AN mvgsnamou OF THE CHARACTERISTICS WHICH DIFFERENTIATE mwowmve FROM N0N~mNQVAferiL CGLLEGE STUDENT PERSONNELPROGRAMS ._ 1 ' Thesis for the Degree of P h, D. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY BENJAMiN E. SPRUNGER 1968 ”this; “- ‘ ‘ 4-4 .4¢._L__- '° '4'")! LIBR A R Y MlClllgait \Law University |IIWWI"!WIT!ilII‘IIII‘IIHTI'ITRIIITIIIIIfil'iiilflTifllii 3 1293 10571 4046 This is to certify that the thesis entitled AN INVESTIGATION OF THE CHARACTERISTICS WHICH DIFFERENTIATE INNOVATIVE FROM NON-INNOVATIVE COLLEGE STUDENT PERSONNEL PROGRAMS presented by BENJAMIN E. SPRUNGER 1968 has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Pl’l . D 0 degree in COUDS e 1 ing and Personnel Services Q as Major professor Date MaLm, 1968 ABSTRACT AN INVESTIGATION OF THE CHARACTERISTICS WHICH DIFFERENTIA'IE IMIOVATIVE FROM NON-INNOVATIVE COLLEGE STIHENT PERSONNEL PRCBRMB by Benjamin E. Sprunger College student personnel administrators have been 'h‘adiflomlly delegated the responsibility for minimizing the abrasive aspects of the college environmnt which interfere with the students' optimal progress. Although social scientists, be- havioral scientists, and student personnel workers have introduced mm new practices and theories which may facilitate the students' academic progress both inside and outside the classroom and labora- tory, little is known about how these practices are comunicated, or what distinguishes institutions which readily adopt new student personnel practices from colleges which are relatively slow in up- dating their programs. Few research studies have been conducted in the area of college student personnel work and none have been reported indicating how student personnel practices are comimicated and adopted. be major intent of this study, therefore, was to examine one aspect of student personnel work, that of isolating specific variables which would effectively differentiate colleges with innovative student personnel programs from non-imovative programs. 'Ihree secondary problems were also emminedt 1) Are some characteristics more potent than others in predicting innovative student personnel programs? Benjamin B. Sprunger 2) What relationship if any exists between administrative- organizational and personal-psychological variables and the innova- tiveness of the student persomel program? 3) Could innovative and non-innovative student personnel programs be identified based upon measurement devices? To provide answers to the problem under investigation, one generalised multivariate hypothesis was formulated: Kl: No appreciable difference exists between student personnel programs in colleges with innovative and non-innovative student personnel programs. 'Jhe generalized multivariate null hypothesis allowed for the genera- tion and testing of sixteen related statistical hypotheses. 'Ihe analysis used to test the efficacy of the hypotheses was multiple discriminant analysis and univariate statistical techniques. Prior to testing the hypotheses, it was necessary to estab- lish two mutually exclusive groups from which relevant data could be collected. An instrument, "Adoption of Student Personnel Practices Inventory ," was developed which would provide a systematic method of identifying from the population sample those institutions having innovative programs and those having non-innova tive programs . The two mutually exclusive groups which were identified by the adoption scale were drawn from a population sample of 216 private, coeduca- tional, liberal arts colleges located in the midwestern states with student enrollments of 5,000 or less. From the 215 colleges repre- senting the population sample, the twelve most innovative and twelve least innovative student personnel programs were identified and categorized into two mutually exclusive groups. Benjamin E. Sprunger 'Ihe statistical analysis of the generalized multivariate null hypothesis was rejected at the .01 level of confidence, thus lending tentative support to the assumtion that there were identifiable differences between imovative and non-innovative college student personnel programs. Based upon univariate F ratios, five of the sixteen variables were found to be significant at the .05 level of confidence or greater. From the analysis of the sixteen statistical hypotheses, however, it was not possible to draw conclusive evidence indicatirg either the relative potency of each variable or the effect administrative-organise tional and/or personal-psychological charac- teristics had in relation to innovativeness. Analysis of the data revealed that adoption scales can systematically rate the relative innovativeness of college student personnel programs. he adoption scale developed for this study was found to have a split-half reliability coefficient of 4..83. Further analysis revealed that the frequency distribution approached almost perfect normality. Although definitive answers were not provided for all the prob- lem under investigation in this study, sufficient evidence was found which appeared to have direct and indirect implications for student personnel practice. The positive findings of this initial study on the diffusion and adoption of student personnel practices, along with the evidence which indicated that there is a rather large similarity of findings between adoption practices in student personnel and in other organisations, appeared to provide a firm basis upon which further or post facts and experimental studies can be built examining the processes of change in student personnel work. AN INVESTIGATION OF THE CHARACTERISTICS WHICH DIFFERENTIA'IE INNOVATIVE FROM NON-INNOVATIVE COLLEGE STUDENT PERSONNEL PROGRAMS By '\ -, 0‘< \‘9 Benjamin E? Sprunger A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DmTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Counseling, Personnel Services, and Educational Psychology 1968 G 5/ 57233 M? M DEDICATION To aw wife, Sue, who throughout the last few years provided the necessary encouragement, assistance, and support which made this study possible. Also to Julie and Jonathan, who were both patient and understanding during the coagulation of this study. ii AC KNCHIEMMENTS The author wishes to acknowledge and thank those individuals who provided the guidance and direction fer this study. Dr. Norman R. Stewart provided continuous assistance and ideas throughout all phases of this study. ‘Without his critical analysis, suggestions, and guidance, the potential importance of this study would prdbably have been diminished. I also wish to express my'appreciation to Dr. Everett M; Rogers. His vast.knowledge of the numerous diffusion research traditions allowed for extensive informationsand resource avail- ability during the fermulation.of the various aspects of the study. In addition, I wish to express aw appreciation to Dr. Halter Johnson for his continuous assistance in refining the nature of the problems under investigation. iii TABLE (F CONTENTS AC “WNMNTS O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 LIST 01“ LIST 6‘ mm 0 O O O O C O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O me C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O HST 0F APPENDm O O O O O O O O O I O O O O O O O O 0 Chapter I. III . NATUIEOFTHEPR$IEM.............. Social Milieu and Importance of the Study Statement of Problem Purpose of the Study Statement of the General Fh'pothesis Theoretical Assumptions Definition of Terms Organization of the Study mm 0F LIERATUE . O C O O 0 O O O O O O O 0 Historical Perspective Basic Concepts of Diffusion Research The Social System as the Unit of Adoption Theories of Organizational Change Conclusions and Sunnary DESIGNAND RESEARCH macnomcr. . . . . . . . . Development of Adoption Scale Sample Population Instr-unenmtion for Testing Hypotheses Statement of Ibpotheses Statistical Model and Computational Procedures Sumnry mmSIS m THE MTA 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Test of the General Hypothesis Determination of the Potent Variables Conclusions and Sunlnary iv H mm or contests (Cont.) Chapter Page V. SUM, COMMIOIBANDEECOWTIONS . . . . . . 95 8 Conclusions Implications for Educational Prac tics Recommendations for Further Research In Retrospect Bmumm O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I O I O O m NICE 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O 0 n8 Table 2-1 2-2 2-3 3-1 3-2 3-3 h-1 huh h-S h-6 14-7 IISTOFTABIES Average Number of Cross Citations per Publication by. Year. I O O O O O O O O O I O O O 0 O O O O O 0 A Comparison of the Diffusion Research lIraditzions. . Variables Related to Innovativeness. . . . . . . . . Frequency Distribution and Normality Check for the Instrument, "Adoption of Selected Student Personnel PracticeSInventory"............... Number and Standard Deviations from Mean of the Innovator and Non-Innovator Population Sample. . . Tenure of Chief Student Persomel Administrators . . Innovative, Non-Innovative, and Combined Gretna Means and Standard Deviations for all Statistical momesgs O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O latent Root Value, Chi Square Value, Degrees of Freedom and Probability Statement for file Dmrmmnt Emu-on. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Discriminant Function, Probability Statement, latent Root Value and Percent of Trace for the DiscriminantFumtion............... Rank Order of Variables According to Vector Weights. Rank Order by Vector Weights for Innovative and Non‘muve Inafihlflons. e e e e e e e e e e e latent Root Value, Chi Square Value, Degrees of Freedom and Probability Smtement of the Discriminant Function Based upon Seven Variables . Latent Root Value, Chi Square Value, Degrees of Freedom and Pmbability Statement of the Discriminant Function Based upon Ten Variables . . Page 20 22 1:3 53 58 S9 81 83 85 89 Figure 1. 2. 3. It. 5. LET OFFIGUIES thtive Percent Of Adoption Omee e e e e e e e Adopter Categorisation on the Basis of Relative TineofAdoptionofImovaflons . . . . . . . . . Griffiths' Model of Organisational Change . . . . . Adopter Categories Used in 11113 Study . . . . . . . Schematic Diagram Showing the Relationship of Generalized, Research and Statistical Pbpotheses. vii Page 29 37 67 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix I. Adoption of Selected Student Personnel PracticesInventcry............... II. 69mm]- mu Srlat O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 III. mgml “tar. C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 IV. mat Rewind.” umre O C O O O O O O O O O O O O V.SecondReminderIetter.............. VI. Consultants in the Development, Formulation andSamplingoftheInstmments. . . . . . . . . VII. Total Years of Experience in Student Personnel Work and Ages of Chief Student Personnel Amsmwra O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 VIII. Survey of Demographic Data Pertaining to Deans of Students and Student Personnel Administrative Procedures in liberal Arts Colleges. . . . . . . H. Ofigml latter. 0 O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O x. Remnder “tar. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 II. Combined Correlation Matrix with Criterion Grow Imluded O O O O O O O O O I O O O O O O 0 III. Univariate F Tests for All Statistical Hypotheses. Page 118 123 125 126 127 128 129 137 138 139 CHAPTER I NATURE OF THE PROBLEM Social Milieu and Importance 9_f 3333 §_t_1_1_gy One might easily interpret that innovation is the spirit of America. Rapid social change and technological change has become the pattern which has uniquely set America apart from other societies. 'Ihis way of life has been fostered by everyone from our most eminent scientists who contribute to the frontiers of knowledge to the buck- sters who peddle trivia. Madison Avenue, symbolic of the advertising world, continually embraces and informs man that he must change with the times or become obsolete and therefore be nothing better than a social outcast and a drag on the great American way of life. 1119 prOpensity for change has become part of the environmental condition- ing which has universally affected almost all segments of our society. The acceptance of change has not gone unnoticed by educators. Barrington (1953, p. )4) stated that . . . the record of history shows that in times of change institutions which fail to make the necessary adjustments in their programs soon drop out of the social picture. It is necessary for educators to see permanence and change together. 'Ihe schools and colleges must not emphasize one to the exclusion of the other. Fosdick (191:7, p. 7) stated: "'Ihe illusion that security can be found in immobility or that safety is dependent upon the absence of change, is perhaps the most dangerous form of imbalance which plagues the minds of men." Some writers maintain that society 1 2 and especially education are not changing rapidly enough (Carlson, 1965b, p. 60). On the other hand, one has little difficulty in locating numerous publications decrying the rapid changes which are continually being made both in the society and in education. Many writers and educators are concerned about change not from the point of view of change for change sake, but from the point of view that education must change and keep pace with the society which it serves. An example of this is John Dewey's statement that . . . not all the social changes which are going on are good and beneficial. But it is claimed that these changes are here and must be faced, not ignored; education has the responsibility of developing types of minds and characters that can direct these newer forces toward good and that otherwise they will surely become forces of destruction and disintegration (Caswell, 1937, p. 12). The process for change and the need to keep pace with society has not gone unnoticed by supporters and critics of higher education. Alvin Eurich (19614, p. 55) in an article in the Educational Record stated that . . . the contemporary world created in large measure by the ideas which have come from universities, now demands that higher education reform itself. A conventional pattern of higher education is an anachronism in today's world. he only way to conserve the values of liberal learning is through the full and imaginative exploitation of every tool of modern technology. . . . Yet college teaching stands out as one of the few fields in which innovation and improvement are neglected. A study undertaken at Teachers College, Columbia University, to investigate the diffusion of educational practices at colleges revealed the following: Careful examination of our educational system reveals that a multitude of educational inventions have been introduced during the past 100 years. It appears evident, however, that most of these inventions lag several years behind the cultural needs of our society and also behind the insights into the learning process and individual behavior provided by psychological research. In addition, the time required 3 for new practices to diffuse throughout a large percentage of school systems is discouragingly long. It hardly seems possible that education which is primarily concerned with change-change in the behavior of individuals and groups-- would be so reluctant to accept change in its methods and procedures (Barrington, 1953, p. 6). Despite all of the writing, research, technological advance- ments, and social changes which have taken place in the past few decades, there are surprisingly few studies of the diffusion process in education (Katz, 1962, P. 55). More astounding is the conspicuous absence of studies investigating the change process in higher educa- tion, especially when it is this institution in our society which is a major contributor to change. ‘Ihe writer has been able to locate only a few studies which have systematically investigated the process by which innovations spread through higher education. When examining diffusion research, it is readily apparent that a considerable quantity of research has been done; however, when one extracts that which is directly related to education, it is lack- ing both in quality and quantity (Carlson, 1965b, p. 60). When one further categorizes educational diffusion research into that which is relevant to elementary, secondary and higher education, it is higher education which has received almost no attention, and there appears to be nothing written concerning diffusion of innovations in college student personnel work. Although social scientists have for many years studied the process of change and more specifically the diffusion of new ideas through the social system and the eventual acceptance and adoption of the ideas by the social system, college student personnel work has shown little if any interest in studying change within student personnel work. h In most cases, innovations are in the form of new products, procedures or methods of doing things more efficiently and economical- ly. Thus, the motivating factor is usually financial reward. With student personnel innovations, however, it is rather difficult to prove or promote adoption of new ideas on the basis of monetary gain. In fact, mny innovations, if they are adopted, cost more than it does to continue with the present methods, 8.8., due process in discip- linary procedures, in-service education, research on envirorunental stress, and records by electronic data processing equipment. 'Ihus, marry times the only motivating force for innovation centers around methods of communicating more information to students in an attempt to reduce the dissonance which exists between the college and the students. Mort (1961;, p. 317-28), a leading researcher on the diffusion process in education, found that: 1) decades elapse betwaen the need for change and acceptance of innovations, 2) diffusion of innovations through the American school system proceeds at a slow rate, and 3) simple and complex innovations spread at about the same rate. At the college level, Davis (1965) verified Mort's findings when he studied adaption rates of liberal arts colleges. 'lhus, it would follow that elementary and secondary education as well as higher education could benefit greatly if new ideas could be diffused through the educational system with efficiency. With seven or more major research traditions representing more than a thousand studies, it would appear, therefore, that ample theory and the supportive research is available to undertake an investigation into the role and traits that characterize and identify student 5 personnel innovators. It also appears evident that an investigation in this area would result in more extensive empirical data identify- ing ways and means whereby college student personnel administrators can adopt innovations more readily, consequently allowing the total student personnel profession to keep pace with changes in the cultural needs rather than lagging behind due to ineffective procedures for the diffusion of student personnel innovations. It would seem of foremost importance to know the characteris- tics of the student personnel innovators as well as those who are non- innovative. 'Ihe importance of this concern is based upon the theory that early adopters serve as pilot models and local demonstrators, and they in turn are an influence for local change and a direct line of communication for the remainder of the social system (Rogers, 1962, p. 1814). If, then, the characteristics of an imovative student per- sonnel program as well as the non-innovative programs can be identi- fied when new concepts, practices, and methods are developed, they can be directed toward these target audiences, namely colleges with innovative student personnel programs, that are most likely to adopt and accept the innovation. If this is true, although there are some critics of this theory, then systematic attempts should be made to identify those colleges with innovative programs, and extensive effort should be utilized in disseminating new ideas to those innovators and in encouraging them to adopt. Thus, if the study is able to identify innovative programs as well as to isolate those characteristics that separate the innovator from the non-innova tor, the smdy should afford valuable information 6 to the researchers of the future; to those who are professionally involved in student personnel work; and to those whose interests, whether they be within the profession or outside the profession, lie in the direction of diffusing innovations through the social system of college student personnel administrators. Perhaps more important- ly, the information gained from this study will aid in more rapid diffusion of innovations in college staldent personnel work with the resultant effect that student persomel programs will more effectively meet the needs of those within or dependent upon the college. Statement of: Problem The primary problem of this research is to determine if there are specific variables of college student personnel work which are effective in differentiating innovative student personnel programs from non-innovative programs. The process whereby variables relating to innovativeness are identified gives rise to three secondary prob- lems. First, are some characteristics more potent in predicting innovative student personnel programs than other characteristics? Second, what relationship if any exists between administrative- organizational structure and innovativeness of the program, and the personal-psychological characteristics of the chief student personnel administrator and innovativeness? Third, can colleges with innovative and non-innova tive strdent personnel programs be systematically identified through the use of measurement devices? Mose 23 313 Study It is the purpose of this study to: 1) identify liberal arts colleges which have innovative student personnel programs by means of 7 an instrument which measures the relative innovativeness of the institution's program contained within the population sample, 2) compare the most innovative college student personnel programs with the least innovative programs in order to determine those character- istics which are unique to colleges with innovative student personnel programs, 3) determine if the variables which identify innovators in population samples other than student personnel also identify innova- tors in college student personnel work, 1:) determine which variables for predictive purposes are the most potent in identifying colleges with innovative programs. Providing the problems outlined for this study can be answered and the purposes of the study are met, then the results of the study should provide valuable information in establishing criteria for identification of innovative institutions. ‘Ihese findings can then be used in the process of disseminating new procedures, identification of pilot colleges which will readily experiment with new practices, and colleges which will serve as demonstration units for new practices. For those who consider propensity for innovativeness as a value to be emulated, the findings of this research should also pro- vide valuable information. ‘Ihose chief student personnel administra- tors wishing their program to be more innovative may find the results helpful as a means of making their own programs more innovative. Those who are student personnel educators may wish to stress the character- istics which correlate highly with innovativeness in the course of their instruction and field consultation. 8 Statement of 3.12 General Hypothesis 'Jhis study's main objective is to determine variables which have predictive value for determining the relative innova tiveness of student personnel programs. It will examine some personal, education- al, and organisational variables of these programs within a sample of private liberal arts colleges. In order to determine if differ- ences existed between colleges with innovative programs and those having non-innovative programs, the colleges included in the study were categorized in either the innovative group or the non-innovative group. Based upon the instrument, "Adoption of Selected Student Per- sonnel Practices Inventory," dichotomization was accomplished by selecting the six percent of the colleges which fell at the tails of the distribution and therefore furthest above and below the mean. A number of variables considered relevant to the dimension of innovativeness will be presented and then categorized into various hypotheses to be examined. Since the major problem of the study was identifying characteristics which separate innovative college student personnel programs from non-innovative programs, the following major hypothesis was generated. Hereafter, the major hypothesis will be referred to as the generalized multivariate null hypothesis. 8. H.: No appreciable difference exists between student personnel programs in colleges with innovative student personnel programs and colleges with non- innovative programs . The hypothesis will be tested in null form since there is little if any supporting research regarding student personnel programs and innovativeness. Also since this study represents exploratory research, it was felt that the generalized multivariate null form would be most apprOpriate . 9 Because the problem of this study has generated several sub- problems, namely the characteristics which are most potent in identify- ing innovativeness, two broad research hypotheses were established. has two research hypotheses will serve as the central focus for the generation of numerous statistical hypotheses which will be subjected to quanfitative analysis.1 The first research hypothesis to be considered in this study is concerned with the effect administrafive and organizational proce- dures and practices have upon whether or not the student personnel program is innovative. Included within the domain of this hypothesis are budget appropriation, staffing procedures, policy formation and student personnel research. ‘Ihe formulated research hypothesis is: $12 A positive relationship exists between administrative and organizational procedures and the imova tiveness of college student personnel programs. 'Ihe second research hypothesis generated for this study attempts to examine the personal and psychological characteristics of the chief student personnel administrator and how this effects innova- tiveness. In studying the adoption process in the institutional setting, it is not always possible to identify whether or not it was the individual or the institution that was instrmnental in the decision to adapt new practices or procedures. There is ample theory and supporting research evidence available, however, which indicates that the chief administrator stands between new ideas received from outside the system and those within the system which have the power to adopt (Spindler, 1963, p. m2). lFurther statements regarding statistical hypotheses are presented in Chapter III. 10 Theory'and research, established by students of the diffusion process, indicated that.diffusion of innovations is basically‘a com- munication process (Rogers and Stanfield, 1966). Consequently, the extent to which the chief student personnel administrator introduces new ideas to the system from information he receives outside his in- stitution is related to his own personal characteristics. In other words, the more the chief student personnel administrator is cpen to or has had contact.with those outside his institution, the more he will be aware of potential innovations. Since his Openness to outside sources is a personal character- is tic and not under the direct control of the institution, cosmopolite- ness, education, and dogmatism.will.a11 be considered as part'of the fellcwing research hypothesis: 82: A positive relationship exists between the personal interests and psychological characteristics of the chief student personnel administrator and the innova- tiveness of the student personnel program. Other questions were raised related to the major hypotheses which concerned the relationship among various personal and organiza- tiona1.variables. For example, questions were raised regarding relationship of: l) the size of enrollment, 2) the comparison of academic discipline and number and type of graduate courses taken, 3) the total budget’expenditure per effectiveness in determining innovativeness, and.h) the total financial aid program per capita to innovativeness. These questions, however, were not stated in hypothesis form because data-collec tion procedures provided neither accurate nor precise date. theoretical Assumptions The inquiry into the dissemination rates of student personnel practices and the administrators who tend to adopt new practices more readily than others takes its orientation from assumptions derived from existing research and established theory. Unfortunately, for many years the research conducted by social scientists representing the various disciplines have often failed to take cognizance of the research being conducted outside their own discipline. Rogers and Stanfield (1966, p. 6), however, after extensive emmination of diffu- sion studies, have recently found that there is a growing awareness on the part of diffusion researchers which indicates a general type of consistency from one disciplinary field to another. It is also appar- ent from the increasixg number of cross references and the inter- disciplinary approach to the diffusion process that diffusion research is emerging as one field of concepts and relationships even though the research is being conducted within the separate disciplines by social scientists loyal to their given field of study. Consequently, the underlying theoretical assumptions of this investigation will be based upon an interdisciplinary approach and will rely greatly upon diffusion research. The two-step flow theory of conmmnica’dons as developed by Kate suggests that mass communication messages are mediated by refer- ence groups of the recipient and the social structure to which he belongs (Kata, 1957). Thus, when the chief student personnel adminis- trator either reads or hears about a new student personnel practice, the theory suggests that his response is not directly determined by the 12 message, but that it is determined largely by his relationships with other people whom he perceives as important. Therefore, for the purposes of this study, it is assumed that the dean's openness to comnnufication as well as his contact with numerous opinion leaders will be related to his innovativeness. A second basic assumption which is germane to this investi- gation is that the period of time for which a new practice takes to diffuse generally exhibits the following characteristics: 1) When a new practice is introduced, there are relatively few adopters. 2) This period is followed by a rapid increase in adopters. 3) A general decline in the number of adopters is noted after the mjority have adopted the innovation. Graphically represented, this distribu- tion over time would be in the form of an ”S"-shaped curve (Carlson, 19658. p. 7). (See Fism‘e 1) FIGURE 1 CUMUIATIVE PEWENT CF ADMION CURVE § 8 8‘ :- O N O CUMUIATIVE PERCENT OF ADOPTION O 13 Carlson»(1965a, p. 6-8) has provided additional theoretical support which indicates that adopter distributions approach normality. His theory is based upon "interac tion effect." This is the process whereby the adopters of an innovation influence the other members of the social system. The interaction effect results in a type of chain reaction. Since there is intercommmication among adopters, the potential adOpters learn from each other. Therefore, the group pressure for adoption becomes more intense as the mmber of adopters in a social system increases (Rogers, 1962, p. 155). Mathematically, the interaction effect follows a binomial expansion, 1.9., one member of the social system tells two other members, they in turn each tell two others, and each of these pass it along to two others, etc. has resulting binomial expansion follows a normal curve when plotted. At the Diffusion Document Centerl, after reviewing 2 ,hOO empirical findings from the diffusion research on file, representing fourteen main research traditions, researchers were able to identify fifteen separate variables that were positively related to the dimen- sion of innovativeness (Rogers and Stanfield, 1966) . They are as follows: 1) education, 2) literacy, 3) income, 1;) level of living, 5) knowledgeability, 6) attitude toward change, 7) achievement motiva- tion, 8) aspirations for children, 9) cosmopoliteness, 10) mass media emosure, 11) contact with change agencies, 12) deviance from name, 13) group participation, 11;) interpersonal communication exposure, and lithe Diffusion Document Center, under the direction of Everett M. Rogers, is sponsored by federal funds. It classifies and codes all diffusion studies irregardless of research tradition. Currently, there are more than 1,026 studies coded. 1h 15) opinion leadership. 'lhere is no consistent relationship between age and innovativeness. 'Ihe empirical findings and assumptions of previous diffusion research from all research traditions will constitute the basis for the derivation of all assumptions and hypotheses concerning innovative- ness in this investigation. Definition of Terms Chief Administrative Officer.--The highest individual administrator whose major responsibilities are the supervision and administration of non-classroom and/or non-laboratory student activities. Cosmopolitenessw-The degree to which an individual or organization is oriented outside his or its own social system. Diffusion. -'1he process by which a new idea, innovation or invention is communicated through a social system in relationship to time. Innovation.--An idea, invention, technological advancement, or method- oIo—gicaI procedure which is perceived as new by the individual or the social system. The newness of the idea to the individual is of more inmortance than the time lapse between discovery and awareness. Innovation Decision Process.--The process in which an individual or organization engages Em first awareness of the innovation to final adoption or rejection. (This is also frequently referred to as the adoption process.) Innovativeness.--1he degree to which an individual or organization is relatively earlier than the other individuals or organizations in adopting new ideas. Innovators." Refer to those individuals, administrative units, and college student personnel programs which represent approximately the first 6% of the institutions studied to adopt new practices. For the purposes of this study, the term, innovator, represents college student personnel programs which have scored on the instrument, "Adoption of Selected Student Personnel Practices Inventory", at 1.6 standard deviations above the mean. he innovators are those insti- tutions which ran): at the 91:52 percentile or above. The term, innovator, then, is subjectively used to connotate those adopting significantly before the rest of the social system under study. 1“Both the innovators and non-innova tors were drawn from a sample population having a mean of 51 and standard deviation of 1M. 15 Non-Immators.-Refer to those individuals, administrative units, or college student personnel programs which represent the last 6% of the institutions studied to adopt new practices. The colleges classified in this category scored 1.2 standard deviations below the mean on the ”Adoption of Selected Student Personnel Practices Inventory."1 This group represents those ranking at the 11.51 percentile or below. Subjectively, the non-innovator group was representative of those who were last to adopt new student personnel practices. Organization 93 213 m A review of the relemnt literature is in the following chapter. Chapter III contains a description of the sample population, instrument deveIOpment, derivation of the hypotheses, and an explana- tion of the methodological procedures. The findings will be described in Chapter IV. 'me sunmary and conclusions as well as a discussion of the findings and their implications for educational practice will be discussed in Chapter V. 180th the innovators and non-innovators were drawn from a sample pepulation having a mean of 51 and standard deviation of 114.14. CHAP'IER II REVIEW OF mm In an attempt to systematically review the research and theory related to this investigation, this chapter will be divided into four major presentations. A fifth and final section will draw from the literature reported, the conclusions drawn, and a sumary of the findings presented. The first section, consequently, amines briefly the historical deve10pment leading to the contemporary position of both student personnel work and diffusion research. he second section presents basic concepts, operational definitions, and procedures which provide much of the underlying support of diffusion research. he majority of diffusion research has studied the individual as the adoption unit. Section three, however, examines the few existing studies which have investigated the social system as the adopting unit. Since this study utilizes the social system as the unit of adoption, section three and section four provide much of the theories and models for this study. Historical _P_e;spec tivs Although student personnel work has been in existence mamr years, it has by tradition taken its direction for change from sources other than its own profession or its mique intellectual l6 l7 endeavors. The chief student personnel administrator has been traditionally the individual charged by the president of the institu- tion as me one responsible for keeping the status quo, that is, the control of discipline and other non-academic, housekeeping functions. In recent years, however, more and more imetus has been placed upon student personnel departments for providing not only co-curricular ac tivities, but also an environmental atmosphere and services which enhance and are conpetible with the students' ability to excel in the academic community. The traditional college envirorment did not necessarily require that new student personnel practices be adepted rapidly since isolation, selectivity and autonomy were the prevailing trends of private liberal arts colleges. This has given way to pressure brought to bear upon both public and private higher education to provide both effective and efficient education for the heterogeneous msses. Today, however, when the national security of the country depends upon a majority of the society being intellectually and technically educated, the total campus environment comes into play as part of the educational process. The speed which new ideas can be diffused, therefore, through student personnel work, has resulted in providing the student with a better education. ‘Ihe auxiliary student personnel services assist his student in his classroom and laboratory studies, while at the same time minimising the aspects of higher education which have thwarted or hindered the student's academic growth. 18 Consequently, privately controlled higher education and its student personnel programs, which at one time could remain isolated and apart from the competitive and changing business and industrial world, can no longer change and innovate at their own pace. By necessity the college must innovate and change to meet the needs of the changing society which the college institution serves. To be contemporary and relevant to today's society, private colleges must keep their channels open to new ideas. As the college must keep aware of the changes taking place, so must student personnel programs be continually aware of the new findings in social sciences, be- havioral sciences, legal precedents, and innovative student personnel practices adopted by other institutions. When attempting to determine the factors relating to the adoption process of new student personnel practices, little if any research was available. Researchers from traditions other than educa- tion, however, have compiled evidence on other organizations and how new ideas are diffused through them. Since little evidence was avail- able indicating how new ideas are communicated or adopted by student personnel administrators, it may be helpful to briefly review the diffusion of innovation research traditions. Although diffusion research has been in existence for the last half century, it has not been until the last decade that there has been a rapid increase in the quantity of studies completed (Rogers and Stanfield, 1966). It is also interesting to note that within the last decade there has been a consolidation and cooperation of efforts among the major research traditions. Prior to the last l9 decade, few if any researchers exanfined work done in disciplines other than their own. One writer indicated the following regarding this problem: . . . taro of the intellectual traditions of diffusion were ably represented on the same campus of one large univer- sity and within five blocks of each other. After several years of widely acknowledged research, these two sets of scholars had little understanding or appreciation of each other's findings (Rogers, 1962, p. 21-2). As was mentioned in Chapter I, there is now considerable evidence available which indicates that "diffusion research is emerging as one body of concepts and relationships, even though the investigations are conducted by researchers in marw disciplines" (Rogers and Stanfield, 1966, p. 8). line number of cross citations over time has increased considerably. An examination of the data contained in Table 2-1 provides supportive evidence. Considerable academic thought and empirical research has been done in the study of the diffusion of innovations. The Diffu- sion Document Center, which attempts to code and file all diffusion studies for coding purposes, lists twenty-two research traditions under which they have filed over 1,200 diffusion studies. Rogers, in his book, Diffusion of Innovations (1962), provides one of the most complete summaries of diffusion theory and research. His book represents an extensive compilation and integra- tion of findings from all research traditions, although rural sociology tends to have been reviewed most thoroughly. In his book, he (Rogers, 1962, p. 23) lists anthrOpology, early sociology, rural sociology, education, industrial and medical sociology as the six major research traditions. Kate and Ievin (1963), however, list 20 TABIE 2-1 AVERAGE NUMBER OF CROSS CITATIONS PER PUBLICATION BY YEAR Average Number Year of of Cross Citations Total Number of Publication Per Publication Publications Completed Before 19,40 .083 12 19140 - 19th .610 114 1915 - 19h9 .300 10 1950 - 1951; .1430 79 1955 - 1959 .522 186 1960 - 1962* .9Sh 173 1363 - 1961: .975 161 1965 - 1966 1.370 73 Total ~-- 708 it Categorization of years changes from four to tw0 years at this point. 21 market research as an additional research tradition. The various intellectual traditions and their respective contributors which have studied the diffusion process are presented in Table 2-2. The study of diffusion of educational practices has con- tributed extensively to the body of diffusion research. The majority of educational diffusion studies, however, has been carried out at one institution, Columbia University's Teachers College, under the sponsorship of one researcher, Paul Mort. The researchers at Columbia gathered almost all the data by mailed questionnaire from school superintendents and principals. rIhe concept of Spread of new educational practices has been linked to "adaptability" which was felt to be one of the three needs of organizations. "Adaptability was a synonym for innovativeness and was defined as the ability of a school to take on new practices and discard outmoded ones" (Carlson, 1965a, p. 9). Mort and his research associates have com- pleted more than 200 studies of the "adaptability" of schools. The Mort "tradition," however, is not without critics. There is some feeling among researchers that.he was unable to get his research beyond the financial support variable in determining the innovativeness of a school (Carlson, 1965a , p. 9). Mort also has been criticized for ignoring research on the adoption process which had been published by other diffusion researchers. Since the Mort tradition, such researchers as Carlson and Brickell have studied the diffusion of new educational practices. Unlike their predecessor, they have borrowed heavily upon the other research traditions for support and methods of investigation. 22 .wmlmm .n qua." .onomom «ooh—5mg. unosobfigog no 3938.30 «:36 -She 5 essences; saunas 3895.3 gonad Mo nSmHohuoo 833....me asses Based momaobfigocfi mo 39.33.30 833ng has“; seams. um anemone someone doggone as oofigomfi mo menace “gaseous co 38 B nope” no." name.“ no nofieflfloflfio unuosobfigoofi mo use—“9800 saucepan; no 033983 30.3. L55 3% .383 efifltm 5.396qu no 3828 10980 «3523 3. Beacon ono Soc 395.26 .33" tom 336:.“ch ages Haqnuflsu e mangoes.“ Hmcomaom ages“ H83 3 H3593 $.33... Ba 383» 38 «page H8353 Superfine 2:. sun 30325580 has: 39398 Hsoflvmfifln 33am Hoosom s Begonias 3%: 39398 H33 938.» use 25.2535 Heoonnom c.3575. H33 25.3.» no cg a one wagon goons scan 38 3558 3.3 unions 5.? confines noflrfl no noflofioom aofigooo pudawofladm 5.30m 033m hwoaoaoom mafiaflawco .1: .553: in 3.3808 .65 aoficosvm hmoHofloom hmonowoom hmoaow eon H330: Hug 33H dogwossm honofloon gm hwododoom 3.3m hmoaoaogdd hmoaoaohfidd uwfiefla mo mega no net 3534 no :5 53. 32334 use €053.38 Ho 353‘ 5:2 topsononaom manganese 5a: “0.5. as .x. 98ande magma zOHmEHQ a ho gage 4 «IN and“. 23 Presently, Richard Carlson at the Center for the Advanced Study of Educational Administration at the University of Oregon appears to be the most active researcher of the diffusion process of educational innovations. In summarizing the historical perspective, it is evident that Mort, Carlson and their followers have contributed much to the research evidence on the diffusion of educational innovations. However, little if any research has directly investigated the process whereby student personnel programs adopt new practices. Since little research evidence is available in this specific area, and since much of the educational diffusion research has borrowed from other research traditions, it would appear that any research undertaken on the diffusion of educational practices in college student personnel programs cannot be done in isolation and without consultation with other research traditions. The propriety of borrowing from other research traditions than education is given further credence when attempting to determine the extent to which college student personnel programs are comparable to public school programs. Basic Concepts 9_f_‘ Diffusion Research Prior to examining the literature which directly addresses itself to the formal organization, i.e., student personnel depart- ments, and the process whereby they adopt new innovations, it is important to consider the significant antecedent research and concepts which have been established prior to the research on the diffusion process among and within colleges. 2h Diffusion Research.--In an attempt to understand diffusion research more thoroughly and its related implications to student personnel work, it may be thought of as the spread of a new idea from its source of invention or creation to its ultimate users or adopters. Anthropologists have described the process as " . . . the spread of an item within a cultm‘e-u-from the innovator to a group and from one group to another" (Etaioni, 1961;, p. 1406). Others have defined it "as the process by which an innova- tion is transferred from one person or aggregate of persons to another person or aggregate of persons in a social system over time" (Iin, 1966, p. 12). The crucial elements in the diffusion of innovations as outlined by most researchers are: l) the innovation or new idea, 2) which is conmunicated via certain channels, 3) among the members of the social s stem, h) over time. The Innovation: An innovation, whether or not in student personnel work, may be defined as an idea perceived as new by the individual. It is not necessarily an invention. In fact, whether or not an idea is objectively new as measured by the amount of time elapsed since its discovery or its first use is not as important as the fact that it is new to the social system, the individual, or the adopting unit. Barnett (1953, p. 7) defines an innovation as "any thought, behavior or thing that is new because it is quantitatively different from existing forms." Communication: The communication process represents the centroid of the diffusion process as was mentioned in Chapter I in the theoretical assumptions section. Both personal and impersonal communication 25 medias play important roles during the adoption process through which the individual or adopting unit passes from first hearing about an innovation to final adoption or rejection. Communication models such as Berlo's (1960) and academic leadership as provided by Elihu Katz and Paul Iazarsfeld have assisted in the delineation of the influence of the commmication variable. Social System: Although most diffusion studies have used the individual as the adopting unit, it becomes apparent rather quickly that the individual does not operate in isolation of his social system when it comes to decision-making. Coleman and others (1956) in their study of innovative physicians identified the importance of the social and advisory reference groups as a variable effecting adoption of innovations. 'me reference group to which the individual or the adopting unit goes to seek information, sanction, approval and/or advice determines the individual's or adopting unit's behavior. The social system serves as the informal communication and teaching mechanism. It would be expected then that the orienta- tion of the social system would directly effect the innovativeness of its members. Ems: Time of adoption has been one means for differentiating the innovator and the non-innova tor. The innovator or the traits of innovativeness have been usually assigned to the individuals or adopting unit which is relatively earlier in accepting or adopting a new practice before other members of the social system adopt. In other sections of this chapter and in Chapter III, further evidence will be given in support of the importance of the time 26 variable in the establishment of adopter categories and the identification of innovators and non-innovators. The Adoption Process.--The process through which an individual or adopting unit such as a student personnel program passes when con- sidering the adoption and rejection of an innovation has been described variously by different. researchers. Ryan and Gross (19113) were pro- bably the first to recognize that the adoption of a new idea consisted of stages. They defined the stages as awareness, conviction, trial acceptance and complete adoption. Rogers (1962, p. 81-86), in his review of the adoption literature, analyzed other researchers' categories and developed a five-step adoption model. These steps consisted of awareness, interest, evaluation, trial, and finally, either adoption or rejection. It should be noted that rejection may take place at any one of the five stages of adoption. In studying educational innovations, Miles (1961;, p. 19-20) created a four-stage adoption model. The stages consisted of the following: 1) design: The innovation is discovered, developed, invented. 2) awareness-interest: The target system becomes aware of the existence of the designed innovation, becomes interested in it, and seeks information about its characteristics. 3) evaluation: The target system performs a kind of mental trial on the innovation and it forms opinions about its efficacy in accomplishing the system's goals, its feasibility and its cost. )4) trial: The target system engages in a small scale trial In order to assess the innovation consequences. 27 The similarity betmen Rogers, Miles and other adoption stage models is readily apparent. The various models enconpass basically the same concepts. Two researchers have designed empirical studies to test the validity of the concept of five-stage adoption process. Both concluded that the concept is valid (Copp, 1957, and Real, 1957). Factors Effecting Rate 9_f Adoption 3f Innovativeness.--As would be expected, not all new ideas or practices are adopted at the same rate. Mort (19116, p. 199-200) found that kindergartens required fifty years to reach widespread adoption. Allen (1956) found that a period of only eighteen years was necessary for the adoption of driver training by United States schools. Carlson (1961:) showed that only five years was required for modern math to reach almost conplete adoption among Pennsylvania schools. The rate of adoption of a new idea, practice or product varies according to how it is perceived by the potential adopter. Generally, more rapid rates of adoption are characteristic of innovations that: 1) Have more relative advantage over the existing ideas being replaced. 2) Are less cogplex; new ideas that are simpler to under- stand are adopted more quickly than ideas difficult to grasp. 3) Are more visible; new ideas whose results are more plainly seen are more quickly adopted than those whose results are difficult to perceive. 1;) Are more divisible for trial; new ideas which allow small scale samplE experiments are more readily acceptable than ideas which require a complete change at once and allow less possibility of trial. 5) Are more compatible; new ideas that fit with pre- sently held values and attitudes more easily gain approval than those contrary to individuals' values (Rogers, 1962, p. 121:). 28 Adopter Categories.--Innovativeness has most frequently been defined as the degree to which an individual or adopting unit is relatively earlier than other individuals or adopting units in adopting new ideas, practices, or products in a social system. A common approach to the identification and classification of innovators, and for that matter other adapter categories, has been to classify adopters into categories by using time of adoption as a criterion and to identify and conpare the individuals falling in each classification. Rogers (1960, p. Bus-Sh), for example, classified individuals in a given social system as innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards. As was indicated in Chapter I, empirical research has indicated that the diffusion of most innovations can be represented on a bell-shaped curve unless some special circum- stances occur during the adoption period. For conceptual purposes then-n-although the variable innovativeness is continuous--it can be partitioned into adopter categories. Procedures for partitioning the continuum into categories varies with different researchers. Rogers (1962 , p. 162), for sample, partitioned the continuum accord- ing to standard deviations. (See Figure 2) Innovativeness also appears to be a consistent type of behavior. If the adoption unit is innovative on one idea, it tends to be similarly innovative for other new ideas . The Social System as 312 Unit _o_1_' Adoption Most diffusion researchers in the past have concentrated their efforts on the study of the individual as the adopting unit almost to the exclusion of studying the social system as the adoption unit. 29 FIGURE 2 ADOPTER CATEGORIZATION ON THE BASIS OF RELATIVE TIME OF ADOPTION OF INNOVATIONS 20' 10' 10' Innovators Early Early late Iaggards Adopters Majority Majority A recent review of the literature indicated that only seven studies have attempted to investigate the diffusion of innovations using the social system as the unit of analysis. Out of the seven studies, four traced the diffusion of innovations within educational organizations (Rogers and Shoemaker, 1968). Lin (1966) attempted to measure two new variables as they related to three innovative Michigan high schools. These variables were: 1) innovation internalization, defined as the extent to which a member of an organization perceives the innovation to be relevant and valuable to his role performance, and 2) change orientation, defined as an individual's degree of general predisposition toward change. He found that the first variable correlated with twenty-twp organizational variables, and the second variable correlated with eighteen variables . 30 Queeley and Street (1965) contrasted an elementary school which had adopted multi-grading of pupils with a school which adopted the practice at a later date. They found that the innovative school had a greater staff participation in decision-making, was more interested in students and had a higher pupil achievement than the later adopting school. The only study this writer found in the review of the litera- ture relating to diffusion of innovations in higher education was done by Davis (1965). His study consisted of a thorough analysis, by utilizing a case study method, of both an innovative and a non- innovative college. The major problem explored by Davis was related to the adoption of educational innovations by private liberal arts colleges. The problems outlined by Davis were as follows: 1) What personal variables characterize individuals in an innovative college? 2) What features of the organization normative structure operate to promote innovation? 3) What are the factors within the relationship be tween the individuals and the organization which account for the college receptivity to educational innovativeness? Although Davis's data collection techniques and interview schedules were extensive and thorough, his findings must be considered with extreme caution. His study consisted of only trvo institutions-— the most innovative and least innovative colleges within the population. Based upon the limited sample, however, Davis (1965, p. 1111) indicated there was reason to believe that the adoption process for a collegiate institmtion is similar to other research findings regarding non-collegiate institutions. A college seems to go through the sa msear p. 325 reluct other : be gen betwee: to the at the than ti Sixtee: differq their a finalhe i. reaSQn . 31 the same "stages" of adoption as reported by other diffusion researchers. His findings also appeared to verify Hart's (1961;, p. 326) observations that colleges like other organizations if reluctant to adopt one innovation tend to be reluctant to adopt other innovations. Davis (1965) set forth other findings, which were felt to be germane to this study: 1) No significant difference existed between the age of the staff at the innovative college as compared to the age of staff at the non-innovative college. 2) The faculty at the innovative institutions held longer tenure in the institution than those at non-innovative colleges. 3) Results based upon a Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire indicated no significant difference between the staffs at the two colleges studied regarding their awareness of potential innovations available for adoption. One of the more interesting findings of Davis's study was the extent of faculty involvement in policy determination. He found that the innovative faculty participated to a greater degree in policy decisions than the faculty at the non-innovative college. Statistical significance was even greater when considering the differences in faculty involvement in the hiring and tenure regarding the faculty. The faculty at the non-innova tive college, however, had a significantly greater degree of participation in policy forma- tion in student personnel decisions. The two student personnel areas upon which these conclusions were based were admissions and financial aid policies. He (Davis, 1965, p. 71) concluded that the reason for the difference existing between college policy and 32 student personnel policy decisions was that.at.the non-innovative college, the faculty'was more reluctant to set.aside traditions of establishing student controls, whereas at the innovative college, the faculty was attempting to promote more responsibilitytamong the students fer their own affairs. Finally, Davis (1965, p. 118) concluded that when attempting to effect.innovation.in.a college, the participation.by the faculty in decision-making becomes an important variable since faculty involvementrenlists the assistance and power of the formal and in- formal groups to enfbrce the decisions to adapt.an innovation. This finding tends to support a similar theory as outlined by March and Simon (1958, p. 197). Davis (1965, p. 117) also concluded that there were indications based on results to support.Bricke11's (19Sh, p. 503) findings that;although faculty may lend support and give consensus to change, it.is the administrator or head of the depart. ment who promotes or prevents innovation because he is powerful. It is not due to his monopoly on imagination, creativity, or interest in change, but simply because he has the authority to precipitate a decision. Many of the findings of Davis's study appeared to provide the most direct and relevant data for this study; however, the limitations of his population makes generalization to other colleges most tenu- ous. Nevertheless, the thoroughness and penetration in depth into the colleges studied provides an excellent'basis for replication of tested hypotheses and for the generation of new theories and hypo theses . 33 Theories of Organizational 912252 The reported research on the diffusion of innovations enndning the process through which an individual passes when adopting a new idea was numerous, but there were only a few studies which exist examining the social system as the unit of adoption. Because this study examined the social system as the unit of adop- tion, it was felt that an analysis of the theoretical models on organizational change would provide additional information and a more comprehensive background for understanding the process of change which takes place in a college student personnel program. A social system or social organization has been given various definitions. Griffiths (1961;, p. 1426) has succinctly defined it as "an ensemble of individuals who perform a task sanctioned by the society in which it functions, in which its mem- bers perform interrelated and coordinated functions, in order that one or more tasks may be completed." For the purposes of this study, a college was considered as a social system, and therefore, fit within Griffiths' construct. Another method of classifying organizations has been on a formal and informal continuum (Gallaher, 1965, p. 115). Both types of organizations have an affect upon the adoption process. he forml organization has frequently been defined as an organization which has been deliberately conceived and planned and which has explicit pur- poses and goals for existing. It is usually an organization which the public supports or is knowledgeable of its existence. If the formal organization is of any size, it is characterized by a 3h centralized authority and an ordered status hierarchy. In relation to directed change, the formal organization is usually slow in changing, and it is dependent upon the ascribed roles of the legiti- mized authorities (Gallaher, 1965 , p. 145). In contrast to the formal organization, the informal organiza- tion deve10ps without explicit plan, purpose, or goals. It is spon- taneously formed to serve the needs of its individual members, for example , grows which take work coffee breaks together, or possibly members of the same organization who are attracted to each other by some unique or comon interest. There is no formal plan or organiza- tional chart. Its significance, however, in the adoption process, as outlined by Rogers (1968), is that it exists to protect its members. The informal organization can directly or indirectly put sanctions on practices which are adapted by the formal organization. This organization, if it so desires, can inhibit the adoption process or it can increase the rate of adoption. ‘Iheories 93 Administrative Mew-Prior to examining models of change which have been developed specifically for educational institu- tions, a brief review of basic communication models should be examined. Although the original taro-step flow model of communication as developed by Kate and Lazarsfeld, Deutchmann and Danielson, and rural sociologists has been subject to criticism (Iroldahl, 1963), its basic concept is applicable to the process whereby new ideas are introduced into an organization. The theorized tam-step commication pattern as applied to an educational institution is as follows: 1) The innovation is comunicated to some individual or representative llll’l" Vt!!! 35 of the adoption unit, perhaps the chief student personnel adminis- trator, and 2) the innovation is then communicated to the members (perhaps his staff) within the system who must. either adopt or reject the idea. For example, a student personnel administrator while attending a professional conference learns of a new idea or practice from some individual outside his organization. He then returns to his college and informs his staff and others who may be within the decision-making group, thus diffusing the idea or practice within the organization and forcing the organization to take some action upon the new concept which has been introduced. The type of new practice introduced to the student personnel organization may also effect whether it my be adopted independently by the individuals, adopted by the student personnel department with- out the necessity of college-wide adoption, or whether the entire college must decide upon adoption because it affects the system as a whole. In an attempt to conceptualize the decision-mung options available to an organization or social system, Rogers (1968) outlined four conceptual categories. 'Ihey were: 1) @tional decisions, which are made by an individual re- gar ess o e cisions of other individuals in the social system. Even in this case, the individual's decision is no doubt influenced by the norms of his social system, his need to conform, or other group presmae 2) Contingent decisions in which the individual may adopt an innovation only after a majority of his social system has already made an adoption decision; he is not forced, however, to conform to the group decision. 3) Collective decisions, in which individuals in the social system agree to adopt or reject by consensus, and all must conform to the system's decision once it is made. igiitittl‘l‘lil l I 36 1;) Authority decisions are those forced upon an individual by someone in a superordinate power posi- tion, such as a supervisor in a bureaucratic organi- zation. The attitudes and opinions of the individual toward the innovation do not effect his adoption or rejection; he is simply told what behavior is expected of him. When Gallaher (1965, p. 39) analyzed change using the public school as a social system, he developed a tire—part conceptual para- digm. The first concept of the change process was by non-directed procedures. This type of change would be described as consensual agreement by either formal or informal groups. When comparing Gallaher's non-directed change to Rogers' model, it would be the same as change by optional or contingent decision. Gallaher's second concept of change was by directed change. He indicated that this type of change is the most frequent type in organizational systems, and it should be the one which receives the most research attention. Directed change is change by a structured situation in which an advocate interferes actively and purposefully. In this situation, the change agent or advocate of change con- sciously selects elements in a target system and by stimulating the acceptance of innovations and inhibiting the practice of prior patterns of behavior, he manages the direction of change. When com- paring directed change with Rogers' concept of authority decisions, they appeared to be similar. Another model of organizational change which appeared to be relevant and applicable to the educational organizations has been formulated by Griffiths (1961;, p. loo-1436). In his model (See Figure 3) of administrative change, the organization consists of three conceptual sub-systems. 37 FIGURE 3 GRIFFITHS' MODEL W WTIONAI. CHAME '! t -‘ fl _— I Environment : Supra-system In this model, an organizational system is comprised of human interactions that maintain a definite boundary. He maintains that the closer the three interacting systems come together at a point of tangency (See arrow, Figure 3), the more open the system is to change. He argued that when the three systems are together (represented as tangent lines in the graphic model), there is signi- ficantly less distortion of communication between the supra-system and the administrative sub-system which legitimizes the decision- mking. The further the lines are from tangency, the more insular are the qualities of the commication from one system to another. Thus, the resultant effect is greater message distortion, mis- perception of attitudes and needs, and lack of understanding 38 between systems. Griffiths' model parallels the theories of admin- istrative change as outlined by John Gardner (1963). Griffiths and Gardner agree that the major impetus for change in organizations is from outside the system. Impetus for change, therefore, may come from any one or more of the following: 1) the chief administrator from outside the system being named the successor of a previous awnistrator, 2) the appointment of staff members from outside the system, and 3) the degree and extent of pressure brought to bear upon the system from outside sources. This theory of administrative change also agrees with Davis' (1965, p. 116) and tiles' (l96h, p. 6143) findings indicating the importance of change coming from members brought into the system from another social system. Conclusions 3.ng W Drawn from 313 TEview 2; literature Conclusions.-It appeared from the review of literature that most writers agree upon the study of authority and cooperative decisions as being the area in need of the most study. In these types of organizational change, an advocate of change, such as the chief stu- dent personnel administrator, is a most important element in the change process. The degree to which he is successful in advocating change or retarding change depends primrily upon 1) how he as the controller of organizational change is in tune with the needs of the organization and its constituency, and particularly how he plays his role as an authority, and 2) how the individuals will be affected by the change process, their perceptions of their needs and those of the organization. 39 'Ihe success of the educational administrator as an advocate of change appears to have a definite effect upon innovation. The chief student personnel administrator, as well as the president of a college, has a role within the decision-mung hierarchy. From their authoritarian position, it would appear that they would be able to advocate change in the formal organisation due to their prestige and legitimized role of controller and policy decision-mlmr. This study of the diffusion and adoption of collegiate student persomel innovations used the institution's college student personnel program as the adapting unit for analysis; however, the major emphasis has been placed on the chief student personnel admin- istrater as an element in the adoption unit and only incidental attention was given to other elements within the institution. Although the college as a whole must accept or reject most innovations, the chief student personnel administrator is most frequently at the center of the decision process regarding student personnel innovations. Whether he is the advocate of change or whether he is convinced by his subordinates, superiors, or outside public, he is, nevertheless, in the position to make final decisions. Due to the paucity of literatmre relating to student personnel administrators in higher education as advocates of change within their own educational institution, it was felt that sufficient justifica- tion existed (Davis, 1965, p. 1114) which indicated the public school administrator could be considered analogous to the chief student personnel administrator. {the similarity which exists between the administrative roles which both play regarding interested publics ho is, however, congruent. lhe student personnel administrator as well as the superintendent has concerned public on either side of the administrative decision process. On one side is the student papu- lation and subordinate members of his staff. 0n the other side is the outside public which sanctions the institution and the adminis- trative personnel who supersedes him in the hierarchy of the organi- zation. The latter are board members, presidents, state or national educational officials. Gallaher (1965, p. 50) defined this role as the "man in the middle." Spindler (1963, p. 11:3) further defined this middle-man role. However, he questioned the premise that he is an advocate of change. He stated: His job is in large part that of maintaining a working equilibrium of at best antagonisflcally soaperative forces. This is one of the reasons why educational ad- ministrators are rarely outspoken protagonists of a consistent and vigorously profiled point of view. Given the nature of our culture and social system and the close connection between the public and the schools, he cannot alienate significant segments of that public and stay in business. Another student of educational change felt that the educa- tional administrator may not be--and frequently is not-~the original source of interest in a new type of program, but because of his legitimized authority role, he can effect change (Brickell, 1961, p. 21;). It would appear, therefore, from the available literature, although not definitively so , the role of the educational adminis- trator can be an advocate of change. It is evident, however, in the change process whether it be advocate of change or middle man allow- ing change or retarding change, the educational administrator has played a key factor in the regulation of change. hi Griffiths as well as Rogers and Stanfield has provided further conclusive evidence regarding the variables which effect propensity to innovate. Griffiths (19st, p. h30) outlined eight propositions enabling and inhibiting change. 'Ihose enabling change in the educational organization are : l) The major impetus for change in organizations is from the outside. 2) 'Ihe degree and duration of change is directly propor- tional to the intensity of the stimulus from the social system within and without the organization structure. 3) Change in an organization is more probable if the successor to the chief administrator is from outside the organization, than if he is from inside the organi- “flan. 1;) Living systems respond to continuously increasing stress first by a lag in response, then by an over-compensatory response, and finally the catastrophic collapse of the system. Conditions which inhibit change are: 1) lbs number of innovations is inversely proportional to the tenure of the chief administrator. 2) The more hierarchical the struc ture of an organiza- tion, the less the possibility of change. 3) When change in an organization does occur, it will tend to occur from the top down, not from the bottom up. 14) has greater the agreement and harmony between depart- ments and sub-systems within the organization, the less chance there is for change. A more extensive and empirical attempt to pull together the variables related to innovativeness was accomplished by Rogers and Stanfield (1966 , p. 22). 'Ihey identified 2 ,h86 research findings relating other (independent) variables to innovativeness. 'Iheir Operational measures of innovativeness were: 1) the adoption or h2 non-adoption of one new idea or set of new ideas, or 2) the degree to which the unit of adoption is relatively earlier in adepting new ideas than other members of his social system. 'Ihe variables which they found related to innovativeness are presented in Table 2-3. m.—Even though the chief student personnel administrator has been in existence for numerous years, it has not been until recently that changes in society have dictated that he provide an environment which minimizes the abrasive aspects of the college climate and provide an environment which maximizes the student's potential. In recent years, numerous new student personnel practices, ideas, and concepts have been introduced. Even though there is a rather sizable body of diffusion research in existence, little if any research has been done to determine how these practices are communicated among colleges, how colleges come to adopt a new practice, or what differentiates an institution which readily accepts innovation com- pared to those which tend to be non-innovative. Most of the empirical research which was found, however, was related to the individual as the adoption unit. Ample empirical research was found which strongly supported the theories that the adaption process consisted. of a new idea or product which is communi- cated through certain channels among members of a social system over a given period of time. It was further found that the individual passes through a series of processes before adoption, namely, awareness of the idea, interest in it, evaluation of it, possibly some sort of trial adoption period, and eventually adoption or rejection of the innova- tion. lhe empirical evidences also indicated that potential or ll VARIABLES RELATED TO INNOVATIVENESS ‘- r h3 TflBlE 2-3 *- Number of Publications with Each Type of Relationship to Innovativeness Characteristics Total of the Unit of Positive N0ne Negative Conditional Total Number of Adaption (it) (it) (it) (i) (5) Publication 1. Education 7h.6 16.1 5.2 h.1 100 193 2. Age 32.3 h0.5 17.7 9.5 100 158 3. Knowledge- ability 78.8 16.7 1.5 3.0 100 66 h. Attitude toward Change 73.6 11.5 8.2 3.8 100 159 5. Empathy 75.0 0.0 25.0 0.0 100 h . Mental Rigidity 20.8 25.0 50.0 h.2 100 at 7. Cosmopoliteness 80.8 11.0 2.7 5.5 100 73 80 was Media I 9. Contact with Change Agencies 91.9 6.6 0.0 1.5 100 136 10. Deviance from Norms 53.6 1h.3 28.6 3.6 100 28 11. Group Partici- pation 78.8 10.3 6.h h.5 100 156 12. Interpersonal Communication Exposure 70.0 15.0 15.0 0.0 100 to 13..0pinion ‘ ‘ leadership 6h.3 leh 7.1 7.1 100 1h T Source: Rogers and Stanfield, 1966, p. 22, 2h and 26. hh previous adopters could be classified into adopter categories, since the adoption of innovations is a continuous process over time. Though numerous studies exist. which examine the individual as the adopting unit, only seven were found which reviewed the social system as the adopting unit. Davis's (1965) study was the only one that investigated higher educational instimtions as the unit of adaption. He found that faculty involvement in policy forma- tion, except in student personnel policies, was directly related to the innovativeness of the institution. Since a paucity of literature existed investigating the institution as the adopting unit, a number of theoretical models of organisational change were presented. The models attempted to pro- vide further data explaining the process through which a social system accepts change or adopts innovations. Finally a discussion was presented of the role which the administrator plays in effecting change. The evidence available indicated that he plays a middle-man role in allowing new ideas to penetrate the social system. He also, by his legitimized authority role, can serve as the advocate of forced change. CHAPTER III DESIGN AND RESEAFCH ME'HIODOLOGY There were two major phases of this particular research study. The first was the procedures and methodology of classifying colleges with innovative and non-innovative student personnel programs into mutually exclusive groups. The second was the study of different personal, educational and organizational variables of innovative pro- grams as contrasted to non-innovative programs. Because of the trio distinct phases of the study, the first part of this chapter concerns itself with instrumentation, delimitations, and the papulation from which two mutually exclusive groups, namely innovators and non- innovators, could be drawn. The procedure involved in the actual identification of the innovative and non-innovative college student personnel program to be studied is included in the second section of the chapter. In the final part of the chapter, the statistical hypotheses to determine if differences exist between innovators and non-innovators will be presented followed by a description of the methodology used in testing the hypotheses. Develgpment 93 Adoption Scale Before the specific objectives of the study could be investi- gated--innovative student personnel programs contrasted to non- innovative programs—a means of accurately identifying innovativeness 1:5 1:6 had to be devised. Once innovativeness could be measured, it would then be possible to classify colleges into adopter categories as well as to determine the colleges which would fall within the perimeters of the investigation. As was stated in Chapter II, this investigator was unable to discover am research or instrmaentation which dealt directly with college student personnel programs as related to innovativeness. Consequently, if the investigation was to compare innovative programs with non-innovative programs, it was also necessary to develop some scale for objectively classifying college student personnel programs on a continuum of innovativeness. Rogers' (1962, p. lbOuléh) review of 509 studies on.adoption and diffusion of innovations indicated three methods of measuring innovativeness which have been utilized by previous. researchers. One procedure was to classify adopting units into adopter categories by using "experts'" or judges' ratings. This procedure is probably the most expedient and efficient; however, it also has inherent weak- nesses since the biases of the judges may interfere with objective ratings. Not.only'are representative judges difficult.to locate, but there is also evidence that the judge's position in the social structure affects his view of the structure which he is rating (Rogers, 1962, p. 161). A second method for rating adopter units into categories has been the procedure whereby individual or adopting units rate them- selves as to their own innovativeness. There is some evidence available that this method has some validity (Rogers and Rogers, 1961). When using this procedure, however, researchers have found b? that the individual has a tendency to perceive himself as being more innovative than he actually is. A third procedure of placing adopter units into categories has been by means of adaption scales which use a number of innovations adopted by the unit and the relative time of adoption for each innova- tion. This method basically consists of the cpen-ended questionnaire which asks the individual or adoption unit to respond concerning whether or not they have adopted the innovation. If they have, the date of adoption is requested. This procedure overcomes the inherent weakness of the two previously outlined methods. Although adoption scales have become the most popular method of rating innovativeness, it has also been subject to criticism. Since the adoption scales response set is recall information, the critics have attacked this method on the grounds that it may lack sufficient validity and reliability. Rogers and Rogers (1961) attempted to answer the critics by reviewing meaty-six studies using adoption scales. They found that adoption scales were reasonably valid providing the adoption scale consisted of a number of innova- tions. In analyzing the reliability of adoption scales, they found a range of +.70 te +.8h correlation coefficient on split-half reliability with educational adoption scales having the highest reliability. When checking reliability of respondents' recall by test-retest methods, they found a range of +.52 to +.93 reliability coefficient. When analyzing internal consistency and the uni- dimensionality of adoption scales, there was some evidence that the scales are internally consistent, but there was no clear cut evidence to support unidimensionality, i.e., the degree to which 118 adoption scales measure a single dimension (Rogers and Rogers, 1961). Fliegel (1965), however, concluded after testing a hypothesis of uni- dimensionality of the adoption variable pertaining to eleven farm practices that "adoption could be treated as a single dimension covering a range of practices." After considering all factors, it was decided that an inde- pendent means of determining innovativeness, such as offered by adOption scales, would provide the most accurate method of ranking colleges with innovative student personnel programs on a continumn with colleges with non-innovative programs. Although this method is not perfect in every aspect, it nevertheless appears to be the best ‘ single measure available at the present time. Consequently, all findings should be considered in relation to the instrumentation used to identify the sample. Rogers, Havens and Cartano (1962, p. 2) have suggested that the reliability and validity of adoption scales can be improved if the following precautions are taken into consideration when the scale is being developed. 'Ihey are: 1) Contain more than fifteen items. 2) lake into consideration the number of innovations adopted. 3) Consider the relative time of adoption. 1;) Include items that most of the people investigated could S) $333.1. correction factors for items that do not apply to all individuals. An attempt was made to incorporate these points into the development of the adoption scale used in this study. Procedure {21; 313 Deve10pment 93 _th_e_ Instrunent.--Ths initial phase in building the instrument was concerned with identifying as many as possible of the more recent developments, ideas, practices and h? procedures incorporated into college student personnel work. It was generally felt that the items included in the instrument should be innovations which can be adopted by almost all respondents included in the sample. Also, to insure better discrimination at either end of the continuum, innovations included on the scale should contain both practices which have been adopted by almost all of the institu- tions and some which have been adopted by only a few. In order to develop a list of new practices which could be examined for appropriateness for inclusion into the instrument, the following procedure was followed: 1) The professional literature was reviewed for the purpose of identifying new practices, procedures and/or concepts relating to college student personnel work. 2) Ten experts were invited to "brain-storm" with this investigator in a series of sessions with the expressed purpose of compiling a list of relatively new practices and procedures in the organization, adminis- tration, and practice of college student personnel work.1 These two procedures resulted in a list of seventy-five recently developed practices. The seventy-five practices were com- piled on a list and returned to the ten experts. The raters were asked to examine each item and then rate it on a one to five scale based upon the following criteria: 1) the ability of the item to discriminate between innovative and non-innovative programs, 2) the recency of the innovation, and 3) the relevance of the innovation or new practice to student personnel work. he experts were given the following additional instructions 3 1) Each item should be Judged 1Names of ten experts are presented in Appendix VI. SO in relation to its appropriateness to the liberal arts college only, and 2) each item was to measure innovativeness, not the value or quality of the practice. The judges' ratings were analyzed and only the items that received a median score of two or below were included in the first draft of the instrmnent. (Items were rated as follows:- 1 being the most appropriate and 5 being the least appropriate.) The first draft contained thirty-four out of the original seventy-five items. me first draft of the instrument along with the instructions for com- pleting it was given to a pilot sample of ten deans of students. The deans included in the pilot sample were instructed to complete the instrument as it applied to their institution and also to criticize the instrument in general as well as the wording and clarity of each item contained in the instrument. The final edition of the instrument entitled ”Adoption of Selected Student Personnel Practices Inventory" was revised in light of the criticism of the pilot sample (See Appendix I). Scorig Procedure £93 _t_h_g Instrmnent.--One of the major variables to be included in the development of the instrument was relative time of adoption. The instrument was designed to elicit this information; however, this apparently was more difficult than originally expected. Many of the respondents failed to indicate the date of adoption of given practices, indicated they had adopted the practice but did not know the exact date, or indicated adoption of the practice with an estimated date. In order to determine what the overall effect of the incomplete or inaccurate responses was, two separate scoring 51 procedures were developed. The twp scoring procedures were: 1) Utilizing the total number of practices adapted and time of adop- tion only as the major variables with a correction factor for non- applicable practices (Rogers, Havens and Cartano, 1962, p. 2). 2) Utilizing a weighted score for practices adOpted: 1.9., an adopted practice equals a weighted score of tam, practices adopted and dis- continued equaling two, and practices under consideration equaling one. This method of scoring also contained a correction fac tor for non-applicable practices. The coefficient of correlation between these taco scoring procedures was +.90. Since the latter procedure as mentioned above appeared to be superior in ease of scoring and correlated highly (+.90) with the recomended scorirg procedures as outlined by Rogers, Havens and Cartano (1962), the following formula was decided upon: Total weighted score Innovativeness Score . lOO '1me weighted score possible from number of applicable practices One hundred was inserted into the. formula to facilitate handling of decimals. Validim, Reliability and Normality g_f_ _th_e_ Instz'tment.-The validity of the instrument is difficult to determine. Since each item needed a rather high degree of expert agreement te be included in the instrument, there was reason to believe that content validity was high. Since no other instrument of this type was found, the question of construct and predictive validity was unanswerable. Also since the development of this instrument was not the main objective of the study, 52 but only a mans to the main objective, further attempts to ascertain its validity were not undertaken. In checking the reliability of the instrument, it was decided to use the split-half method. Since the scoring of the instrument was done by the number of practices adopted rather than by the rela- tive time of adoption, it was felt that split-half reliability check was more appropriate than test-retest since recall data was not used. The split-half reliability coefficients based upon a sample of 193 returns was £83.:l Since the ability to dichotomise the sample into adopter categories is based upon the assumption of the sample population approaching normality, the response frequency was subjected to statistical analysis. The closer the response frequency approximates the nominal bell-shaped curve, the more appropriate the division of adopter categories becomes. If the response frequency approaches normality, it would also provide support of the previous research as outlined in Chapters I and II. In a visual analysis of the response frequency, it appeared that the response approached normality with the mean of 51.17, a median of 52.0, and a modal score of 52.91:. The visual survey, however, did not indicate whether or not the distribution was symnetrical, peaked or flat. lherefore, further statistical tests were applied to determine the skewness and kurtosis of the sampling distribution. The overall statistical evidence of the sampling distributions is presented in Table 3-1. 1.- < .181, p > .01 53 new 3.1 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION AND NONLITY CHECK FOR THE INSTRUMENT, “ADOPTION OF SEIEC‘IED STUDENT PERSONNEL PRACTICES INVENTORY" Standard Number than Median Mode Deviation Skewness Kurtesis (N)-193 51.173 51 52.91; 1h.359 0.162 2.71:1 From an analysis of the statistical data, it can be seen that the frequency distribution approached normality with the exception of being slightly skewed in a negative direction and slightly lepoto- kurtic (Interpretation of data from Postman, 19347, p. 392, and McNemar, 1962, p. 25-8). m ngulation Data Collection for Initial m.--m colleges which conposed the social system to be studied were sent one capy of the instrument, a general data sheet and a cover letter identifyirg the study and the investigator. (See Appendix I, II, and III) When the instrument was returned by the respondent, it was dated, recorded as being returned, and examined by the investigator. Three weeks after the original sailing, the respondents who had not returned the instrument were sent a reminder letter. (See Appendix IV) If the instrument was not returned after six weeks from the original mailing date, a new cover letter and instrument was sent. (See Appendix V) If the instrument was not returned after nine weeks from the original nailing date, a personal reminder letter was sent. The procedure of adminis- tering the instmment to the sample population resulted in 201 Sh institutions responding out of 21:5 (82%) in the original sample. Of 201 received, eight were not usable, leaving 193 usable returns out of 2&5 or 78.77%. i Criteria for Establishigg Population Ely-«A number of unique fac tors were involved in the identification of the original sample of chief student personnel administrators who were chosen to receive the adoption scale. Since imovations could not be considered equally applicable to all colleges, it was mcessary to define a comma type of social system which for purposes of this study repre- sented a number of schools which were similar on a number of char- acteristics. For example, a state supported institution of higher education with an enrollment of h0,000 students my have relatimly few practices, procedures, programs, and goals in common with a pri— vately endowed, church related liberal arts college with an enrollment of only 800. Also, researchers have found that the diffusion process in higher education generally follows this pattern: large state supported institutions adopt new practices first; private institutions adopt second; teachers colleges adopt third; technical institutions are usually the last to adopt new practices (Card, 1966, p. 11). Since the diffusion of new ideas is generally dependent upon either mass media or personal communication, it would follow that, in a given social system, opportunity is greater for the members of that social system to commicate within the system than outside of the system. When comparing the adoption rate of individuals or adopting units, a more realistic comparison can be made regarding the diffusion rate and the variables which separate the innovators 55 from the non-innovators when the unit of analysis has mny character- istics in common. Also considered in the identification of the social system to be studied was the geographic proximity of the colleges. Since for some members of the social system the adoption process may involve personal observation of a new practice or personnel communi- cation with some other member who already adopted the practice, it we decided to restrict the geographic boundaries of the social system. The rationale for the procedure was to eliminate extraneous variables resulting from comparing institutions from different regions of the country. Another consideration in the identification of the population to be studied was the total number of schools which needed to be included in the original population to insure a representative sample of innovators and non-innovators. As stated in Chapters I and II, there was sufficient evidence to support the assumption that the adopting process is continuous and that it can be shown graphically in the form of a bell-shaped curve. The first requirements then were based upon the Operational definitions of innovator and non-innovator as described previously. That is, to be included in the two groups to be studied the college had to meet the following criteria: 1) Student enrollment of 5,000 or less 2) Private liberal arts colleges as identified by the United States Office of Education - Institutional Directory, Part III, for Higher Education, 1966 3) Coeducational 1:) Located within the following midwestern antes: Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentmcly, Michigan, Minne- sota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, West Virginia, and Wisconsin S6 5) A score of either 1.6 standard deviation above or 1.2 standard deviation below the mean on the "Adoption of Selected Student Personnel Practices Inventory“- An additional requirement was established to control for the extraneous variable of how long the person had been the chief student personnel administrator in the college under study. Since the study not only used the college student personnel program as the adopting unit but also studied the characteristics of its chief student per- sonnel administrator, it was necessary to eliminate colleges which met the first requirement as stated above but where the chief per- sonnel administrator actually inherited the program from his prede- cessor. Therefore for this study, it was necessary for the chief student personnel administrator to have held his present position for a minimum of four years. The adopter categories established forlthis study are graphically represented in Figure 1:. FIGURE 1: ADOPTER CATEGORIES USED IN THIS STUDY ‘-----—-—— , Early Late ' : himity tenor-Lu . J Innovators , , mugs AmmfiLm-ML 1,6 0' 1,2 g; 1Additional data indicating the use of standard deviations for identification of innovators and non-innovators can be found on pages 58 and 59. 57 Population Sample: Demographic _D3_t_a__.--Each "Adoption of Selected Student Personnel Practices Inventory" was examined to determine if it met the established criteria. 0f the 25 institutions included in the original population sample, 201 institutions or 82.04% returned the "Adoption of Selected Student Personnel Practices Inventory.“ Eightrof the inventories returned were unusable due to incomplete information or errors in completing the instrument. Thus, 193 institutions or 78.77% of the original sample remained. Of this remaining group, ninety-six institutions were disqualified due to the chief student personnel administrator's inability to meet the tenure requirements. Consequently, ninety-seven or 50.5% of the institutions constituted the final sample used in the selection process for deter- mining which collsge student.personne1 programs fell within the innovative group and the non-innovative group. The procedure for drawing the sample to be studied was done by placing all the colleges in rank order according to the scores received on the "Adoption of Selected Student Personnel Practices Inventory," and then identifying the colleges which fell at the two extremes of the continuum. Twelve colleges or 6% of the sample popu- lation which met the qualifying criteria were chosen to represent the innovative and non-innovative groups. If a college, which was considered either innovative or nonqinnovative according to the score received on the instrument, did not meet the qualifying criteria, it was rejected and the next college in rank order was included. Chief studentqpersonnel administrators holding less than the required minimum of four years in their present positions contributed to a higher loss than was expected. ‘Jhe compilation of statistics 58 regarding tenure indicated that non-innovative personnel programs have a higher turnover of chief student personnel administrators than any other adopter category. The data relating to the final selection of the innovators and non-innovators appears in Table 3-2. TABIE 3-2 NUDBER AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FRO)! m (F THE INNOVATGI AND NON-INNOVATOR POPUIATION SAMPLE Average Non- N - 193 Innovators Adop tars Innovators list all requirements to be included 12 73 12 Did not meet requirements 2 69 25 Percent of loss 114% 113.5% 67.5% Standard Deviation +1.6 +1.59 to 4.19 -1.2 Percentile Rank 9h.52 91:51 to 11.52- 11.51 As can be seen when examining the data contained within Table 3-2, it was impossible to draw the sample of innovators and non-innovators which would represent populations of equal distance from the mean. This was due to the large number of chief student personnel administrators who lacked sufficient tenure in the non- innovative group. It was interesting to note that the percent of innovators ineligible due to insufficient tenure was 11% while the percent of loss among non-innovators was 67.55. The number of years the administrator spends in his present position appears in Table 3-3. As can be readily seen in the table, 59 the primary reason for not meeting the requirements for inclusion in the study was insufficient tenure of the chief student personnel administrator. his average number of years in his present position was 5.2 with a range from less than one year to twenty-three years. TABLE 3-3 TENURE 0F CHIEF STUDENT RESONNEL AMNISTRATORS Met All Tenure Requirements Average Adapters Administrators in Pruent Innov. Non-Innov. Who Met All who Did Not Meet Position Group Group Requirements All Requirements 1 - 3 0 O 0 90 h - 6 5 6 27 o 7 - 9 h 5 16 o 10 - 12 l l 16 0 l3 - 15 0 O 7 0 16 8: over 2 O 7 0 Did not state years of tenure O O O 6 Total 12 12 73 96 i 8.1a 6.08 8.77 1.72 An enmination of the data presented in Table 3-3 reveals the number of years of tenure held by the chief student personnel adminis- trators for all the colleges included in the sanple. Data indicating the number of years experience represented by the chief student personnel administrator whether or not in his present 60 position and the ages by categories of the administrators in the population sample can be found in Appendix VII. Instrmnentation for Testing Itnmtheses The ideal method for collecting the data necessary to test the hypotheses would have been by personal interview with each chief stmdent personnel administrator included in the selected innovative and non-innovative population sample. Although this procedure was seriously considered, it was ruled out on the basis of the inability of the researcher to travel extensively throughout the udwast. Consequently, another approach had to be devised which would elicit the necessary information, but in a more expeditious manner. Since a personal interview was not feasible within the limita- tions of this study, it was felt that a questionnaire-type instrument combined with a telephone interview would provide the data necessary to complete the study and with a reasonable degree of accuracy and reliability. 'me philosophy and rationale underlying the development of the instrument for testing the hypotheses was one of designing items which would elicit information that would make it possible to compare the innovative institutions with the non-innovative institutions. Since no instrument in its entirety was found which would elicit responses appropriate for testing all hypotheses, it was necessary to design an instrument. Of the sixteen statistical hypotheses, only one--dogmatism-- could be tested from data collected by an existing instrmnent. The Rokeach Dogmatism Scale which was used to test the hypotheses 61 of open-mindedness will be discussed in a later section of this chapter. Since no instruments were available for testing the fifteen other hypotheses, each hypothesis was carefully analyzed to determine what kind of information would provide the most valuable data for testing the statistical hypotheses. Rom the analysis of each hypothesis, three or four differently worded questions were generated. The items generated for the elicitation of data for testing the hypotheses were submitted to ten experts for rating and evaluation. The following procedure was used in validating the items: 1) Inunediately following each hypothesis, three or four alternate questions for eliciting data were listed. 2) Each expert was asked to rate the alternate questions in relation to the ability of the question to elicit accurate information. 3) The experts' ratings of the questions were tabulated and only the questions which received the highest degree of agreement were incorporated into the first draft of the instrument. Rokeach Begum §c_§_l_e_.--Of the sixteen hypotheses which were to be tested, only one--innovaters have a more open belief system than non- innovators--could adequately be tested by a previously developed instrument. The Rokeach Dogmatism Scale was deve10ped by Milton J. Rokeach to test his theories about people's different styles of belief systems. The theory and the resulting Dogmatism Scale was an out- growth of work on the Authoritarian Personality. An understanding of the terms "open" and "closed" as they refer to the belief systems of individuals starts with the basic premise that it is not so much what you believe that counts, but how 62 you believe (Rokeach, 1960, p. 6). Rokeach further suggested that: A basic characteristic that defines the extent to which a person's system is open or closed is namely the extent to which the person can receive, evaluate and act on relevant information received from the outside on its own intrinsic merits, unencumbered by irrelevant factors in the situation arising from within the person or from the outside (Rokeach, 1960, p. 57). The relationship of open and closed belief systems to innovativeness was tested by Powell (1962, p. 63). He tested the hypothesis that relatively high dogmatic (closed-minded) individuals are unable to separate what (the message) is said and who (the source) is saying it. Powell attempted to demonstrate that closed- minded individuals are less able to distinguish and evaluate inde- pendently the source of a message and the content of a message than are open-minded individuals . The implications of Powell's research as well as the theory that individuals with open belief systems are more innovative than others would indicate that those with open belief systems are able to innovate without being dependent upon some authority figure, while those with closed belief systems depend upon the approval or support of scans authority figure. Rokeach's Dogmatism Scale, consequently, was found to be most appropriate as an instrument for testing the hypothesis. The Dogma- tism Scale contains forty items and each item has a six point response scale. The scale yields a score which can be used to compare the belief systems of individuals or groups. Plant, Hinimn and Myers (1959) reported odd-even reliability coefficients for the Dogmatism 63 Scale of +.8h for sales and +.85 for females. 'Ihey also found an internal consistency reliability of +.76. Because the respondents included in this phase of the study would also be aslcsd to give information for testing the other fifteen hypotheses, it was felt that the forty-item Dogmatism Scale would be too lengthy. For the purposes of economy in completing the total instrumnt, a henty-item short form of the Dogmtdsm Scale was used. Troldahl and Powell (1965) conducted a smdy to determine the efficiency and reliability of various shorter versions of the Dogmatism Scale. they found the split-half reliability on the forty-item form was +.8h. A tatenty-item version of the scale, developed by using items taken from the larger scale idth the highest reliability coefficients, had a reliability coefficient with the original forty-item scale of +.9h. boy found that the scale when using split-half reliability coefficients was +.79. (See Appendix VIII for the items included on the scale.) Testing 313 Instrmnent Against 313 Pilot mmm first draft of the instrument was designed, without listing or giving any indication of the nature or content of the hypotheses to be tested. A pilot sample of student personnel adndnistrators was contacted by phone asking if they would cooperate in this project. Upon giving their consent, they were sent a capy of the instrument with the ins‘lrucfions for conpleting it. Not only did the administrators in the pilot sample couplets the instrument and offer criticism, but a standardised phone interview was deve10ped to test out the best approaches for contacting those who were to be included in the actual sample of 6h innovators and non-immters. Each administrator in the pilot sample was interviewed by phone following the completion and return of the instalment. The instruments and criticisms received from the pilot sample were examined and analysed. Following some minor revisions and corrections, the final instrument was created. (A copy of the final instrument used to collect the data can be found in Appendix VIII.) Validity and Reliability _o_f the Instrument-«Since no previously developed instrument was available which would elicit the data necessary for testing the hypotheses, it us therefore inpossible to check the construct validity of the instrument. Consequently, the validity of the insh-ument rennins somemnt up to question. Content validity would appear, however, to be rather high since each item included on the instrument received some degree of expert rater concurrence. Although there was no formal reliability check nude on the instrument, there was an attempt to determine reliability as part of the follow-up telephone interview. In the routine follow-up inter- view, the administrator was asked to verify selected questions. In this way, an attempt was made to check upon the consistency in responding to the items. 292 Collection Procedures.-As was stated earlier, the ideal data collection procedure would have been by means of a personal inter- view with each chief student personnel administrator. 'nlis, however, was not possible. As an alternative, a procedure consisting of a telephone interview and questionnaire was devised. The following data 65 collec tion procedure was followed for each innovative and non- innovative college included in the study. First, each chief student personnel administrator was contacted by phone. He was not told the nature or intent of the study, but he was asked if he would be willing to provide some additional data which was not included on the “Adoption of Selected Student Persomel Practices Inventory." After his consent to supply the additional data, he was given verbal instructions for completing the imminent and information indicating that there would be a follow-up telephone interview. Second, following the introductory telephone conversation, the chief student persomel administrator was sent two copies of the instru- ment. He was instructed to couplets the instruments in duplicate. He was further instructed to send one back to the investigator and to keep one for his file and for the follow-up telephone interview. (See Appendix VIII for copy of instrument, Appendix 11 for copy of cover letter, and Appendix I for copy of first reminder letter.) “mird, following the review of the instrument, the follow-up telephone interview was initiated. During the interview, the chief student personnel administrator was asked to provide additional data if further clarification was needed. If there was incomplete data, he was asked to supply information which would provide couplets data. If some items appeared to be in error, he was questioned about these. Finally, he was asked to verify certain selected questions in an attempt to determine the reliability of the instrument. After the follow-up interview and final review of each instru- ment, the data was subjected to statistical analysis to determine 66 what significant differences existed between the innovative student personnel programs and the non-innovative student personnel programs. Statement of Motheses 'lhe derivation of the hypotheses as outlined in this section was based upon evidence presented in Chapter I under theoretical assumtlons and the review of literature presented in Chapter II. The major problem of the study was to determine if any signi- ficant and identifiable difference exists between colleges with innovative student personnel programs and colleges with non-innovative programs. In order to answer the question posed by the major problem under investigation, the following hypothesis was developed: G. 3.: No appreciable difference exists between student persomel programs in colleges with innovative student personnel program and colleges with non- innovative programs. In order to test the generalised hypothesis, two research hypotheses were developed which would allow for a systematic means of generating testable hypotheses, hereafter referred to as statistical hypotheses. A schematic diagram showing the relationship of the gemralized hypothesis, research hypotheses, and the statistical hypotheses appears in Figure 5. Administrative and Organizational Research mmesesw-‘Ihe research cited in the latter part of Chapter II would support the assertion that organisational procedures may be influential in allowing some organizations to innovate more freely than others. Although little or no evidence is available indicating how student persormel depart- ments within a college compare to other organisations, there was, however, considerable evidence available which indicated public school 67 33am coflom some the ess etc 82:8 Roaoeoom s sons .855 ohm Awmv essence cashew Honotdsem mumm aqueous» 03.88 oomhsoo census—6 one Honsoenom 4km Hoonoaohehnm use Hmsoehom secede cease Seasons mum» soc endoscope assesses seamen Success m. m / . comes. aaoumeomonm E" senescence—n” Humm 33525” a: 33533 decadence seen .3 c3829 sea: eases the assess Hesoeeeocoh use o the .3 eoEomunH one noncomom you 0 ohm. Admv concedes cuss soc 285m see a mam oofieflsefifle BsoeBm 3 «use we seats the assessedamso ess 83.53323 38053.5 housewom $25 you 335an soweoeom confines hence 5" senses BooeBm «he confines scenes 5 assess basses The escapees Assesses Hesflesflm Bag gHamEam a: fig .333 B afloflfifi Ba 5.5mm 33o Hague m museum 68 and educational organizations can be compared with other types of organisations. Support for the following research hypothesis was drawn from previous studies of business, farming, and medicine which all indicated that the innovativeness of the adopting unit is posi- tively related to such factors as the ease of cosmunication flow into and within the organisation. The research hypothesis formulated from the related literature and supporting theoretical asstmptions was: 81: A positive relationship exists between administrative procedures and the innovativeness of college student personnel programs. ‘Ihe research hypothesis as stated above encompasses the general importance and direction which administrative procedures play; however, it cannot be subjected to statistical analysis in its present form. It has served, however, as the base for the deriva- tion of statistical hypotheses. The first taro statistical hypotheses are based upon Davis's (1965) research on innovative characteristics in private liberal arts colleges. He found that student personnel programs which were rela- tively free of faculty influence were more imovative than those which looked to the faculty for direction. 'Ihe resulting statistical hypothesis was derived: 81-1: Colleges with innovative student personnel programs have greater faculty participation in policy forma- tion than colleges with non-imcvative programs. he second statistical hypothesis was also based directly on Davis's (1965) research. He indicated that the college with an innovative program made provisions for students to have a voice in the form of committee membership, on policy and decision-making 69 committees. ’lherefore, the statistical hypothesis developed for this evidence was: 81-2: Colleges with innovative student personnel programs have greater student participation in policy and decision-mung oomdttees than colleges with non- innovative programs. Rogers (1962, p. 313) indicated the innovators depend upon sources of information which are close to the source of newly developed innovations. Since many innovations are developed from within theoretical assumptions or research, the early adopters frequently must be knowledgeable of research practices and endeavors, or do much of their own research to determine the efficacy of new practices. It was assmsed, therefore, that innovators would have a greater involvement in research acfivities than non-innovators. Consequently, the following hypothesis was established: 81-3: Colleges with innovative student personnel program participate in and conduct more research than colleges with non-innovative programs. Some research studies by Hort (l9h6) and his followers have found that staffing of programs can be linked with the instituflon's innovativeness. The evidence supplied by Mort for this does not sake clear whether this is independent of monetary allotment. In order to provide further evidence regarding the importance of staffing, the following statistical hypothesis was generated: 31-h: Colleges with innovative student personnel programs have a greater ratio of full-time equivalent staff per student than colleges with non-innovative programs. Considerable evidence has been supplied by nearly all diffu- sion research traditions indicating that innovativeness is related to monetary expenditure of the adopting unit. Mort in his studies of 70 public school administration has probably supplied more evidence to support this assunmtion than my other researchers.1 From this evi- dence as well as other evidence supplied in Chapters I and II, a number of statistical hypotheses were generated which would test the effects of monetary expenditures as it effects innovativeness. me first statistical hypothesis related to monetary expenditure was as follows: 81-5: Colleges with innovative student personnel programs have a greater monetary allotment per student for salaries of student personnel workers than colleges with non-innova tive programs . Many researchers and student personnel workers have continu- ally emphasised the inportance of in-service training research involvement. Truitt and Gross' (1966) monograph presents theoretical assmnptions that suggest student personnel staffs should budget both time and money for in-service educations. Rural sociology has given documentation supporting the research orientation as a variable related to innovativeness. Developed from these theoretical assump- tions and research evidence was the following statistical hypothesis: 81-6: Colleges with innovative student personnel programs have a greater monetary allotment per student for research and in-service education than do colleges with non-innovative programs. Rural sociologists have provided a rather large quantity of literature as well as theoretical assunrptions which would indicate that travel or cosmopoliteness and innovativeness are positively related. 'lhey have also supplied numerous research studies support- ing these assumptions. 'Iherefore, the following hypothesis was formulated : 1Carlson (1965a, p. 9), however, disagrees with Mort's IMSe 71 51-7: Colleges with innovative student personnel program have a greater monetary allotment per student for travel for professional. involvement than colleges with non-innova tive programs . The previously stated hypothesis and the body of research supporting it also served as the theoretical bases for the derivation of the eighth statistical hypothesis. However, it was based upon actual cosmopoliteness of the individual. rather than upon budgetary allocations. To test this hypothesis statistically, the following testable hypothesis was developed: 81-8: Chief student personnel administrators from innovative colleges travel more miles per year than administrators from non-innovative colleges. Personal and Psychological Research Mothesesw-Much of the diffusion literature and research in the past concentrated upon the individual and his personal characteristics. Much of this research energy has been devoted to adapter units where the individual can make an inde- pendent decision, e.g., farmers and physicians. Within the framework of this study and the review of literature as presented in Chapter II, it would be inconceivable to assume that the student personnel admin- istrator can make independent decisions as does the farmer or physi- cian. me decisionary process of the student personnel administrator must operate within the limits of the organisation. However, as was pointed out in Chapter II, he serves either as the gatekeeper in the decision process or as an authority meldng forced decisions. He, therefore, has some control regarding the adoption process. For these reasons, a second research hypothesis was developed as follows: 82: A positive relationship exists between the personal and psychological characteristics of the chief student personnel adMnistrator and the innovativeness of the student personnel program. 72 In order to test this research hypothesis, six statistical hypotheses were explicitly developed to measure the direction and extent of the chief student personnel administrator's professional interest and past professional background. Diffusion researchers in both medicine and education have supplied some evidence in the form of empirical data which indicates that a commitment to professional growth and innovativeness is positively related. From the evidence supplied by these research traditions, the following statistical hypothesis was developed in an attempt to detemine if the student personnel administrator's nember- ship and involvement in professional organizations was positively related to innovativeness: 82-1: Chief student personnel adndnistrators from innovative colleges belong to and participate in more professional student personnel organizations than do administrators from non-innovative colleges. Some supportive research as outlined earlier in Chapter I indicated that education is positively related to innovativeness. There was, however, little evidence which indicated that particular disciplines were more or less related to innovativeness. For the most part, the research evidence available only revealed a positive relationship between years of forml education and innovativeness. Since there was no research evidence dealing directly with student personnel administrators, four statistical hypotheses were developed to explore these variables: 32-2: Chief student personnel administrators from innovative colleges hold more advanced degrees beyond the bachelors degree than administrators from non-innovative colleges. 73 82-3: Chief student personnel administrators from imovative colleges have taken more advanced graduate credit hours beyond the bachelors degree than administrators from non-imovative colleges. 524:: Chief student personnel administrators from innovative colleges have taken more graduate credit hours in student personnel and guidance courses than administrators in non-innovative colleges. 82-5: Chief student personnel administrators from innovative colleges have taken more graduate credit hours in the behavioral sciences than administrators from non-innovative colleges. 52-6: Chief student personnel administrators in innovative colleges have taken more graduate credit hours in anthropology, psychology, and sociology than administrators from non-innovative colleges . Two statistical hypotheses were developed to test the personal and psychological variables. In the review of the literature, there was no clear cut evidence to support the theoretical assumptions that age is inversely related to innovativeness. Although the evidence was not clear, a large enough body of literature existed which indicated there is a possible relationship between age and innovative- ness. Consequently, the following hypothesis was generated: 82-7: Chief student personnel administrators in innovative colleges are younger in age than administrators in non-innovative colleges. Similar conflicting evidence existed in the literature re- garding the relationship between open-sandedness to new ideas, practices, materials and imovativeness. Since the evidence existed to support the assmrqation that. there was a relationship between open- mindedness and innovations but was inconclusive, a hypothesis was formulated. The justification for the derived hypothesis was to 7h provide further evidence of the existence or non-existence of am rela— tionship between these two variable3. The hypothesis which developed was: 82-8: Chief student personnel administrators from innova- tive colleges have a more open belief system than administrators from non-innovative colleges. 'lhe Statistical Model and Computational Eocedm‘es Because the min problem of the sum was to identify those characteristics which differentiate an innovative student personnel program from a non-innovative program, a statistical model would need to be used which would discriminate between‘the twa groups of colleges to the greatest degree possible. As previously reported, data was gathered on two mutually exclusive groups, namely, innovators and non-innovators consisting of twelve renters in each group. Since new of the variables to be tested in the study were interrelated, it was necessary to incorporate a statistical methodology which would: 1) identify basic independent factors which accounted for possible group differences, 2) identify the combination of variables which would discriminate minimally between the groups, and 3) identify the intensity and direction of the differences bemoan the groups. Rulon, et a1., (1967) in their book, Multivariate Statistics £25 Personnel Classification, discussed at length factor analysis, discriminant analysis and regression analysis as three possibilities for classification of individuals into groups. When taking into account their discussion in relation to the stated problem of this study, multiple discriminant analysis appeared to be the appropriate statistical model. 75 Frances E. Dunn (1959) established taro procedures for classi- fication and prediction. In her research report, she discussed the validity of multiple discriminant analysis and multiple regression analysis. She found multiple discriminant analysis to be the appro- priate sta‘listical tool. Her findings were also concurrent with findings discussed by McNemar (1962, p. lBh-B?) and Cooley and Iohnes (1962). It was felt, therefore, that multiple discriminant analysis would be the most powerful euustical model for this study. Description 93 Multiple Discriminant inflow-Multiple discriminant analysis is a statistical procedure of combining test scores or other data so as to “size the differences between the groups and minisdse the differences within each group. Through the separation of individ- uals who are known to belong to mutually exclusive groups, it is possible to detentine the culmination of variables which will. die-- criminate to the greatest degree possible betasen the different grows (Cutting. 1966. p. 29). Cooley and Iehnes (1962) gave the following description: Discriminant analysis is a procedure for esflmting the position of an individual on a line that best separates classes or groups. The estimated position is obtained as a linear function of the individual's "m” test scores. Since one "best" line may not exhaust the predictive power of the test battery in distinguishing among the classes, additional discriminant functions, all mutually orthogonal, my be fitted. ‘Ihe nximum nuuher of discriminants is indicated by the lesser of the two embers, 8-1 and "a“. Coaputations required for obtaining discriminant functions are extremely involved and numerous. It was not until the advent of coaputer programs written for this particular statistical model that multiple discriminant analysis received much attention or use in 76 applied research studies.1 Recently a number of writers have developed in detail the theory and computational procedures for this statistical model. This writer, therefore, will not go into detail regarding the couputaticnal procedure, but refers the reader to work done by Tiedeman, Bryon and Rulon (1951a), Cooley and Lohnes (1962), Cramer and Block (1966), and Rulcn, et al. (1967). Cooley and Lchnes (1962) in their book, Multivariate fries- m 593; pg Behavioral Sciences, and Iloenberry (1960) in his doctoral dissertation presented lucid descriptions of computational procedures for multiple discriminant analysis. The original formula for solving the determinal function as described by Cooley and Iehnes and Dean-- berry was derived from the procedures provided by Bryan in his doctoral dissertation. 'Ihese early procedures were origimlly reported by Tiedemn, Bryan and Rulon (1951b). The basic formula it'll-Mun c. used for solving the detenfinal equation is Assumptions 93 the Statistical Hode1.--In the use of multiple dis- criminant analysis, the assumption is rude that the test scores of the pcpulation being studied produce equal variance and cc-variance matrices, and it is a multivariate normal population. In a review of the literature, nothilg was found which would indicate the availability of a procedure to test this assumtion. Ikenberry (1960) corresponded with Tiedemn in an attempt to determine if a method of testing this assxmption was available. Ikenberry received a negative reply. Due to the inavailability of appropriate tests, it was, therefore, J‘Prograned by Dr. P. Iohnes, University of Buffalo; modified for the Control Data Computer 3600 by Stuart Thomas or the Commuter Institute for Social Science Research, Michigan State University, AWt, 1967a 77 necessary for the purposes of this study to assume multivariate normal distribution and equality of variance-covariance matrices. .1212; 93" Statistical Significance-Multiple discriminant analysis as prong for the Michigan State University computer yielded data indicating means and standard deviations. The program also provided correlation coefficients, the latent root value of the discrimimnt functions and Rae's chi square test all of which could be tested against levels of statistical significance. For the purposes of this study, any result which was within the 95 percent confidence limits was considered in excess of chance expectation and consequently tenable. In essence from am of the smtistical analysis, the in- ference was that a populafion mean falling within the esmblished confidence level has the probability of being correct 95 out of 100 times, or that the results obtained may occur by chance only five (.05) times out of 100. The .05 level of significance was arbitrarily chosen as the most appropriate level when considering the purpose of the study in relation to Type I and Type II statistical errors. 3.2921 Prior to the identification of innovative and non-innovative colleges which would provide mutually exclusive sample populations to be analysed for significant differences, it was necessary to develop an instrtment which would systematically measure the relative innovativeness of an institution. The instrument, "Adoption of Selected Student Personnel Practices Inventory," was created in order to measure relative innovativeness. 'lho validity of the instrmnent was checked against a pilot sample of ten experts. A split-half 78 reliability check resulted in a cormlatzion coefficient of +.83. The normlity of the population was subjected to analysis and the frequency distribution approached normality with the exception of being slightly skewed in a posiuve direction and slightly lepote- kurtic. The sample population of twelve innovative and twelve non- innovative colleges was drawn from a total population of 2145 private coeducational liberal arts colleges in the midwestern states with student population of less than 5,000. Based upon the score which the institution received on the ”Adoption of Selected Student Per- sonnel Practices Inventory,” the twenty-few colleges meeting the selection criteria and at the extremes of the scoring continuum were chosen for inclusion in the mutually exclusive groups to be studied. These two groups represented approximately 6% of the total pepulation sampled. A second instanment was developed which muld elicit from the colleges to be studied, the data necessary for the testing of the hypotheses. The instrument along with telephone interviews provided the data upon which the hypotheses were tested. For the purposes of this study, one generalized, multivariate, null hypothesis was established. Sixteen related statistical hypoth- eses were established for the purposes of testing the generalized multivariate hypotheses. The statistical model chosen for testing the hypotheses was multiple discrimimnt analysis. The ability of this model to nannies 79 the differences between the groups and minimise the differences within the groups was the basis for choosing this model over other statistical models. CHAP'ER IV ANALYSIS OF DATA The statistical technique, multiple discriminant analysis, as programed for Michigan State University's Control Data Computer 3600, included output data which was both directly and indirectly related to the major problem under investigation. 'lhe output data which was indirectly related to the major problem, however, yielded information which may provide further assistance in understanding the problem studied. As a matter of record, a simle combined groups correlation matrix is presented in the Appendix (See Appendix H). The correlation matrix presented in the Appendix indicates the rela- tionship of each of the sixteen variables to all variables. A criterion variable, i.e., innovative characteristics, is also con- tained in the correlation mtrix. A correlation coefficient of .515 is significantly different from zero at the 1% level of confidence, and a coefficient of .1401; is significant at the 5% level of confidence (Edwards, 1960, formula, p. 301-3; table of significant values, p. 502). Prior to the presentation of the analysed hypotheses by the statistical technique, multiple discriminant analysis, it may be helpful to examine briefly the means and standard deviations. The means and standard deviations for each of the sixteen variables are presented in Table 14-1. From a visual examination of the means and 80 81 e3. mew mew «.d. are” e.me esseam Henem cede mumm in me: in 33 we; 4.3 one can 3. .2 0.5 or“ new 9e 8998 Refleeeem e enema .855 eke m.~H o.H~ m.~e e.eH «.mm m.:~ eeeeeeo eeeeeem Heeeeeeeem m-~m %m we %3 %m Q? he e8§8eaégege3§8$makm e.e4 m.mm a.meH e.4w ~.Hen o.eofl eeeeeo eeeeeo eeeeeeee mumm a.” 4.: ~.m e.m m.e m.m eeeemeo eeeeeeeo «new we. 93 0.3 «.2 3H 3H 683 Haeeeeeeeee 5 eeaeheefi dam m.emma w.maafl m.mmee a.oe~H H.Heom «.memm eeee_ae_eeae>ene eeae: Hence m-Hm w.eem ~.:~ofi H.0Ham H.aae ~.om- ~.Hama Heeeea Heeeeeeeeeem nee « anew m.e~: m.oe~ H.ee e.eH e.eaea o.m~m .em eeeeeem.eH eee eeeeeeem not a euam e.am m.ma H.em «.mm e.mHH m.me eeeeeaem geese pee peeeepm tee a mnflm ~.em o.HeH o.e;m «.mom «.mow m.H~H eeeeeepm e» weeps ee eeeem 4.Hm m.m e.a o.m a.o w.en m.~ _ eeeaeeaeeeH eeeeeeem m.Hm fie «.2 98 mg“ HAN ad 83558 kn”flee 5 $33. fleeefim «hm e.H m.m m.m w.: o.m e.m eeeeeseee_aeaaee ea peeee4.eeaeeee Huflm QmUSHQEO ON gOhmwmbfiP ECWHIGOZ gmmw 0.)..3. NPWEH nfimws OgamflfldflHQP mmmmmhongm adoHHmHefim 8.3. mom mzofiafikmm amazam an: @499 e: mzemz .598 SEES a: .Eéogfiéoz .EQaBEfi 82 standard deviations, large differences inmediately become apparent. The large differences, however, between means and standard deviations should be interpreted cautiously due to the type of data collected, e.g., the sample papulation was asked to indicate the number of research projects in which they participated or initiated. The number of research projects, therefore, is rather small when compared to the number of miles traveled. later in this chapter further discussion of the significant difference between the means will be presented. In order to answer the primary problem of this study, the general hypothesis was generated in the null form. It was the encom- passing twpothesis established for this study and the basis from which all research hypotheses and statistical lvpotheses were derived. The general lvpothesis stated the following: 0. 11.: No appreciable difference exists between student personnel programs in colleges with innovative student personnel programs and colleges with non- innovative programs. In order to test the generalized, multivariate, null hypothesis which states that the taro groups had similar cluracteristics and pro- grams, it was essential that a statistical model be used which would maximise the between-groups differences while minimizing the within- groups differences. As was indicated in Chapter III, the statistical model which gave evidence of being the most powerful tool for the purposes of this study was multiple discriminant analysis. The solu- tion of the determinal equation [W'J'A- MIG, as well as correlation mtrices, means, and standard deviations, was part of the output data provided by the C. D. C. 3600 at Michigan State University. 83 By the use of chi square values, Rao (1952, p. 372-73) has been able to establish a test of statistical significance of the latent roots, or discriminant functions. By the use of the test established by Rao, it was possible to test for the multivariate discrimination among several grows. The following equation was used for testing the statistical difference among groups: 12' [fl-‘Hptfllos (1+1) ’ the total sample of 21. individuals the total number of 16 variables the total number of 2 groups the latent root of the discriminant function ywez IIII The formula yields a chi square value for each root. The nunber of roots yielded is the lesser of the two numbers g-l and the number of variables. Since there were only two groups in this study, the formula, g-l, provided only one root value. The signifi- cance level obtained for the latent root is reported in Table 15-2. The chi square value and the degrees of freedom also appear in the table. TABIs h-2 IATENT Roar VALUE, CHI SQUARE VALUE, DEGREES or FREEDOM AND PROBABILITY STATEMENT FOR THE 1321:3011an summon Discriminant Function 7x 12 BF P V1 7.812 33.731 16 < .01 32.1 < .01 The evidence, as shown in Table 14-2, indicates that the dis- criminant function which tests the multivariate discrimination among the innovators and the non-innovators was significant beyond the .01 811 level of confidence. Also the solution of the determinal equation produced a Wilks lambda equal to 7.81279 which is over seven times larger than the emoted chance ratio of zero. By using the latent root as an estimate of the total variance of dispersion among the groups, the percentage of variance accounted for by each root can be computed (Rao, P. 372). The extent to which the latent root (A) accounted for the total dispersion appears in Table 14-3. It can be seen that the variables accounted for by the latent root (A) approadmated the total variance. TABLE h-3 DISCRDHMNT FUNCTION, PROBABILITY STATEMENT, LATENT ROOT VALUE AND PERCENT OF TRACE FOR THE DISCRIMINANT FUNCTION Discriminant level of A latent Percentage thction Significance Root Value of Trace VI .01 7.812 .9999 Further evidence indicating the extent of separation of the groups in the discriminant space was derived from an examination of the institution's estimated position on a linear axis. The deter- mination of each institution's position on the linear axis is based upon a scaled vector or weight assigned to each of the sixteen variables. The weight given to each variable is shown in Table 14-1; in rank order according to the weight the variable received. The estimated position upon which an institution falls on the linear axis is determined by multiplying the weight assigned to each variable by the correSponding score which the institution received 85 for that given variable. The sum of the multiplied variables gives the estimated position for that institution within the discriminant space. The numerical value (score) esflmfing the position on the linear axis within the discrimimnt space for each of the twenty-four institutions is presented in Thble h-S. TABLE h-h RANK ORDER OF VARIABLES ACCORDING TO VECTOR WEIGHTS Variable/ Hypothesis Vector Weights 52-2 Graduate Degrees .5143? 51-3 Research Involvement .14773 Sl-l Faculty Assist in Policy Formation -.hlh0 52-5 Behavioral Science Courses -.3797 52-6 Anthro, Psych & Sociology Courses .2807 82-1 Involvement in Professional Associations .2110? 82-8 Open Belief Systems .1208 52-7 Age .0726 5244 Personnel and Guidance Courses -.0611 81-2 Students Assist in Policy Formation .0209 51-4; Ratio of Staff to Students .oouo S -5 8 per Student for Staff Salaries -.0033 51-8 Total Miles Traveled by Dean -.0019 81.6 8 for Research and In-Service Education -.0018 81-7 8 for Professional Travel .00116 32.3 Graduate Course Credit «00111; As can be seen from an enmination of the numerical value (score) representing the institution's position on the linear axis, there was complete separation of the grows. (Horizontal line in Table h-S represents the line of separation.) The analysis of data revealed that there was complete separa- tion among the grows in excess of the pro-established level of statistical confidence as can readily be seen when examining the information presented in Tables h~2 and 14-5. From the evidence 86 available, therefore, the generalized, multivariate, null hypothesis was rejected and regarded as untenable. TABLE h-E RANK ORDER BY VECTOR WEIGHTS FOR INNOVATIVE AND NON-INNOVATIVE INSTITUTIONS Code Raw Score Number* on Instrmnent Score 107 75.76 -.2017 Ion 78.78 1.165h 105 77.9h 2.3h57 103 81.82 2.86t6 101 86.36 3.1768 106 77.27 3.2952 109 72.06 3.6910 111 75 .00 3.7271 110 73.53 3.9623 108 7h.1h h.7769 112 79.h1 5.0506 102 811.85 5.71.1.7 20h 30.88 6.5h17 203 29.h1 7.h717 210 38.2h 7.6089 202 29.h1 7.8160 208 3h.38 8.h386 201 12.12 8.h69o 211 35.29 8.7716 206 33.82 8.92h8 205 32.35 9.1125 8 209 35.911 9.5185 207 3h.38 10.82h1 *Since complete anormnity was promised during the data collection period, the colleges have been assigned code numbers. Determination of the Most Potent Variables In an attempt to determine the extent to which each variable contributed to the total identificafion of the variance, two basic options appeared available. Cooley and Lohnes (1962, p. 119) 87 suggested that vector weights say give some indication of the relative contribution of each variable. The weights assigned to the variables, however, do not provide any indication regarding the percent or level of significance which each variable contributes to the total variance. The first of the alternatives, therefore, was to choose those vari- ables receiving high vector weights. T'hese selected variables then could be analyzed using the multiple discriminant analysis technique in an effort to determine the effectiveness or potency of the selected variables for the purpose of identifying the differences between the innovative and non-innovative student personnel programs. The second alternative for determining the potency of the variables represents a more traditional approach, i.e., establish a univariate F ratio for each variable. This procedure consists of examining each individual variable in isolation from its dependence upon other variables. The limitations to this approach, however, appear rather evident especially in view of the following statement: One of the main problems with which the investigator of data becomes interested is that of deciding whether the means of the grows for each of the variables are signifi- cantly different. The well-known variance analysis test provides an answer to this question. Such tests may indi- cate that some variables show significant differences while others do not. However, since the variables are likely to be highly correlated, they cannot be treated as independent. It may well be that only a stall number of the variables with significant differences in means are contributing to discrimination among the groups while other variables which by themselves provide no means of discrimination may aid considerably when taken in conjunction with the rest. It is only by study of the entire constellation of points that we can recognise which variables are useless and which provide real evidence concerning group separation (Tiedeman, 1951, Po 7“»). Although Cooley and Lohnes (1962, p. 121) suggest that uni- variate F ratios be established, they also indicate that there may be 88 limited agreement between the results of the univariate F ratios and the actual contribution of each variable to the identification of the variance when the multiple discriminant technique is employed. Although the univariate statistical techniques have represented tradi- tionally the most pepular procedure for determining the relative con- tribution of a number of variables under consideration, it was decided for the purposes of this stmdy that the multiple discriminant analysis technique represented the most sound statistical procedure to follow. In keeping with tradition, however, the sixteen variables comprising the generalized multivariate null hypothesis were stated in directional hypothesis form and subjected to univariate F tests. The sixteen univariate F tests which indicate the significance of group differences for individual variables are smrised in the Appendix (See Appendix III). Five of the sixteen hypotheses tested by univariate F ratios were found to exceed the pro-established .05 level of confidence. 333$. 93 M Variables.-Since the relative contribution of the variables may be dependent upon other variables, it was decided that those variables having the highest vector weights would be selected for additional analysis. By repeating the multiple discriminant analysis technique on only a reduced number of variables, the results would yield an indication of the variables or combination of variables most effective in identifying the differences between colleges with innovative and non-innovative student personnel programs. From an enmination of the vector weights assigned to each of the sixteen variables (See Table 14-h), it became apparent that seven variables represented most of the assigned weight, and the remaining 89 nine variables collectively represented negligible assigned weight. Seven variables representing the largest vector weight were used to determine the effectiveness of identifying group differences. These were: 1) number of graduate degrees, 2) research involvement, 3) faculty assistance in policy formation, 1;) number of behavioral science courses, 5) number of courses specifically in anthropology, psychology, and sociology, 6) involvement in professional associations, and 7) Open belief system of the chief student personnel administrator. In order to test the relative efficacy of these seven variables as potential discriminators between the innovative and non-innovative groups, the variables were tested in the same manner as reported earlier for the oring sixteen variables. The significance level obtained for the latent root value based upon seven variables is reported in Table h-6. The chi square value according to procedtn'es established by Rao (1952, p. 372-3) and the degrees of freedom also appear in the table. TABLE h-6 LATENT ROOT VALUE, CHI SQUARE VALUE, DEGREES OF FREEDOM AND PROBABILITY STATEMENT OF THE DISCRIMINANT FUNCTION BASED UPON SEVEN VARIABLES Discriminant summon x x2 DF P V1 8.722 12.510 7 < .10 ”$.07 (.05 12.017 (.10 The evidence, as presented in Table 14-6 , indicates that the discriminant function, which tests the multivariate discrimination 90 among the imovators and non-innovators based upon seven variables, was less than the pro-established .05 level of significance. Although the .05 level of confidence was not reached based upon Rae's chi square technique, the solution of the determinal equation produced, however, a Wilks lambda equal to 8.722 which is over eight times larger than the chance ratio of zero. An additional attempt was made to determine what effect the variables had in identifying the mjority of the variance. The ten variables with the largest vector weights were analyzed. (See Table h-h for rank order of weighted variables.) The results of the discriminant function based upon ten variables which test for the multivariate discrimination among the innovators and non-innovators is presented in Table 14-7. TABLE h-7 IATENT ROOT VALUE, CHI SQUARE VALUE, DEGREES OF FREEDOM AND PROBABILITY STATEMENT OF THE DISCRIMINANT FUNCTION BASED UPON TEN VARIABLES Discriminant Function )\ 12 BF P v1 1.293 15.351 10 < .20 18.3 (.05 10 <11" 15.9 (.10 13.11 (.20 The analysis of data, which can readily be seen when examining Table h-7, indicated that based upon Rae's chi square test of the discriminant function, the results failed to reach the pre-established .05 level of significance. The solution of the determinal equation 91 based upon Wilks lambda was 1.29 which is 1.3 times larger than the chance ratio of zero. Conclusions and BM Conclusions.--The computed results from the multivariate discriminant analysis of sixteen variables clearly indicated, based upon Rao's test of significance, that the separation of the groups was signifi- cant at the .01 level. The chance of producing group differences this large or larger by drawing two random sample groups from a six- teen multivariate space is less than one in one hundred. As was indicated earlier, the generalized, multivariate, null hypothesis was considered untenable. Innovative colleges did differ from non- innovative colleges when the sixteen variables were considered collectively. 0n the basis of the data analyzed, when considering the gen- eralized, multivariate, null hypothesis as being untenable, support was given for the theory that there are identifiable differences betwaen colleges with innovative student personnel programs and colleges with non-innovative student personnel programs. One of the secondary problems under investigation in this study was an attempt to identify those characteristics which were most potent and consequently contributed most to the identification of the vari— ance between the groups. Although the well known univariete tests seem to indicate significant differences which could be identified between Specific variables of the groups, the researcher is normally forced to pick out and interpret the largest F ratios, t's, or correlation coefficient, and often does so from a large number of non-independent 92 statistics. The probability of the first kind of error increases, therefore, far beyond their nominal values (Cramer and Darrel, 1966, p. 605). Multivariate analysis, however, provided a statistical model and procedure for dealing separately with each variable in estimation, while at the same time providing tests of impotheses which lead to a single probability statement referring to all variables Jointly. The univariate test provided information regarding the accept- ance or rejection of the individual statistical hypotheses (See Appendix.XII). The overriding superiority of the statistical technique of multiple discriminant analysis, which accounts for the relationship and interdependency of variables, was used as the final criterion for accepting or rejecting the variables contributing most to the identi- fication of the variance. Two attempts were made to determine if the major source of contribution to the variance could be identified using less than sixteen variables. The seven highest weighted vectors were arbitrarily chosen to test the discriminating power of a limited number of vari- ables. The discriminant function Obtained from testing the seven highest weighted variables was less than the pro-established .05 level of confidence. A second attempt was made using the multiple discriminant analysis technique. This attempt was based upon the ten highestwweighted.variables in.order to determine the relative potency of variables to discrimimte between the innovative and non-innovative colleges. The resulting discriminant function and chi square test again did not reach the .05 level of significance. 93 In attempting to provide an answer for one of the problems outlined in this study, i.e., what characteristics or variables are more potent in identifying innovative and non-innovative student personnel programs, the evidence from the analysis of data gave no clear indication. It was interesting to note that when using sixteen variables, the variables collectively differentiated between the irmovative and non-innovative programs; however, when using less than the full sixteen variables, there was a significant loss in discrimina- tory power. Based upon multiple discriminant analysis which deals separate- ly with each variable in estimtion while at the sane time producing a probability statement referring to all variables Jointly, ten variables were not sufficiently effective to produce significant differences between groups. When testing each variable in isolation and as an independent variable, univariate F analysis, however, revealed five variables to be significant at the .05 level or above. The apparent discrepancy of the two statistical tests would lead to the conclusion that there was a very high degree of interrelatedness among all the variables. Mann sunmary the overall generalized, multivariate, null Imaothesis was regarded as untenable and rejected on the basis of data analysis. Consequently, there was some supportive evidence for the theory that there are identifiable differences between colleges with innovative student personnel programs and colleges with non- innovative student personnel programs. 9h In an attempt to provide an answer for the problem of what variables are most potent in identifying the differences between innovative and non-innovative programs, there was no clear evidence provided from the analysis of data. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECObfl‘iENDATIONS In this chapter, a general summary will be presented first which includes the problem under investigation, theory, methodology and major findings. Based upon the major findings, some conclusions will be presented. Implications for further research and educational practice will follow the conclusions. m In recent years, considerable pressure has been exerted upon colleges to provide an education for a madman number of individuals, while at the same time minimising those aspects of the college environ- ment which may interfere with the stmdents' optimal progress. While society has been pressuring colleges to be more effective, social scientists, behavioral scientists, and student personnel workers have been developing new theories and practices which are intended to reduce the abrasive aspects of higher education and create an environ- ment conducive to increasing the students' academic productivity. Although many new practices and theories have been introduced which facilitate the students' academic progress both inside and out- side the classroom and laboratory, little has been known about how these practices were commicated, or what distinguished institutions which readily adopt new student personnel practices from colleges which are relatively slow in up-dating their programs. 95 96 This research project was conducted, therefore, to examine one part.of student.personnel work, that of isolating specific variables which were effective in identifying colleges with innova- tive student.personnel.programs. The major problem under investiga- tion also generated three secondary problems which required examination. First, which of the characteristics under investigation provided the greatest potency in identifying innovative student personnel programs? Second, what relationships, if any, exist between the l) organizational and administrative structure and innovativeness and 2) the personal.and psychological characteristics of the chief student personnel adminis- trators and innovativeness? Finally, could innovative and non- innovative student.personnel programs be identified based upon measurement devices? To provide a theoretical base for the study, it was found that an interdisciplinary collation of findings from diffusion and com- munication research represented the most fertile base upon which to draw supportive evidence. Ample research was found which.strong1y supported the theory that the adoption of a new idea consists of a new conceptior product which is communicated through certain channels among members of a social system over a given.period of time. Moreover, empirical evidence indicated that the adeption process is a continuous process and can be graphically represented by an "S" curve. The adoption process, therefore, can also be represented as a normal distribution. The theory and evidence indicated that the normality of adopter distributions served as the theoretical support for identifying 97 the population sample of a mutually exclusive group of innovators and non-innovators. Kata (1957) developed a theory of communication which identi- fied the process whereby a new’idea or concepttis passed from social system to social system. He contended that new ideas or messages are mediated by a reference group before the total social system becomes aware of the new idea or message. The collation of Kate's "two-step flow" theory with Gallaher's (1965) and Spindler's (1963) theory that the administrator plays a mediating function or a "middleaman" role in allowing new ideas to infiltrate the system, as well as creating change and inhibiting change, produced one of the basic theories for this study. The chief studentwpersonnel.adminis- trator, the resultant theory suggests, plays a key role in determin- ing the propensity for innovativeness in his college's student.per- sonnel program due to his "middle-man" role and ability to facilitate or inhibit.change by his legitimized authority role. 'meoretical support for the identification of variables related to innovativeness was derived from a review of the empirical findings on file at.the Diffusion Document.Center (Rogers and Stanfield, 1966). A review of the findings on file indicated the fellowing variables have contributed to the identification of variance related to innovativeness: amount of education, relative age, knowledgeability of professional developments, positive attitude toward.change, empathy, mental rigidity, cosmOpoliteness, mass media exposure, contact'with change agents, faculty involvement in policy making, ratio of staff, monetary expenditure, and research involvement. The variables Just 98 outlined served as the theoretical assumptions for the generation of hypotheses. Because this study represented an initial exploration into the relationship of student.personnel administration as related to innovativeness, the major hypothesis to be tested was established as a generalized,.multivariate null hypothesis. The generalized null hypothesis consisted of sixteen related statistical hypotheses. The first eight statistical hypotheses were categorized as administnative and organizational hypotheses. The remaining eight.statistical hypotheses were categorized as personal and psychological hypotheses. It was necessary to develop an instrument which would enable a systematic method of providing mutually exclusive sample popula- tions representing innovative and non-innovative studentwpersonnel programs. Studies done by other researchers (Rogers and Rogers, 1961, p. 336) have indicated that adoption scales for measuring the relative innovativeness can be constructed. Moreover, the research indicated that these scales have a reasonable degree of validity and reliability. The "Adeption of Selected StudentvPersonnel Practices Inventory" which was especially developed for this study was found to have a split-half reliability coefficient of +.83. An.analysis of'the returns from.a papulation sample of’2h5 colleges revealed that.the frequency distribu- tion approached normality. The mean, median, and mode all fell within 1.9 points of each other with a corresponding standard deviation of 1h.h. The frequency distribution, however, was slightly skewed in a positive direction and slightly lepotokurtdc. Thelve colleges with innovative student.personnel programs and twelve with non-innovative programs were drawn from a sample 99 population of 2145 private coeducational, liberal arts colleges, with student enrollmnts of 5,000 or less, located in the midwestern states. The twenty-four innovative and non-imovative colleges chosen were based upon the score which each institution received on the "Adoption of Selected Student Personnel Practices Inventory." These colleges represented the extremes of the scoring continuum. A second instrument was developed which would elicit from the mutually exclusive colleges the data necessary for testing the generalized, multivariate null hypothesis, and the sixteen related statistical hypotheses. The instrument, which was developed by the writer in consultation with ten experts, was tested on a pilot sample before the instrument was sent to the twelve innovative and twelve non-innovative colleges. When the instrument, which provided data for testing the hypotheses, was returned, each student personnel administrator included in the mutually exclusive groups studied was interviewed by telephone. The interview provided further verification and validation of the data contained within the instrument. The statistical model chosen for testing the hypotheses was multiple discriminant analysis of variance. The ability of this technique to maximize the differences between the groups and minimize the differences within the groups made it the most promising approach of those investigated for use with the hypotheses and data. he statistical analysis of the data revealed that the overall generalized multivariate null hypothesis was rejected at the .01 level of confidence. The rejection of the null hypothesis indicated tenta- tive support, therefore, to the theory that there were identifiable 100 differences between innovative and non-innovative college student personnel programs. Although each of the sixteen statistical hypotheses was sub- jected to univariate F ratios, the statistical results were considered tenuous due to the large number of variables under consideration and the high degree of inter-correlation found among the variables. For the purposes of this study, the superiority of multiple discriminant analysis as a statistical technique, which accounts for the relation- ship and interdependency of variables, was used as the final criterion for accepting or rejecting the variables contributing most to the identification of the variance. To test further the assumption that variables with high vecter weights contribute greatly to the identification of the variance, the seven highest weighted variables were chosen for additional analysis in an attempt to determine their relative potency in identifying the differences between the innovative and non-innovative college student personnel programs. The seven variables failed to significantly discriminate between the groups at the pre-established .05 level of confidence. A second attempt to determine if less than sixteen variables could adequately discriminate differences between innovators and non- innovators was made. This attempt to determine potency of variables was based upon ten variables receiving the highest vector weights. The ten variables chosen for this analysis and tested by multiple discriminant analysis also yielded results which did not meet the pre-established level of confidence. Since it was impossible to identify statistically the extent the variables contributed to the 101 variance, it was, therefore, impossible to provide any definite solu- tion for the problem of what variables are most potent in identifying the innovative and the non-innovative student personnel programs. It we also impossible to derive any clear evidence indicating the effect administrative, organizational, and/or personal-psychological charac ter- istics had in relation to innovativeness. Conclusions Based upon an analysis of the data collected to test the hypotheses and problems of this study, the following represent the major conclusions: The primary problem under investigation was that of isolating and identifying specific variables which differentiate colleges with innovative student personnel programs from colleges with non-innovative programs. The analysis of data provided clear evidence for the rejection of the generalized multivariate null hypothesis that innovative and non-innovative college student persomel programs have similar characteristics. The rejection of the null hypothesis lends tentative support to the theory that there are identifiable characteristics which separate innovative programs from non-innovative programs. One of the secondary problems under investigation was what characteristics or variables were more potent in identifying imovative student personnel programs than other charac ter- istics. The analysis of data yielded inconclusive evidence indicating that one characteristic or combination of character- istics had more or less potency or ability to identify the significant differences existing between innovative and non- innovative student personnel programs. Another secondary problem.under investigation was what relationship existed between administrative-organizational characteristics and innovativeness, and what relationship existed between personal-psychological characteristics of the chief student personnel administrator and innovativeness. It was impossible to make any statistical differences regarding which of the variables under investigation was contributing extensively to the identification of the differences between innovative and non-innovative colleges. Furthermore, it was impossible to draw any conclusions indicating the relative importance which administrative-organizational and personal- psychological variables play in identifying innovativeness. 102 The final secondary problem.under investigation was to what extent can measurement devices systematically rate the rela- tive innovativeness of college student personnel programs. An analysis of the norms tive data derived from the "Adop tion of Selected Student Personnel Practices Inventory" indicated that;measurement devices were effective in measuring and comparing the relative innovativeness of college student personnel programs. The measurement devices did not, howa ever, provide any evidence indicating the characteristics which differentiate the innovative from the nondinnovative programs. Discussion 9! Comlusions.-The results of the analysis of data per- taining to the major problem.of this study appeared to give clear evidence that.innovative college studentrpersonnel programs can be readily differentiated from colleges which have noneinnovative programs. The evidence supporting this assumption was twofold. First, the instmment, "Adoption of Selected Student Personnel Practices Inventory," provided evidence from the normative data indicating that.instruments can measure the relative innovativeness of college student personnel programs. Second, the analysis of data by multiple discriminant.analysis, based upon sixteen variables, clearly and definitively indicated that there was a significant difference between colleges with innovative and non-innovative college student personnel programs. Although the findings of this research project.are not.new to diffusion research, the results of the data analysis have for the first time provided evidence indicating that the characteristics which differentiate innovative student.personnel.programs from the non- innovative programs were similar to the characteristics feund in other social systems. These findings along with Davis's (1965, p. 111;) have 103 also provided support for the assumption that results from innova- tion studies using other social systems may have a high relationship to college student personnel work. Furthermore, the results of this study have provided exception- al documentation of the concept that there are unique and identifiable differences between innovators and non-innovators. The basis fer this assumption rests upon the statistical technique used in the analysis of data. Previous studies, fer the most.part, have relied upon uni- variate statistical techniques in an attempt to determine differences between groups. This procedure normally forces the researcher to pick out.and interpret the largest F ratios, t's, or correlation coefficients. Frequently, these are drawn from a large number of non-independent statistics. Also, many innovation studies using multiple correlation techniques have attempted to determine relation- ships between specific, dependent variables and innovativeness (Rogers and Havens, 1962, p. 38). The superiority of multiple discriminant analysis provided a means for dealing separately with each variable in estimation while at the same time providing a test of hypotheses which led to a single probability statement referring to a11.variables jointly (Tiedeman, 1951). The research methodology employed in this study provided extensive statistical justification supporting the concept that'there are identifiable differences between innovators and non-innovators based upon a number of'highly related.variables. . While supporting the results of previous innovation research, the major findings of this study did not lend support to the concept that innovation is related to a single variable or a relatively small combination of variables. Much of the traditional diffusion research 101; has studied the individual as the adoption unit. Considerable empirical research results based upon univariate statistics have been compiled and collated using the individual as the adoption unit. The resulting evidence from this compilation of data indirectly implies that variables related to imovativeness may be considered and studied as independent variables. Although there have been few innovation research studies which have studied the social system as the unit of adoption, the evidence available from these studies has indicated that innovation is not composed of a single variable or a small number of related variables, but is far more complex (Evans, 1968, p. 152). The evidence from this study gave further support to this premise. Moreover, part of the methodology of this study was an attempt to determine which variables had the most potency in identifying the differences between innovators and non-innovators. The results of the statistical analysis were most inconclusive and tended to support the concept that the behavior of organizations and of the individuals who make up those organizations forms a unified whole (Rogers and Shoemaker, 1968, p. 12). When using traditional univariate methodology, five of the sixteen variables were found to be greater than the pre-established level of significance; but when using statistical techniques which were capable of analyzing multivariate data, the multivariate test represented, therefore, a more powerful and discriminating analysis. The resulting evidence appeared to support the assumption that innovativeness is a considerably more complex variable when the social system is the unit of analysis than when the individual represents the unit of analysis. 105 Because it was impossible to demonstrate which variables con- tributed most to the identification of the variance, it was also impossible to indicate whatirelationship existed between administrative- organizational andjpersonalspsychological.variables and innovativeness. The relationship of organizational characteristics and personal char- acteristics of the chief student.personnel administrator as related to innovativeness was not,answered. It.remains, however, an important prdblemtworthy of further investigation. An examination of the exist- ing theory (as outlined in Chapter II) would indicate that.the role which the chief administrator plays in relation to the organizational structure of the institution cannot easily be identified (Spindler, 1963, P. 1&3). Further evidence supporting the complex relationship between the two can be found in both Davis's (1965, p. 115) and Evans's (1968, p. 28) research. Even though the findings of this study demonstrated rather con- clusively that identifiable differences exist between colleges with innovative and non-innovative student personnel programs, and that measurement.devices appear effective in measuring the relative innovativeness of a college student.personne1.program, there remained many questions of importance which were not.answered. The need for further effort in the area of providing more precise definitions, con- structs, and identification of variables becomes painfully obvious. The evidence reported about the generality of the findings should indicate the importance of identifying more specifically the true nature of the variables which explain innovativeness and the correSponding level of potency of the variables. 106 Iimitations.--The major limitation of this study, as seen by this investigator, would be the degree to which the data and the con- clusions drawn from the findings can be generalized. This study emined only student personnel programs in private coeducational liberal arts colleges with student enrollments of less than 5,000. The colleges included in the population sample were also drawn from seventeen midwestern states, thus adding to the limitations. All the colleges (2&5) which met the criteria for inclusion in the population sanple, were included in the original sample receiv- ing the "Adoption of Selected Student Personnel Practices Inventory." Ninety-six of the 2145 institutions or 39% of the sample pepulatlon were excluded due to insufficient tenure of the chief student personnel administrator. In considering the relative effect of the 39% loss, it should be noted that the loss in the criterion group, i.e., innovators was negligible while the majority of the loss due to insufficient tenure was in the control or comarison group, i.e., non-innovators. has final sample studied, consequently, did not represent a normal sample, but rather one that was slightly skewed. The generalizability of the findings must also be considered in reference to the number of colleges included in the final sample studied. Tvmlve immovative student personnel programs compared to twelve non-innovative programs represented a sample size somwhat smller than my be considered desirable. Caution must be exercised in generalizing the findings of this study to other pepulation samples. Caution must also be exercised in assuming that a cause-and- effect relationship has been established because sixteen variables 107 were shown to relate highly with innovativeness. The study did not attempt to answer the question whether or not a college adopting certain characteristics related to innovativeness would then tend to become more innovative. The primary concern of this study was to pro- vide evidence by post hoc methodology that the study of student personnel programs and irmovativeness is worthy of further research efforts. One further precaution must be taken to guard against the impression that the study generally supported innovation for innova- tion's sake. This study considered innovation irrespective of its inherent positive or negative values. The extent to which a college should be innovative or non-innovative, early or late to adopt new ideas and practices, remains in the domain of the individual institu- tion and the personnel which are responsible for it. Implications for Educational Practice Despite the limitation of the study, the results do appear to have direct as well as indirect implications for student personnel practice. First of all, the results have tended to verify that the diffusion process, adOption process, and characteristics of innovators of student personnel programs appear similar to other social systems smdied. The similarity would tend to support the assumption that the large body of diffusion research findings are applicable to student personnel work. Second, due to the similarity in findings of this study as compared to other diffusion research findings, it was considered possible, based upon the generalizations of the findings, to justify the following implications : 1) 2) 3) h) 5) 6) 108 Adoption scales can be developed with reasonable validity and reliability which have the capacity for identifying the extent to which a college student personnel program is innovative or non-innovative, and they can be used, therefore, as future research and evaluation tools. 'mere are unique, significant, and identifiable charac- teristics which separate a college with an innovative student personnel program from a non-innovative pro- gram, consequently, legitimizing the innovators as a unique group worthy of further attention. Based upon the apparent ability to identify the innova- tors from non-innovators, the results indicate that the chief student personnel administrator is a part of the unique characteristics of an innovative program. It may be possible to accelerate the diffusion of student personnel innovations by concentrating on disseminating the new ideas to the innovators first since they repre- sent the most likely group to adopt and/or be receptive to applied research. If innovativeness is a valued criteria, the character- istics related to innovativeness may be emulated by chief student personnel administrators who wish their program to be more innovative or amenable to change. In student personnel training programs where receptivity to new ideas and flexibility to change are charac ter- istics which represent in part the objectives of the program, the findings then give direction to the student personnel educator. The findings of this initial study, namely, the relation- ship of student personnel practices to innovativeness, provide a sufficient base as well as justification for further heuristic research endeavors. Recommendation for Further Research In the process of building a methodology for this study and during the examination of the findings, more questions were generated than perhaps were answered. The most important and relevant questions which have remained unanswered are those related to the generaliza- bility of the findings. The limited geographic area from which the original sample was drawn, and the relatively small number of colleges 109 included in the final mutually exclusive groups studied demand replication of the study prior to generalizing these findings to all colleges. Replication of the study should be considered with popula- tion samples representing geographic areas other than the midwestern states and colleges and other than private coeducational liberal arts colleges with student enrollments under 5,000. No attempt was made in this stucw to establish a cause-and- effect relationship between the characteristics which were found to be unique to innovative colleges and their actual propensity for innovativeness. One might conclude from the findings of the study that a chief student personnel administrator who wished his program to be more innovative, might adopt the characteristics found to be unique to the innovative colleges. At present, however, there is inadequate empirical research indicating that the adoption of innova- tive characteristics will result in an innovative program. he unknowns in this area would indicate the appropriateness of lorgi- tudinal research which might examine what happens to colleges which have the potential for innovativeness and colleges which wish to be more innovative and are willing to adopt the characteristics found in the innovative colleges. Both in this study and in Davis's (1965) study of innovation in colleges, the findings did not clearly reveal the significance of the inter-relationships between the personal characteristics of the. administrators and the organizational variables. Further research is needed in this area to determine the exact effect and role which the administrator plays. 1.10 Further research should be focused on more precise explora- tion of the dimensions of innovativeness. This study revealed that sixteen variables adequately discriminated between the innovative and non-innovative programs. Sixteen variables, however, for practical purposes, represent a large and unwieldy number with which to work. Further effort, therefore, should be given to providing more adequate and precise Operational definitions, constructs, and theories. This in turn would allow for the deveIOpment of refined measurement techniques which would make possible more valid and reliable data collection. With more adequate theory and constructs along with refined measurement devices, it would perhaps be possible to reduce in number potent variables which would explain most of the differences between innovators and the rest of the population. _I_r_1_ Retrospect During the initial developmental stages of this study, it was hoped that the major portion of the investigation would consist of an experimental stuch'. As the proposal for the study progressed, it became apparent that little supportive research was available which examined the diffusion of innovations among student personnel workers. Without sufficient research evidence indicating either methods or procedures for determining innovative and non-innovative student personnel programs, not to mention what characteristics were representative of an imovative program, the idea of an experimental study gave way to an ex post facto study. Although experimental studies could possibly have been designed, it seemed that to study cause-and-effect relationships before knowing what differentiated 111 innovative from non-innovative programs, or characteristics unique to innovative smdent personnel programs, was inappropriate. The prior study, therefore, was undertaken. By necessity, the purpose and intent of the investigation was designed to examine one particular aspect of student personnel work, namely, that of determining if innovative college student personnel programs were significantly different from non-innovative programs. It is hoped that the positive findings as well as the inconclusive evidence will serve as one of the first foundations upon which both further ex post facto and experimental studies will be built in college student personnel work. BIBLIOGRAPHY Allen, Harley E. ”The Diffusion of Educational Practices in the School System of HetroPolitan School Study Council." Unpublished Ed. D. Thesis, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1956. Barnett, Homer G. Innovation: The Basis of Cultural Charge. New York: moraT—‘a’w- 11, 19 3. Barrington, Thomas M. The Introduction of Selected Educational Pragtices into Teachers Colleges andfifiaeir laboratory Schools. New York: Bureau of ‘Pthlications,Teachers College, Columbia University, 1953. Beal, George M. "Validity of the Concept of Stages in the Adoption Process," Rural Sociolgg, H11, (195?), 166-168. Ben-David, Joseph. "Roles and Innovations in Medicine ," American Journal of Socioloq, LIV, (May, 1960), 557-568. Berlo, David K. The Process of Communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.,f60. Brickell, Henry M. Organisfi New York State for Educational Change. Albany, New ork: terucation Departnent, 1961. . "State Organization for Educational Change: A Case Study and a Proposal," Innovation in Education, ed. Matthew B. files, New York: Bureau of Publications, 1Teachers College, Columbia University, 1961:. Card, B. Y. "The Diffusion of Educational Sociology to Western Canada Through Textbooks and Periodicals ," Educational $001010 ’ VI, (JW, 19%), 11.0-1180 Carlson, Richard 0. "School Superintendents and Adoption of Eden rem: A Social Structure Profile," Innovation in Education, ed. Matthew B. Miles, New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1961:. . Ado tion of Educational Innovations. Eugene, Oregon: The CenEr for the Advanced Study of Educational Admirfistration, University of Oregon, 1965. , et a1. Change Process in the Public Schools. Eugene, Oregon: The Center fir the Advanced Sturfi air-Educational Administration, University of Oregon, 1965. Caswell, Hollis L., and Campbell, Doah S. Readings in Curriculum Development. New York: American Book Company, 1937. 113 Chapin, Stuart 1“. Cultural Change. New York: Appleton Century Craft, Inc., 1928. Coleman, James, et a1. "Social Process in the Diffusion of a Medical Imovation Among Physicians." Paper presented at the American Sociological Society meeting in Detroit, Michigan, September 8, 1956. Cooley, William W., and Iohnes, Paul R. Multivariate Pmcedure_s‘ for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: John Wiley 8: Sons, Inc. , T5765. Copp, James H. "The Function of Information Sources in the Farm Practice Adoption Process," Rural Sociology, XXIII, (1957), 1’46 ”157 c Cramer, Elliot M., and Block, Darrell R. "Multivariate Analysis," Review of Educational Research, mm, No. 5, (December, 1966), 6014.13 0 Cutting, John Donald. "Predicting the Selection of a Field of Con- centration at Michigan State University from the Personal Information Inventory." Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1966. Davis, Richard H. "Personal and Organizational Variables Related to the Adoption of Educational Innovations in Liberal Arts Colleges." Unpublished dissertation, University of Chicago, September, 1965. Dunn, Frances E. "Tim Methods for Predicting the Selection of College Major," Journal of Counseling Psycholgg, VI, (June, 1959), 15-27. Edwards, Allen L. Statistical Methods for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: Rimhart 22 Cchpany, Inc., 1960. Eteioni, Amitai, and Etzioni, Eva. Introduction to "Initiation, Diffusion and Termination," Social Change L Source Patterns and Consequences. New York: Basic Books, Inc. , 1963. Enrich, Alvin C. "The Constituent to Experiment and Innovate in College Teaching," Educational Record, VL, No. 1, (Winter, 1961:), h9-55 . Evans, Richard I. Resistance to Innovation in Higher Education. San Francisco: Tossey-Bass, Inc. , 1968. Farnsworth, Philo T. Adoption Process in Public School Systems as Illustrated by a Stu mive Selected Innovations in Educa- Honsl Service in New ork Connec ticu_t, and Massachusetts. New York: Bureau of Pubflca'fi'ons, Teachers College, Columbia University, 19140. Ill: Fliegel, Fmderick C. "A Multiple Correlation Analysis of Factors Associated with Adoption of Farm Prac tices," Rural Sociolgg, XXI, (1956), 2&6.2920 Fosdick, Raymond B. "We Must Not Be Afraid of Change," New York Times m seine, (April 3, 191:7). Gallaher, Art, Jr. "Direct Change in Formal Organizations: The School System," Change Process in the Public Schools. Eugene, Oregon: The Center of the Advanced Study of Educannal Administration, University of Oregon, 1965. Gardner, John W. Self-Renewal: The Individual and the Innovative Society. New York: Harper and Row, 1963. Griffiths, Daniel E. ”Administrative Theory and Change in Organisa- tions," Innovation in Education, ed. Matthew B. Miles, New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1961;. Gross, Neal. "The Differential Characteristics of Accepters and Non- Accep tors of an Approved Agricultural Technological Practice ," Rural Sociolog, m, (Juno, 19h9), 11:8-156. Ikenberry, Stanley 0. “A Multivariate Analysis of the Relationship of Academic Aptitude, Social Background, Attitudes and Values to Collegiate Persistence." Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1960. Kate, Elihu. "The Two-Step Flow of Commnication: An Up-to-date geport on an mpothesis," Public Opinion Quarterly, III, (1957), 1-780 . "The Social Itinerary of Technical Change: We Studies on the Diffusion of Innovation," Studies of Innovation and of Communication to the Public, ed. Wilbur Salramm, Stanfo—i‘d, Wraity Institute for Commmication Research, 1962. , Levin, M. L. , and Ihmilton, H. “Traditions of Research on the Diffusion of Innovations ," American Sociological Review, EVIII, No. 2, (1963), 237-252. Kroeber, A. L. Anthropolog. New York: Harcourt Brace & Co., Inc., 1923. Lin, Nan, et a1. 'me Diffusion of an Innovation in Three Michigig Hi h Sohoofis Inadmaonmundi ‘fizro h'Cha e. Pro act on We Diffusion ofificational Prnac flees in lI'l‘fiiland, Research Report No. 1. East Lansing, Michigan: Institute of International Studies in Education and Department of Communi- cation, Michigan State University, 1966. 115 Lionberger, Herbert F. “Some Characteristics of Farm Operators Sought as Sources of Farm Information in Missouri Comnmity," Rural Sociolog, XVIII, (1953). 327-338. . Adoption of New Ideas and Practices. Ames, Iowa: The Iowa State Universifi Press, 1960. McNemar, Quinn. Psychological Statistics. New York: John Wiley 8: Sons, Inc., 1962. Miles, Matthew B. , (ed.). Innovation in Education. New York: Eugen of Publications, T's—achers College, Columbia University, 19 . Mort, Paul R. Principles of School Adndnistration. New York: . "Studies in Educational Innovation from the Institute of Administrative Research: An Overview," Innovation in Educa- tion, ed. Matthew B. Miles, New York: Bureau of fibficafions, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1961:. Postman, John G. Descriptive and Sampling Statistics. New York: Harper 8: Brothers, 1914?. Plant, Walter T. , Minium, Edward W. , and Myers, Celestine. "An Analysis of the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale Used with a Sample of American College Students." Unpublished paper read at the Annual Meeting of the Western Psychological Association, San Diego, California, April 16-18, 1959. Powell, Fredrick. "Open- and Closed-Mindedness and Ability to Differentiate Source and Massage ," qurnal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, LXV, (1962), 63-69. Queeley, Mary and Street, David. “Innovation in Public Education: The Impact of the Continuous DeveIOpment Approach." Working Paper #16. Chicago: University of Chicago, Center of Social Organisation Studies, 1965. Rao, 0. Radhakrishna. Advanced Statistical Methods in Biometric Research. New firk: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. , 1952. Rogers, Everett M. "Categorising the Adapters of Agricultural Prac- tices," le Sociology, XXIII, (1960), ans-35h. , and Rogers, L. Edna. "A tbthodological Analysis of Adoption Scales," Rural Sociolog, XXVI, (December, 1961), 325-336. , and Havens, Eugene. "Predicting Innovativeness," Sociolog - cal nguiry, mII, (Winter, 1962), 3h-t.2. 116 Rogers, Everett M. , Havens, Eugene A. , and Cartano, David G. ”The Construction of Immtivemss Scales,” Bulletin A. E. 330, Department of Agriculture, Economics and Rural Sociology, Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station, Columbus, Ohio, 1962. Rogers, Everett M. Diffusion of Innovations. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1962. . "On Innovations and Education." Paper presented at the Conference of the Michigan Cooperative Curriculum Program, Boyne Mountain, Michigan, September 21;, 1965. . ”Toward a New Model for Educational Change." Paper pre- sented at the Conference on Strategies for Educational Change, Washington, D. 0., November 8-9, 1965. , and Stanfield, David. "Adoption and Diffusion of New Products: Emerging Generalizations and Motheses.” Paper presented at the Conference on the Application of Sciences to Marketing Management, Purdue University, July 12-15, 1966. , and Shoemaker, Floyd F. Commicauon of Innovations: Frees-Cultural Approach. New York: Free Press Muses, 958. Rokeach, Milton J. gen and Closed Mind. New York: Basic Books, Inc. , 1960. Ross, Donald M. (ed.). Adminismtion for Ada tabili . Revised edition. New York: Metropolitan 365m Stag Council, 1958. Rulon, Phillip J . , et a1. Multivariate Statistics for Personnel Classification. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. , 1967. Ryan, Bryce, and Gross, Neal C. "The Diffusion of Whrid Seed Corn in Two Iowa Comnnmifles," Rural Bodega, VIII, (191:3), 1.5.th - Spindler, George (ed.). Education and Culture: Anthropolo Approaches. New York: Holt, Rinehart andlflnston, 3. Tiedeman, David V., Bryan, Joseph G., and Rulon, Phillip J. The Utililof the Airman Classification Battery for Assignment of Airmen to Eight Air Force Speciajfties. Tambridge, Massa- chusetts: EducationalTEesearch Corporation, June, 1951. , Bryan, Joseph G., and Rulon, Phillip J. "The Multiple Discriminant Func tion--A Symposimn," Harvard Educational Raview, XXI, (1951), 71-95. I‘ I 117 Troldahl, Verling C. "A Field Experiment Test of a Modified 'Two- Step' Flow of Communication Model." Paper presented to the Association for Education in Journalism, Iincoln, Nebraska, 1963 . , and Powell, Fredrick. "A Short-Form Dogmatism Scale for Use in Field Studies," Social Forces, XLIV, (December, 1965), 2. Tmitt, John W. , and Gross, Richard A. "In-Service Education for College Student Personnel." National Association of Student Persomel Administrators, Division of Professional Develop- ment and Standards, Bulletin fl, Jam, 1966. (Monograph) APPENDIX I ADOPTION OF SELECTED STUDENT PERSONNEL PRACTICES INVENTORY 118 zHomm 2 gm ME. 2mg. "flag 7 8880 .30» 8 830 Soc 800 833 8880 m 80: 0:083:00 3 838.8 8 Ho 8338 05 no .8388 05 03 080000 3832000038 .3 8338 083 83300 808 £803 60383080 0.833585 08 8808 838.5 m8 388 8 388005 2 3 8:3 .38 03.38 a .538 .8388 30 88 05 88:05 0853883. 88 83 03 003008 88 8: 838.3 05 3 03.50 M 838 .8888 08 0803800 83 83 3 3 to 838.5 9.3 08008 8.» 300 08: :0» .3 03.50 N 8300 .8388 08 30 83008 08 838380 00 8000.3 08 5 08 8.» 3 .38 30.30. a 838 .0888 8% m8 8: .8880 .80..» 85 08800805 88 8s 05.... 08 8 .8 H0 380 3 838.8 08 .3 .8388 38 8 080000 38038838 3 83309 0809 833:0 .838 8839 £033 3mu8 m.:0333m5 9.3 c3: .38 8.3.30 on cgosm 8530 35. "meg an." Q m a H I1... ”.8080 8 83m. 000 00 80383880 880 8808 038308 8 300 85 8308.: .8880 83028 .308 .8 080 8 .8300 L0 0080 .88 80: 088 8038.5 803055830 08g 300 008 8330.80 08 mESESmé a 0385 a ® 8 H 082 8808 no 8:8 m .0 8 so 0282588 cameo 88 to: 8:8 m5 5 88328.. m 39st e n ® H 8320008 0888 88382 m .D 5 38.3885 mgon 008888 38080. 303 N 038me v m N 6 8.808 03 83803 008 08 0008 . f . 880:8 80s 8580 8 3008300 95880.8 880 08 88880 go 8: 05. "H 0385 w. . m W .o . m. m 08:88 82288 .. r a a . a a a a as e a a e mm W mm. m. w v M ”2032.88 80» 8. 25.8.1 35. 8 .0 .b . .0 e . . w w Wm. WM mu w N .w 020: 0250.38 89 a0 .8 8. 02008 888 M m a a n a We as :k .m s. .mpsomoonn mmcoqmmn on.» opmpomSHHH Zoaon mofiafimxm 8E. "£3092..ng OZHEAELB m8 monBODmnmzH 119 .80330880 0350 03 0000080 zHHmofizaomoaHza m3 cofiufimoa 08800 Hmfiofiuuo po\0:m .mzmaap .cofiuzufipmcoo m.g03003300:3 esp 88:3 maco 0030830 mp 0H50nm cesaoo mane "keoz_** 880.8 83883 80 03 880 3800.88 80383 0833333083 88330 80\008 unmeafisvm mcfi>fimomp oficoppomam Hmcofipmozum soocmmmao .meoop opspoma :prcoo 503:3 0880:00 wcficpwoa mm cmgwfimmo maamofiufiomam mafia: mocmofimom .m mqupmm afinmpwflozom omoaanu 30 mm: .c 0.880 .80» 8 88080. 08>38080 maamfiocmcfig 0:8 mHH8850350 .maamfioom 0088338 03 003>00 pcmpuHSLoog 8 mm mcfiw H830Cmcau 30 mm: 0gp .capwopm mpcmpo 833:5380080 0350:00m map 80 C03300083 883 03 80398 .m $803 028 mcmoa .038 afimmnmaosum 30 cofipmcfinsoo opp ..m.H .=03< 0mwmx088: 30 2800 053 a“ mopmzw 038 Hwfiocmcfiu wcfixmz. .v mewm38800 AHH830C8CHM 008 8HH8823H50 .mfiamfioom Lou 080H>080 memawoga Hmfiumamm 4w pmmp mocmfiofiwopa mwmzwcwa mmfiamcm pwafisfim m mxwu Lo cofimmaecm 803 83H032008088 8 mm 808 8888.3 8388 8 8 £888 .30 385 682. 8 3:58 88 88080 8838885 N 8333308 03580808 Hmcofipamoxm mca>8n 00cm053m 808 0803mmfie08 30 ucmsmocsoccm magma .H monmwczaq mmoHeo0 003000 00 .0000000000 00.0000 0000085 000 003000 0 .3 0.2080088 50 0000.80.80. 00350.0 00000000 00 003000 0003 00030000 0.0000000000000000 00 000000000 000000000“ 0000001000 30 0000 0000000000000 0000000002 .00 000000.» 00 0000.0 00 00000000 000000000 000 0000000 0005001000 0000000000000 000 00008000000 .9 00000000 00000 00 8 00000000008 .80 00000000000 0000 0>00 0008 000000008 8 000000 .0000 0000308 00000 000.80 00 0000000000 0300000000 000 000 00000000 00003 000000 000 .8000“. 60000008 .3 00000 000000000 0000000 .8 00000000 3000 000000000 000 00000 0000030000 03 3000 003000000 0 00,008.30; 000000000 000003 ..0000000000.. 00000200 00,000 .000 00000000 00083 000000 0000 .8000“. 00020800 .00 mzoquRvmm 0739500 00000 00300000: 0030003 8 080 0000 0030000 0000000000 30000000 00 005 000 00000000 00 00 mm 0000 000 0038 0.0000 000 8 030000000800 000 00000008 0000000 0 00 00800 003 0000000 < 1:00 0000000 0000003 0300 000000000 08 000 300 8 00308000 000 0030000008 .00 0030000 0000 000 00300000000 .3 0200 000000000 0000 00 00000000 030033000 02.00 000000000 302 000000 .8 .0000300 .0300? 0000 000000 .00000000 000000000 0000000 000000 0.008300 5000000000 .0000030 003000.000 000080 0003 000000000 300 000000000 0000000088 00 00b .0 .9 008° mo Boga ea? €11 was 36 60000 0.00:0 00205000 Y “ZOFDHHEZH moo.» 00. 70290500 E9 9 mEH 0250442 WE. .00 4.2 8. QzOnmmE mmfimqm 121 .8888 m8» 8 88038 38280838 m6 8388 0.88 8888 .885 @333 5083328 9:0888m5 93 con: 38 .8838. B 3:98 2:580 35. £823. 8x83 883 3.838me 2.8 umfloaonohma 835 8 .meumEozma 98 8mg 8 8 9:88:00 3958 no 258 3.838me 8883 m .8 .3288.“ .588me cum 038588 .8“ 258 3.528me m 05 0838 mg» c8388 8888.88 858888 < , 885.83 1:8 0.833 280385 88883 8 235 8 3 8:858 388 38:35 8 was 05 .mm manna 853828 28 88383 #8888 p85 8 889888 28 5 3538 83338 8 xmmp 05 R8388 ma on: 820228 5 888.5 3888888 88385 m8 8me pm 8 .888 wcflmmgoo < .& oz Hdm 238 3828.3 8 973038 Ea .888 88383 55588 ”858.8me 8.838 on 8 omnmfimmm 88:85 5 4w . Hofiampbmmbm .888 30.8 HSGQESHEm 688858 6858 m5 38.8me 38983 .8 3888 888:8 8883ng 05 888mm» MN 8: 8858 so 8.888 8 5:88:88.“ 28 858mm 989sz .8 .8282: 83m o: 808 .Nm 588.8 888.5 838?“: 358. 85 3055980 .4». Am 559 8 88 Ba 5: 8 88 .8 8838 33m 55 .858 26.888 9583 98 955 flop .8“ 3828888me 8585 238:3 $023 98825 888m 05 6.8885 8888 £88 32083 tad .xmm an 55 .858 8338 an 083. 98 883888ng 83m 8 8835 .8. ozEfim dzszmm ezmmam . 9:88 8288 new .9588 338 8883:? $288 08883 to; £88288 0388882813808 so 2882 833 m8 @883 88598 883.6 .3 383 98238 as ESSEX. Hanan wczbém "onEHHEmzH ~59 OH. ZHSEHE E 9 9?: 0250.58 m5. ho and OH. 920% ESHE 122 a ES“. 38:: .cBaon: .moHuQmL ; m3» 8 oomoaao Edmoflqomodna mwmmzoo 283:3 \ ma cofiwfimma namop Hmaofiuuo‘go mummcSQW Ho cmma ouafioomm< can mzmfi>p coHQSpHumcoo m soap . . 1332: 05 $23 38 oowobo pmwcanfi com .2. ZmELm mp oasonm cesfioo wank anoz** mmmaaoo on» moamoso mmHomea cam mamso >«ccfi on ommwmaop on casonm :oHmeLchH awn: new on: mm Ham: mm Upcomp Hmccompm pcmusum on» so omcfimp:oo mp oflnunw pan: wcficpmocoo mmcfiaoofisw w..m.:.<.< as» ou mocmpozc< .vn mopoomg Hoccompma unmosum Ho Hm>mfippop :oHmeL0ucfi xoasc cam mwmpoum pow mmofi>mu pmafiefim pmspo Lo Eafiuopofie “mcfimmmoopa mums cacopuowam Ho mm: .nn mmaoomm mucopma Lou Emawopa cofiumucoapo Hafiooam <; .N» capwopa noduwucmfigo ms» go ppma a ma smenmmpg mcHEoocH Ham pow Emgmopa mcfiuamg pmeeum umpfiscmp 4 .fin ZoHefipo< .am . Hoogom opasomgm oucfi cofimmfieum wcfixoom mucouzum on cofiumspouca wsfipmcHEmmmHo cam wcfiuomaaoo awcHHmmczoo Ho mmfipfiafipfimcoammp an» ommwfimmm Hmsofi>fivcfi go moauuo Hwfiooam < .mm BEEQaJm Qz< ezmggg mpoommb m4 avg: 025958 E? no 4?. o? onmwmm mmfimqm APPENDIX II 123’ sofipsuuumsH cofiusufiumcH cofiuspfipmcH coHpSuHumcw mswz msaz meaz oswz .<. «coauSpHpmcfi use» mcfimpso Hauaams mapwHSoHupma pmofimcoo pom cane: Eon: .oofiuompa 30: m wcfipaoum pmofimcoo ou opoz :0» «H .m .0 3m: paoum Lo unsoppm on pmpfiu may mamxfia pmoe pmofimcoo no» on 5053 .cofipmosom Loam“: Ho mcofiuSQHumcu opm>fipa wag waos<. .p» .02 .m ii wmmofiuompa Hancompwa achSQm "cofiumEL0ucu mcfizoaaou 05p zaaasm ommmam .cofiuaELOucfi Hmfiucoodgcoo mm ompmopp mp Hafiz mmmcoamoh HH< .N .poumpumficfiscm Hoccompoa unmuSum “mane map an nofiaqmsm on canonm mums HH< SHED émmzmo «xpoz Hmccompoa pamUSpm ca camp so» o>mn Ceca pmpsmpaom ou poHLa mummh m:we.30:. opmofiuuo Hoccompoa pamUSpm.umHno mm cofiufimon ucwmmpa psom mesmmm so» can can: amonppfip ummH pa mmw use» :oHunpfiumcu Ho memz mapfie. mgfimccofiuwmsa wcfipmHano Hmsua>auca Mo mamz umzozbbmemzH 12h APPENDIX III ORIGINAL LETTER larch 6, 1967 Dean John A. Smith All-American University Hmmm, U. S. A. Dear Dean Smith : The questionnaire which is enclosed is being sent to a selected group of chief student personnel adudnistrators in private colleges having a liberal arts program. I am requesting your assistance and coopera- tion in completing and returning the questionnaire. A return stamped envelope has been enclosed for your convenience. As student personnel practices continue to change to meet contemporary needs and as new practices are introduced, I am sure that all of us can benefit from research which indicates how new ideas and practices can be disseminated and adopted more efficiently. 'Iherefore, the under purpose of this questionnaire is to collect information which will allow the investigator to study (1) the dissendmtion rate of new student personnel practices and (2) the extent of adoption of the selected practices contained in the questlomaire. Since all institutions have not been included in this study, your response is both significant and necessary. The results of the pilot study indicate that the questionnaire may be completed in approximately 20 minutes. Your responses to the items will be treated as confi- dential ini'ormtion and complete enormity will be observed in report- ing the results. An analysis of the results iron this questionnaire will be mailed to you. Your response to this questionnaire will assist me greatly toward the completion of nw doctoral dissertation. This study is being conducted under the direction of Dr. Norman Stewart, Chairman of the Department of Counseling and Student Personnel, Michigan State University. I would certainly appreciate your ixmediate attention to this request. Sincerely, Ben Sprunger Associate Dean of Students 125 APPENDIX IV FIRST REMINDER IETTER March 27, 1967 Dean John A. Smith All-American University Hometown, U. S. A. Dear Dean Smith : Approximately three weeks ago you received from me an inventory requesting informtion concerning selected student personnel practices adapted by your institution. The inventory form may at first appear to be complicated; however, you will find it is not difficult and it can be completed in twenty minutes. I realize that at this tune of the year with con- ventions, spring break, and laying plans for next year, the demands upon our time as deans is exceedingly great. It would, however, be extremely helpful if you could complete the inventory and return it to me. The response to this point has been very encouraging. As stated in the letter accompanying the inventory, a copy of the results will be sent to you. I would certainly appreciate your innediate attention to this request. If by chance you have already returned the inventory, please disregard this letter. Sincerely, Ben Sprunger Associate Dean of Students BS :gw 126 APPENDIX V SECOND REMINDER LETTER April 20, 1967 Dean John A. Smith All-American University Hometown, U. S. A. Dear Dean Smith: A few weeks ago, I sent an inventory type questionnaire to your institution and to a number of other private liberal arts colleges. 'Ihe inventory dealt with a number of selected student personnel practices adopted by your institution. As of this date, over 60% of those receiving the questionnaire have returned it. Since I have had no response from you, it is possible that you never received it, or perhaps your busy schedule has not permitted you to give it your immediate attention, and it has been mislaid. Regardless of what may have happened, may I assure you that your response is needed in order to insure an accurate and representative analysis. The inventory form may at first appear to be complicated; however, you will find it is not and can be conpleted in approximately 20 minutes. An analysis of the results will be mailed to you. I am enclosing another inventory questionnaire and a return envelope for your use. Your help in assisting me to complete this study will be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Ben Sprunger Associate Dean of Students BS 21p Enclosures APPENDIX VI CONSULTANTS IN THE WM, FORMULATION AND SAMPLE!) OF THE INSTRUMENTS The following individuals acted as consultants (January - by, 1967) in the formulation and pilot sampling of the instruments: Mr. Walter Block“ Man of Smdents St. Procopius College Lisle, Illinois Dr. Marion Chase" Dean of Students North Central College Naperville, Illinois Dr. Roberta Christie.” Department of Guidance and Student Personnel Services Loyola University Chicago, Illinois Dr. William Demon" Dean of Students Elihurst College Elmhurst, Illinois Dr. Richard Gross" Dean of Students Wheaton College Wheaten, Illinois Dr. James Harvey Dean of Students Harper College Palatine, Illinois Dr. Walter Johnson Dept. of Counseling, Personnel Services 8: Ed. Psycholog Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan Dr. Henry Nelson Higher Education Division U. S. Office of Education Chicago, Illinois Dr. Norma Stewart, Chairman Dept. of Counseling, Personnel Services 8: Ed. Psychology Michigan State Universitnr East lensing, Michigan Dr. Arthur Volle* Professor of Psychology and former Dean of Students Wheaton College Wheaten, Illinois *Served as a pilot sample for testing second instrument. ‘1’"\l.l.. 128 APPENDDC VII TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN STUDENT PERSONNEL WORK Met All Requirements Average Adopters Administrators Innov. Non-Innov. Who Met All. Who Did Not Meet Years Group Group Requirements All Requirements 1 - 3 o o o h3 h - 6 2 3 16 19 7 - 9 h S 15 15 10 - 12 1 2 1h 8 13 - 1 l 2 10 6 l6 & over 1; 0 18 5 Total 12 12 73 95 Y 11.6 8.5 11.8 6.3 AGES OF CHEF STUDENT PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATORS Met All Requirements Average Adopters Administrators Innov. Non-Innov. Who Met All Who Did Not Meet Years Group Group Requirements All Requirements 20-29 0 O 0 11 30-39 6 3 1h hl 1104.9 h 6 31 33 50-59 2 2 23 8 60-over O 1 h 3 Did not indicate 0 O l 0 Total 12 12 73 96 X 38.1; 116.5 10.1 38.? APPENDIX VIII To: From: IE29 Survey of Demographic Data Pertaining to Deans of Students and Student Personnel Administrative Procedures in Liberal Arts Colleges Ben Sprunger Associate Dean of Studen*s Wheaton Cullege Hheaton. Illinois 60187 Directions: There are three sections to be completed. In order to save time. Section I may be completed by your secretary or one of your staff members. Please review it to make sure the information is correct before returning it. Section II and III must be completed by you. Please answer all items in Section II before opening and completing Section III. SECTION I How many full-time undergraduate students were enrolled at your institution at the beginning of fall semester or fall quarter for the 1966-67 academic year? Indicate theinumber in each category who are under your administrative responsibility. 2% FUll-time professional staff (deans. associates, assistants, residence hall directors. union directors. etc.) who have had professional preparation as student personnel workers. Part-time professional staff (List the title of each person and percent of time spent in student personnel work.) Position Percent of Time (Use reverse side of page if additional space is needed.) 330 4. _____ Fun—time (or the equivalent of full-time) nonprofessional staff (secretaries, clerks, receptionist-s, etc.) =br each of the following categories, what were the budget appropriations for your adminis- trative area for the last fiscal year? 5. __ A. Total salary appropriations for all full-time and part-time staff R. B. Total of financial aid monies administered by the insti tution, i.e., institu- tional scholarships, 109113. N. D.E‘.A. Loans, Economic Opportunity Grant, Faderal Work Study Program etc. (Do not include monies received from State Scholarship Agencies, National Merit Winners. unless they are sponsored by your institution, United Student Aid, or state giarantee loan monies.) '7. G Total allocation for travel and expenses to attend professional conferences. 8. D. Total for research. in-service education and consultants whom you bring to your campus a E- macellanaoua 10. F. mat was the total budget appropriation for your adninistrative area for the last fiscal year? (Do not include capital outlay for new residence halls, unions and furnishings for new buildings.) Please indicate each institutional policy- and decision-making committee on which students serve. Indicate if it is considered a major or minor policy-and decision-making committee. Also indicate the extent of student voting, e of Oamnittee Students Have a Vote On: 11. Name of Omnittee aJor Minor All Matters Most Matters ame orNo Matters (Use reverse side of pap if additional space is needed.) 131 SECTION II This section should be completed by the Dean of Students. 12. 13.‘ 14. Please complete all of the items as they pertain to your educational background. Undergraduate. Masters Post Masters Degree Degree work Major Minor Type of Degrees Received 8.8., M.A., Ed.D.,.Ph.D., etc. Year each degree was completed Please indicate in the blanks below the total number of graduate hours you have compiled since completion of your undergraduate degrees. (Include research credit. independent study credit, practicum credit. etc.) semester hours._and/or quarter hours Please indicate the total number of courses which you have had in the folloudng areas. Do not include undergraduate courses. ' Agriculture Anthropology ___ Business Administration ' Educationz' Areas other than guidance, student personnel and higher education Engineering Fine and Applied Arts Guidance. Student Personnel, and/or Administration of Higher Education Humanities and Arts and Letters Natural Science - Psychology: Counseling, Clinical. Experimental and/or Social Psychology Sociology Others- Plaeee 1.3M??? II .II \|2|l.ll II 15. 132 Please check appropriate column for each organization in which you hold membership or in D; n_ot check if members of your depart- which you are the institutional representative. m nt hold membership for which they have paid from their om personal funds. A. General Student Personnel Organizations B. 'U H I: s .9 Q) (1):; 50 Shaw 3 “UNI g 8 ‘3” CH I; H :3» 33 Q I: U (Hg—K ‘1) L4 3 e 5 ~~m am to > u I C a 55? 5e “’5“? afar S U6“! «T H” U0” :3 '05?) 055 ca 83-78 'U 5 8 yrs 0,03 '5' 13’ 8 tug” >. £3 :1: w :3 maggfis) 1. American College Personnel Association (Arm) 2. American Personnel and Guidance Assoc. (APGA) 3. Canadian Association of University Student Personnel $rvices (CAUSPS) Cblle Student Personnel Institute 4. (CS): 5. Conference of Jesuit )Student Personnel Administrators (GIEPA 8. muncil of Student Personnel Associa- tions in Higher Education ((DSPA) '7. Evening Student Personnel Association 8. National Association of Student Personne l Administrators (MAS? A) 9. Student Personnel Association for Teac Aer Education (S’ATE) 10. National Association Of Womens Deans and Counselors (NAWDC) Related Student Personnel Organizations 1. Administrators of College and University OounselingrOenters 2. American Association of (bllegiate Reg- istrars and Admissions Officers (AACRAO) 3. American (bllege Health Assoc. (ACHA) 4. American Psychological Assoc. (APA) ‘= American Rehabilitation (bunseling Association (ARCA) 6. Association of college Admissions Oomselors ( ACAO '7. Association of Oolle Unions - International (Aw-I 8. Association of (bllege and University Housing Officers (ACIJ’HO 15. B. C. 133 (Continued) Related Student Personnel Organization(cont) 9. Association for the Coordination of University Reliiious Affairs (ACCRA) 10. Association for Counselor Education and Supervision (ACES) 11. Association for School. College and University Staffing (ASCUS) ’ 12. College Entrance Extermination Board (CREE) 13. The College Placement Council, Inc.(CPC) 14. Midwest Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators 15. Midwest Association of imiversit‘ty; Student Employment Directors (M SED) 16. National Association of College and University Chaplains and Directors of Religious Life (NACUC) 17. National Association of Cbllege and University Traffic and SecurityDirectors 18. National Association for Fbreim Student Affairs (NAVSA) 19. National Cbuncil of College Publications Advisers (NCCPA) a). National Vocational Guidance Association iNvoA) . 21. Oriental Directors Conference Organizations of Colleges, Universities and igher Education (Selected) 1. American Association of Junior Colleges LAAIC) 2. American Council on Education (ACE) 3. Association for Higher Education 4. Association of American Colleges (AAC) Others (List Organization) 5. 6. '7. 16. 17. 18. 13h Please make as accurate an estimate as possible of the number of profes- sionally related speeches you have made since September 1965. (Last two years Please make as accurate an estimate as possible of the number of times you traveled as a professional consultant since September 1965. Please indicate each professionally related conference ou have attended from the period of July 1. 1885 through.June an, 1967 ( ast two years). Name of conference City State (Use reverse side of page if additional space is needed.) 10. Please indicate each trip, not including attendance at professional conferences, ' you have taken to observe specific student personnel practices at other insti- tutions from July 1, 1965 through June 30, 1967 (last two years). Practice or facility to which you traveled to observe City State 3. 4. 5. 8. ‘—TUse reverse side of page if‘adaftithéI‘épaee—fs‘neeuem.i Does your college have an institutional policy restricting the number of conferences and number of miles allowed for travel? (Yes or no) If yes, briefly indicate the restrictions of the policy: 135 21. Since September 1963: how many professionally and/or academically related Journal articles or ooks have you had published or have been presently ' accepted for publication? (Lg not include book reviews.) Title of Book or Article ' Publisher Date I (Use reverse side of page if additional space is needed.) 22. Since September 1963, howrmany institutionally conducted research projects which have included empirical hypotheses have you conducted or participated in? (DQ_ngtlinclude questionnaires or other descriptive data which you have supplied via.ma to other researchers.) Title of Project Sponsor Date (Use reverse side of page if additional space is needed.) When establishing new student personnel policies, revising old ones, and/or discarding obsolete ones, to what extent does the faculty become involved? 23. (Place a mark on the continuum which best indicates faculty involvement.) 1 Paculty highly ._/ \l_ Faculty has involved ‘\ "‘ relatively no involvement 136 SECTION III Please respond to each item according to your personal feelings. I am sure you will find yourself agreeing strongly with sime statements, disagreeing Just as strongly with others, and perhaps uncertain about others. Please indicate in the blank at the left of each item how much you agree or disagree with it. Please respond to each item by writing +3, +2, +1, -1, -2, or -3 depending on how you feel in each case, using the folTowing numbers: +3 I agree very much. -3 I disagree very much. +2 I agree on the whole. f2 I disagree on the whole. +1 I agree a little. -1 I disagree a little. 1. Man on his own is a helpless and miserable creature. 2. Once I get wound up in a heated discussion I Just can't stop. 3. I am a methodical person in whatever I do. 4. Fundamentally, the world we live in is a pretty lonesome place. 5. A person who gets enthusiastic about too many causes is likely to be a pretty 'wishy-washy' sort of a person. 6. In a discussion I often find it necessary to repeat myself several times to make.sure I‘m being understood....... .. .. . ... ................. '7. I do not like everyone I know. 8. I often become so wrapped up in something I am doing that I find it difficult'to ‘ turn my'attention‘to ‘Other'matters. ‘ ' ' 9. There are two kinds of eople in the mrld: those who are for truth and those who are against t e truth. if). A man who does not believe in some great cause has not really lived. 11. Once in a while I laugh at a dirty Joke. 12. I'd like it if I could find someone who would tell me how to solve my personal problems. 13. To compromise with our political opponents is dangerous because it usually leads to the betrayal of our own side. 14. The United States and Russia have Just about nothing in common. 15. I would rather win than lose in a game. 16. A person who thinks primarily of his om happiness is beneath contempt. 17. If I could get into a movie without paying and be sure I was not seen I would probably do it. 18. It is better to be a dead hero than a live coward. 19. _ There is usually only one best way to solve most problems. so. There are a number of persons I have come to hate because of the things they stand for. 137 APPENDIX IX ORIGINAL LETTER June 17, 1967 Dean John A. Smith All-American University Hometown, U. S. A. Dear Dean Smith: You will find enclosed two copies of the questionnaire I referred to in our phone conversation on June 16, 1967. It is only necessary to complete one and return it in the enclosed stamped envelome Since I may need to substitute an additional phone can in place of a personal interview, the second copy my be useful as a source of reference. Perhaps you may also wish a copy for your file. Please be assured that the information you supply will be held in strictest confidence. This information and the analysis of data will neither indicate the personal nor institutional source. The data are to be used as part of my doctoral dissertation. Dr. N. R. Stewart of Michigan State University is serving as the director of the dissertation. If possible, I would appreciate your returning the questionnaire before July 1, 1967. Needless to say, I am extremely grateful for your willingness to assist me in this project. Sincerely, Ben Sprunger Associate Dean of Students BS:ss Enclosures 138 APPENDIX X REMINDER LETTER July 8, 1967 Dean John A. Smith All-American University Hometown, U. S. A. Dear Dean Smith : A few weeks ago I sent to you a questionnaire following our phone conversation in which you agreed to participate in additional research for my dissertation. I suggested, if possible, that the questionnaire should be returned by July 1, 1967. Since I have made arrangements to submit the data for analysis at the Computer Center, Michigan State University, on July 21;, it is extremely important that you return the questionnaire within the next week. This will allow me approfimately a week to put the data in the necessary form for submitting to the computer. I would certainly appreciate your immediate attention to this request. If by some chance you have already returned the questionnaire, please disregard this letter. Sincerely, Ben Sprunger Associate Dean of Students BS:ss 139 8.Va.mamv.~¥ mo.Vas34Vh* «Newtawnmralmc fin... H3... #2:... lemma... swam. man... «No. e8. men. 33%.... Madden cone wuum Re... a. 8m... 08... m8. :8... m8... 48... men. he Tam SH... «8. mom. :8. So. can. 5... m3. :mo... assoc @3308 S than «aged Yum «8.- SN. mmm. can. So. was. 05. 30... new... Basso 0838 detonate mam an #3:. how. amom. m3: tame. SN. a. *84: cognac 8536 Be Houseman Arum a8. «8. own. :2. 98.. «R. 8H. 05. ”mm... cases .280 3838 Tum in. same. #3:. the. m3... same. «mm. «8. ma... newsman Sweets «hm 2h. men. an. «an. .30... 13. emu. mom... m8... .834 afloammouea fl pesahofiu Tum *Hom. own. them. seem: 8m. 8m. 50.. smog... 58 .3. e333. 3:: H83. one 3n. has. omm... n8. So. as. Sm. 15h. asowmuaob 8m «9.5 swam. ewes... awn». emu. can. *wow: .3 ooEomueH e5 sweeten s8 a few am: .. amum. Re. So. *mmm... Sufism “ham .8». 283m he a TE 8:... Hum: 3H... #2. finance 8. “Em do 038 in age. emu. fin... €22.35 seasonal raw an. 3... gadgets Snow 5 p384 Sewage «La 2.....- eofigom sense 5 $23 fiancee de gecko cownmeaho «hm Tam e .. o Emaeogfimfimé DEBAOZH gomo ZOHmEHmo E. HEN—HE [ ES ZOHBqummoo 029.8 0 HM NHmzmmmd mo Ho. V.d u mflm v.9 ** mo.Vns:o:V.u* «wuwIaNumunlfiu «no. Hum. 80. SH? mom.n wwH.u 4mm,- usopmhm modaom coho mlwm nmo. wmo. oflf mno.| an... ace. mm< plum may. mm mum. 0mm. HHN. mac. nomnsoo hMOHOfioom a naked .onnpc4 oumw *wflo. mum. he. *5. essence codewom Hunchbmnom maww Haw. he. came. nonnaoo sensuasc use Honcomnom arww 8m. omo. p395 assoc 3335 mam has. moonwon namesake wuwm .oowm< HmnOfiwmomoum :H ensembaoan I m 58 an usages mead: HANS. Sam Hebuna Henchmmomonm new a bnflm .um newbmwmlnH use nonmomom you a on m newsman 33m .8.“ seesaw an a anm summefim 8 $st 03% slim pcoso>flo>nH eondonom nldm uofisfioa sauce 5 $33 Because «Am defimeAOh wofiflom :H anwnw< awesome HIHW Queue downopwno w-~m h-~m ohm mnmm 41m mam N-Nm H-Nm mHmfleoEfiHmfimg QmeAOZH Abomo KOHMMHHmo mBHS NHma¢z ZOHB