failures," gpprpalhpQLBpsingsppgdpcgtipp,
XXXII (February, 1957), 215-17.

184

West, Leonard J. "Implications of Research for Teaching Typewritirg,”
291.29.- -31..EP§1.1£1.B£$£§£CL“311.1115:£1.11.15102-2: 19 ('2. r- 24-

Wilson, W. Harmon. "Who Should Take Shorthand?" The Balance Shget,
XXXI (March, 1950), 210-12.

 

Dissertationsnannghgses

 

Anderson, Ruth 1. "An Analysis and Classification of Research in
Shorthand and Transcription." Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation,
Indiana University, 1946.

Beam, Verna Frances. "Vocational Guidance of Pupils in the Stenographic
Curriculum in Senior High Schools." Unpublished Master's thesis,
The University of Southern California, 1933.

Blacker, Margaret. "The Use of Certain Tests in the Prediction of
Success in High School Shorthand." Unpublished Master's thesis,
University of Wyoming, 1951.

Breuch, E. Margaret. "An Analysis of the Drop-Outs in First Year
Shorthand Classes." Unpublished Master's thesis, Colorado
State College of Education, 1948.

Cruzan, Fairah. "Predicting Shorthand Ability by Prognostic Testing.”
Unpublished Master's thesis, Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical
College, 1942.

Danielson, Harriet Ann. "The Relationship Between Competency in
Shorthand Vocabulary and Achievement in Shorthand Dictation.'
Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, 1959.

Davis, Alexandria M. "Criteria for the Selection of Students of
Shorthand." Unpublished Master's thesis, University of
Minnesota, 1944.

Dempsey, Audrey V. "A Study to Determine to What Extent Success in
Beginning Stenography Is Indicative of Success in Advanced
Stenography." Unpublished Ed.D dissertation, Colorado State
College of Education, 1950.

Didson, Mary H. "A Study in Typewriting and Shorthand Prognosis."
Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Kentucky, 1943.

Doubleday, Lewis B. "A Study of the Factors Affecting Achievement in
Shorthand." Unpublished Master's thesis, State University of
Iowa, 1939.

Duncan, Charles Howard. "The Relationship Between Listening Ability
and Shorthand Achievement." Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation,
University of Pittsburgh, 1959.

185

Edmunds, Brehaut Robert. "A Study of Shorthand Prognosis at Jordan
Senior High School, Long Beach, California.” Unpublished
Master's thesis, The University of Southern California, 1957.

Evans, Ernestine Elsie. "Factors Related to Varied Achievement in
Shorthand on the College Level." Unpublished Master's thesis,
State College of Washington, 1941.

Fermenich, William Frederick. "An Analysis of the Relationship
Between Application of Some Principles of Gregg Shorthand
Simplified and Errors in Transcription." Unpublished Master's
thesis, Mankato State College, 1959.

Frink, Inez. "A Comprehensive Analysis and Synthesis of Research and
Thought Pertaining to Shorthand and Transcription, 1946-1957."
Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, Indiana University, 1961.

Green, Charles Clinton. "The Use of Clerical, Intelligence, and
Personality Tests for Guidance Purposes in Shorthand 1, Type-
writing I, and Office Machines." Unpublished Master's thesis,
Kansas State College of Pittsburg, 1951.

Haggblade, Berle. "Factors Affecting Achievement in Shorthand.”
Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, University of California,
Los Angeles, 1965.

Hale, Jordan. "A Factor Analysis of Shorthand-Transcription Ability.”
Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, New York University, 1958.

Hargrave, Marjorie. "The Relationship Between Achievement in Short-
hand, Intelligence, Clerical Ability, and Achievement in
English." Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Iowa, 1942.

Heil, Margaret E. "The Value of the I. Q. and Teachers' Marks in
Certain High School Subjects for Predicting Teachers' Marks in
Stenography." Unpublished Master's thesis, University of
Louisville, 1936.

Henrickson, Rosanne C. "The Differential Aptitude Tests for Verbal
Reasoning, Numerical Ability, Abstract Reasoning, Space Relations,
Mechanical Reasoning, and Clerical Speed and Accuracy as Pre-
dictors of Success in Shorthand." Unpublished Master's thesis,
University of Minnesota, 1963.

Hutson, Billy Thomas. "Prognosis of Achievement in First-Year Gregg
Shorthand Simplified." Unpublished Master's thesis, University
of Tennessee, 1951.

Johnson, Ronald L. "An Analysis of DrOp-outs and Failures in the
First Semester of High School Beginning Shorthand." Unpublished
Master's thesis, University of North Dakota, 1965.

Jones, Lena. "Prognosis of Shorthand Achievement at the University
Level." Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Tennessee, 1951.

186

Kessinger, E. "A Prognostic Study in High School Shorthand.” Un-
published Master's thesis, Louisiana State University, 1936.

Kortendic, M. L. "A Study of Prognosis in Shorthand," Summaries of
39.41.18- and- 33.899.179.11 in Mamas.lEdpsatien . Delta Pi Bus 11 on
Publication, 1952.

Krueger, Donald D. "Prediction of Success in Business Subjects with
Use of Minnesota Clerical Test." Unpublished Master's thesis,
University of Wisconsin, 1963.

Lang, Mary Jane. ”The Relationship Between Certain Psychological
Tests and Shorthand Achievement at Three Instructional Levels.’
Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, University of Missouri, 1960.

Lee, Mary Elizabeth. "A Prognostic Study in Shorthand." Unpublished
Master's thesis, The University of Southern California, 1958.

Lusk, Iorman M. ”A Study of the Comparison Between Construction of
Shorthand Outlines According to Theory and the Accuracy of
Transcription." Unpublished Master's thesis, University of
Washington, 1959.

Lynch, Aline. ”Factors Related to the Achievement of the 104 High
__School Seniors in a First Course of Shorthand." Unpublished
Master's thesis, University of Michigan, 1947.

Maedke, Wilmer 0. "The Relative Prognosis Value of Selected Criteria
in the Prediction of Stenographic Success or Failure in Selected
Secondary Schools in Illinois." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
Northwestern University, 1957.

Meyer, Bernadine. "A Study of Selected Factors Possessed by Shorthand
Drop-Outs and Non-Drop-Outs in Eleven Western Pennsylvania High
Schools." Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, Columbia University,
1956.

Missling, Lorraine. "Prognostic Testing in Shorthand.” Unpublished
Master's thesis, University of Wisconsin, 1954.

Ohmann, O. A. "The Possibilities of Prognosis in Stenography,"
Research Studies in Commercial Education, Monographs in Education
Series, No. 11. Iowa City: State University of Iowa, 1926.

Osborne, Agnes E. "The Relationship Between Certain Psychological
Tests and Shorthand Achievement." Published Ph.D. dissertation,
Columbia University, 1943.

Phillips, Frank C. "A Study of Stenographic Aptitude." Unpublished
Master's thesis, Tufts College, 1943.

Pullis, Joe M. "Relation Between Accuracy and Achievement in Shorthand.”
Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, North Texas State Univeristy, 1966.

187

Rankel, William L. ”A Comparative Study of the Relationship Between
Intelligence and Success in English CQmposition, Typing, and
Shorthand.” Unpublished Master's thesis, The University of
Southern California, 1934.

Ripley, Gladys Lillian. ”Relationship of I. Q.'s, Teacher's M rks,
and Student Power Inventory Test Scores of Business Students."
Unpublished Master's thesis, Colorado College of Education, 1945.

Ryan, ChristOpher M. ”Prognosis of First-Term Pitmann Shorthand: The
Relationship Between Certain Characteristics of the Vocational
High School Pupils and the Achievement in First-term Shorthand.”
Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, New York University, 1953.

Sandy, F. M. "A Critical Examination of Research Dealing With the
Intelligence of Secondary School Commercial Students.” Unpub-
lished Master's thesis, State University of Iowa, 1932.

Spengler, Allen Charles. "Causes for Drop-Outs in First-Year Shorthand
in Newark, Ohio, High School." Unpublished Master's thesis,
The Ohio State University, 1948.

Strickland, Esther Hedges. "Criteria for Predicting Success in Short-
hand at East High School, Columbus, Ohio.” Unpublished Master's
thesis, The Ohio State University, 1957.

Spellman, Leola B. ”A Statistical Analysis of Shorthand Grades as
Related to Grades in Academic Subjects on the College Level.“
Unpublished Master's thesis, Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical
College, 1945.

Takasugi, Dorothy Okamoto. "The Relationship Between Certain Psycho-
logical Tests and Other Selected Factors with Shorthand Achieve-
ment.” Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Southern
California, 1961.

Terrill, Chester J. "The Value of the Hoke Prognostic Test of Steno-
graphic Ability as a Means of Selecting Shorthand Students."
Unpublished Master's thesis, New York State College for
Teachers, 1927.

Toothaker, Ruth Jack. ”A Critical Analysis of Literature Pertaining
to Prognostic Tests for Shorthand." Unpublished Master's thesis,
Oklahoma College for Women, 1941.

Tschider, Irene R. ”A History of Selected Studies in Shorthand Prog-
nosis from 1914 to 1960.” Unpublished Master's thesis, Univer-
sity of North Dakota, 1960.

Uthe, Elaine F. "An Evaluation of the Difficulty Level of Shorthand
Dictation Material." Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Univer-
sity of Minnesota, 1966.

188

VanKirk, Virginia. HA Study of the Relationship Between Ability
Measures and Success in Beginning and Advanced Shorthand."
Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Southern California,
1960.

Varah, Leonard J. ”Effect of Academic Motivation and Other Selected
Criteria of Achievement of First and Second Semester Shorthand
Students." Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1966.

Veon, Dorothy H. ”The Relationship of Learning Factors Found in
Certain Modern Foreign-Language Aptitude Tests to the Prediction
of Shorthand Achievement in College.” Gk‘ahona Agricultural
and Mechanical College, 1950.

Whittle, Marie. ”The Relationship Between Certain Variables and
Achievement in Beginning Shorthand at the University of Texas.H
Unpublished bmster's thesis, University of Texas, 1959.

Wood, Ethel H. ”Correlation of Prognostic Test and Will-Temperament
Tests With Actual Results in Gregg Shorthand.” Unpublished
Master's thesis, Washington State College, 1928.

Worley, Raymond J. "Relative Value of the I. Q. and Marks for
Predicting Success in Shorthand.” Unpublished Master's thesis,
Harvard University, 1931.

   

"Ill?iiii‘lli‘iliiii“