1

ABSTRACT

A STUDY OF ATTRITION AMONG SELECTED
FORMER STUDENT PERSONNEL WORKERS

Q!
Qt
Walter B. Shaw

The Problem

The general problem of this study was to better under-
stand some of the dynamics of student personnel attrition.
Specifically, the problem of central concern was the deter-
mination of whether various sub-groups within the student
affairs profession left the profession for different reasons.
The sub-groups were: (1) by category of former position,
(2) by sex, (3) by enrollment of the institution of former
student personnel employment, (4) by the presence or absence
of significant academic student personnel or closely related
training in their backgrounds.

A secondary, but important objective of the study was
to better understand the reasons why former student per-

sonnel workers left the profession.

Walter B. Shaw

The Method

 

A research instrument was developed to collect data
from former student personnel workers by inquiring into
their perceptions of their prior position and the reasons
they had for leaving that position for another profession.
The sample was identified through the cooperation of 737
(87.2%) of the voting delegates to NASPA, who supplied the
names and addresses of people who had been in their depart-
ments within the past three years, but were no longer in
the student personnel profession. The other requirements
for inclusion into the sample were that they:

1. formerly held one of the generic positions of
dean of students, dean of men, dean of women,

director of housing, or were immediate assistant(s)
to one of those positions.

2. had shown a commitment to the profession.

. 3. had reasons for attrition that excluded death,
retirement or temporary leave.

Usable instruments were returned from 360 former
student personnel workers. This number represented approx-
imately 80% of the sample. flgd 5TY“ ‘Wn0‘ y“)

The null hypotheses were tested by an analysis of
'variance of eight factors derived through a factor analysis
(If the data. Frequency distributions were also constructed
for each question of the instrument for the total group and

for each category of former position.

walter B. Shaw

Findings of the Study

 

Significant differences in reasons for leaving the
student personnel profession were found by category of for-
mer position and by the presence or absence of significant
academic student personnel training. No significant results
were found for sub-groups by sex or enrollment of the insti-
tution of prior employment. Concerning the nature of the
former position, differential perceptions were discovered
only by category of position.

Important findings from the frequency distributions
were that "internal politics," lack of appreciation by
superiors, level of bureaucracy, level of decision making,
resistance of the institution to innovation or change, and
perceived resistance of much of the institution to the
goals of the student personnel department were the most
frequent reasons given for leaving the profession.

Major Conclusions and Implications
for Further Research

 

l. The research instrument proved to be adequate to dis-
criminate between categories of at least two sub-groups.

2. Attrition from student personnel work is frequent and
possibly increasing; 652 former student personnel
.workers were reported from 737 institutions.

3. People from different positions tended to leave the

profession for different reasons.

Walter B. Shaw

People with significant academic training in student
personnel work tended to leave the profession for rea—
sons different from those with no student personnel
academic training.

Reasons dealing with openness and interpersonal rela-
tions were the most frequently cited causes of attrition.
Additional research is needed in the area of student
personnel attrition and mobility. A longitudinal study
of student personnel graduates, an examination of the
relationship of training and mobility and attrition,
and a study to determine whether or not attrition is

increasing are all especially needed.

A STUDY OF ATTRITION AMONG SELECTED

FORMER STUDENT PERSONNEL WORKERS

BY

Walter 3: Shaw

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

College of Education
Department of Administration and Higher Education

1970

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author expresses his sincere appreciation to the
members of his Guidance Committee, Dr. Iwao Ishino, Dr. Vandel
Johnson, Dr. Eldon Nonnamaker, and Dr. Louis Stamatakos. He
is especially grateful to Dr. Nonnamaker for his review of
the rough drafts of the study and to his constant calming
influence. He also wishes to thank Dr. W. Harold Grant for
his assistance in the design of this study.

To his loving wife, Nancy Joe, whose patience and con-
stant support, in spite of pregnancy, helped to make this

study possible, he expresses his deepest gratitude.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS I

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . .
LIST OF TABLES O O O O O O O O O O C C 0

LIST OF DIAGRAMS . . . . . . . . . . . .

Chapter

I. THE PROBLEM: ITS NATURE AND IMPORTANCE. .
Introduction. . . . . . . . .
Statement of the Problem. . . . . .
Importance of the Study . . . . . .
Definition of Terms . . . . . . .
Outline of the Study . . . . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . .
II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE. . . . . . .
Introduction. . . . . . . .
Factors Internal to the College Student
Personnel Profession . . . . . .
Factors Frequent Within the Profession .

Factors Within Individual Student
Personnel Departments . . . . . .
Independent Factors . . . . . . .
smary O O O O O O O O O O 0
III. DESIGN OF THE STUDY . . . . . . . .

Introduction. . . . . .
The POpulation of Interest .
Identification of the Sample
Surveying the Sample . . .
The Instrument . . . . .
The Pre-test. . . . .

Administration of the Instrument
Format of the Analysis of the Results
Testable Hypotheses . . . . . .
Statistical Analysis . . . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . .

iii

Page

ii

vi

Chapter Page

IV 0 ANAI‘YSIS OF THE DATA 0 O O O I O O O 53
Analysis Format. . . . . . 53
Brief Review of the Nature of the Sample 53
Brief Review of the Instrument. . . . 54

Brief Review of the Statistics Used and
Their Rationale . . . . . . . . 55
Results of the Factor Analysis. . . . 55
Presentation of the Data. . . . . . 58
Part I (environment) . . . . . . 59
Part II (reasons for leaving) . . . 67
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . 87
V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . 89
smary O O O O O O O O O O O 89
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . 98
Recommendations. . . . . . . . . lOl
Implications for Further Research. . . 103
BIBLIOGRAPHY. O O O O O O O O O O O O O 106
”PENDICES O O O O O O O O I O O O O 0 ll 2
APPENDIX A--Attrition Study Instrument . . . 113

APPENDIX B--Letters to NASPA Voting Delegates and
to Research Sample. . . . . . 123

APPENDIX C--Frequency Distributions Not Included
in Text of Document . . . . . . 128
VITA O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O l 3 2

iv

Table

10.

ll.

12.

13.

14.

15.

LIST OF TABLES

NASPA.voting delegates cooperating with study. .

Frequency of attrition

Per cent of former student personnel worker
sample returning completed instrument.

Items contained in Factors of Part I. .

Items contained in Factors of Part II .

Frequency distribution
Factor I, Part I. .

Frequency distribution
Factor II, Part I .

Frequency distribution
Factor III, Part I .

Frequency distribution
Factor IV, Part I .

Frequency distribution
Factor I, Part II .

Frequency distribution
Factor II, Part II .

Frequency distribution
Factor III, Part II.

Frequency distribution
Factor IV, Part II .

of

of

of

of

of

of

of

of

items

_items

items

items

items

0 0

items

items

items

contained

contained

contained

contained

contained

contained

contained

contained

Stated major reasons for leaving student

personnel work . .

F-ratios for differences in "reasons for
leaving student personnel work” and perceptions
of the former environment. .

in

in

in

in

in

in

in

in

Page
35
35

37
56
57

60

63

66

68

70

75

77

79

80

82

LIST OF DIAGRAMS r

Diagrams Page

1. Model of Repeated Measures Analysis of
variance 0 o o o o o o o o o o 0 50

vi

CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM: ITS NATURE AND

IMPORTANCE

Introduction

 

Thomas B. Dutton, writing in NASEA: The Journal of
the Association of Deans and Administrators of Student
Affairs, said that research needed to be done to determine
". . . what factors influence attrition or continuation in
(student personnel work)" (9:341). The question Dr. Dutton
posed is a vital one in this important and growing pro-
fession.

The rate of growth of American higher education is
creating a demand for additionally trained, experienced
and/or otherwise qualified practitioners in the student
personnel profession; at the same time it appears that
relatively large numbers of needed people are leaving at
this important period in the evolution of the profession.
One seldom attends a professional conference without hearing
of various deans who are no longer serving in the area of
student affairs. Little had been done to directly deter-
mine just why there is such attrition, although the liter-

ature reflected that a significant amount of thought had

been given to the problem.

Louis C. Stamatakos, recognizing the dearth of infor-
mation in the area, submitted a resolution to the American
College Personnel Association annual business meeting in
1966 proposing that examination be made of the ”conditions
of employment" (42) of college student personnel workers.
The motion was tabled and referred to Commission I: Organ-
ization, AdministratiOn and Development of Student Personnel
Services. That was four years ago and still nothing has
been done. Efforts need to be made to better understand
the complete environment in which student personnel workers
operate, and special attention must be given to those areas
that may influence the professional to abandon the entire
field. The loss of many of these valuably experienced
people can place a difficult strain on inStitutions and the
profession at an important time in history.‘

Colleges and universities are undergoing major changes
today in reaction to the problems which have surfaced par-
tially as a result of increased size and the often related
phenomenon of student unrest. Students are demanding less
regulation of their lives while in college, and at the same
time are crying for a greater interest in them as human
beings. The college student personnel worker of today finds
himself directly in the middle of this change.

In the past, colleges felt that often student personnel
positions could be adequately filled with a warm but firm

person. Special training or experience in counseling and

student personnel work was considered appropriate but not
necessarily essential. This attitude was workable in the
day in which the dean was only the person whom the institu-
tion had assigned the tasks of enforcing the rules and
paternalistically caring for the personal needs of students.
Today, in most institutions of higher education, additional
duties have accrued and many of the traditional roles have
decreased in importance, or have been eliminated. The
benevolent authoritarian as dean is no longer an appropriate
choice for this sensitive position. The friendly philosophy
professor seldom can effectively fill the dean's position;
the present need is for professionally trained and experi-
enced student personnel workers. Dutton's and Stamatakos'
concerns implied that many of these well qualified people
are leaving student personnel work, and time is no longer
on the side of a non-professional or inexperienced person
who could be named as a replacement.

However, there is a partial alternative to that of
finding a replacement; and that is to avoid the creation of
aan.attrition caused vacancy. In order to keep from having
axn.opening we must first discover just why people choose to
leave. Only after better understanding the dynamics of the
mobility can the problem be effectively attacked. This
research study was hopefully an early step in the complex

process of understanding college student personnel attrition.

In summary, increasing demands such as a changing role,
student activism and alienation, increased institutional
size and others, are being confronted by contemporary student
personnel workers. At the same time evidence from various
sources indicated that attrition from the profession was
increasing, possibly because of some of these pressures. A
more precise understanding of the effects of these demands
and just what the current and former student personnel
workers think and feel about them was necessary. Only
through systematic study of the problem will institutions
be able to intelligently adapt to avoid some of the pitfalls,
and to blunt the effect of others. This study was an

attempt to provide some of this needed information.

Statement of the Problem

The general problem of this study was to determine if
former student personnel sub-groups meeting certain criteria,
which will be stated later, left the student affairs pro-
fession for different reasons. The study's objective was
accomplished in two stages. First, former student personnel
wuorkers were asked to evaluate the environment of their
former positions on various criteria identified by writers
in the literature as areas of potential difficulty. Second,
they were asked whether these same elements of their former

positions influenced their decision to leave the profession.

Assumptions

 

It was necessary to assume the following situations in
order to allow for the accurate testing of the hypotheses,
which will be stated later. The assumptions were:

1. Former student personnel workers left the pro—
fession for conscious and identifiable reasons.

2. The research instrument, to be discussed later,
elicited those reasons for leaving in response to
the appropriate questions contained in that
instrument.

3. Former student personnel workers left the pro-
fession for; (a) reasons intrinsic within the
profession; (b) reasons frequent within the
profession, but not central to its purposes,
goals and objectives; (c) reasons specific to
individual institutions; or (d) reasons other
than those within the profession.

Hypotheses

 

The hypotheses in this study may be stated as follows:

1. Student personnel workers in different positions
left the profession for different reasons.

2. Male former student personnel workers left the
profession for reasons different from female
workers.

3. Student personnel workers from larger institutions
left the profession for reasons different from
those workers of smaller institutions.

4. Student personnel workers with significant academic
training in student personnel work or counseling
left the profession for reasons different from those
with no significant academic training in student
personnel work or counseling.

Importance of the Study

 

The general problem of the study was indicated in the

Preceding introduction. The presence of a student personnel

division in most of the colleges and universities in the
United States today presupposes that they are expected to
fulfill some function that contributes to the accomplishment
of the goals and objectives of the institution. The term
"student personnel" indicates that the center of concern for
the student personnel worker is the student. Likewise,
American higher education traditionally has been concerned
with more than just the classroom education of the student.
Even a cursory review of the history of American higher
education will readily indicate that the classroom has been
seen only as a part (albeit, an important part) of the
college experience. This concern for the student as a

total person is probably the area of greatest difference
between American higher education and European colleges and
universities which have so strongly influenced it. The
extra-classroom concerns, or co-curriculum as it is frequently
referred to today, have ranged from the concept of the
teaching of personal discipline and religious orientation,
as in colonial education described by Rudolph (36), to that
of student development as elaborated on by Grant (12).

The near absence of voices crying that we should be
concerned with the intellect only as it relates to the
classroom indicates increasing recognition of the importance
of the co-curriculmm. The present dominant feeling is one

of increasing realization of the ecosystem1 in which the

 

1Ecosystem--A system formed by the interaction of a
community of organisms with their environment.

student operates, and how it affects his development and
growth in all areas, including his intellect.

In order to achieve the objectives of the profession,
the student personnel worker of today must be a scholar of
the student ecosystem so that he will be able to change
the student's environment, enabling the environment to
interfere less with and contribute more to the goals and
objectives of the institution. This formidable task requires
a specialist whose expertise is gained only through thorough
training and experience. Whenever one of these specialists
left a college, it was a loss to that institution; but when
he left the entire profession, it was even more serious.

Of course not all of the people who leave college
student personnel work are experts in student affairs and
the college environment; however, many do have much'expertise
in specific student personnel areas. Whenever a number of
them leave the profession, their departure can hinder the
accomplishment of the goals and objectives of the institu-
tion. For this reason the dynamics of the mobility need -
to be better understood. This study is important in that
it was designed to increase our knowledge in the area of

student personnel attrition.

Definition‘of‘Terms
Student‘Personnel'WOrker.--For the purpose of this
study a student personnel worker was considered to be a

person who is employed in an institution of higher education

as either dean of students, dean of men, dean of women,
director of the student personnel housing program, or
immediate assistants to any of these positions.

Dean of Students.--This is a generic term for the

 

person who performs the duties traditionally assigned to

the dean of students. He is the chief student personnel
administrator in the institution. In a few cases, primarily
the larger universities, both the nominal dean of students
and the vice-president for student affairs would fall into
this category.

Dean of Men.--This title is a generic term for the

 

person who performs the duties traditionally assigned to
the dean of men. Another frequent term for this position
is assistant or associate dean of students--men.

Dean of WOmen.--This generic term was used to identify

 

the person who performs the duties traditionally assigned
to the position entitled dean of women. Assistant or asso—
ciate dean of students--women, is also a frequent title for
this position.

Director of Housing.--This term identified the person

 

who is responsible for the student personnel aspects of the
housing program. Other frequent titles for this category
include, assistant or associate dean of students--housing,
or dean of housing programs.

Immediate Assistants to the above positions.--An

immediate assistant was considered to be a student personnel

worker one level below, and directly reporting to, one of'
the four previously defined positions. Some common titles
found in the generic positions included assistant dean of
men, assistant dean of women, assistant director of housing,
and assistant dean of students.

Significant Graduate Work in College Student Personnel.--
This term was defined as at least a minor in a graduate pro-
gram (either at master or doctoral level) in college student
personnel work, or in a closely related area.

Commitment to the Student Personnel Profession.--

 

Commitment was defined, for the purpose of this study, as
having completed significant graduate work in college

student personnel or in a closely related area and/or having
two or more years experience in a full-time student personnel
position.

Attrition.--Attrition is leaving a college student

 

{personnel position for reasons other than death, retirement,
or temporary leave.

Former Student Personnel Worker.--For the purpose of
this study, a former student personnel worker was a person
vfluo had met the criteria for "student personnel worker?
sometime during the past three years, who had not died or
retired, and who was not now holding an active student

personnel position.

10

Outline of the Study

Chapter II contains a review of the literature. Par-
ticular emphasis is placed on areas of perceived dissatis-
faction in college student personnel work as expressed by
the authors reported in the survey. The review is grouped
into (1) a discussion of elements central to the goals of
the profession; (2) a discussion of elements frequent within
the profession but not intrinsic in its basic objectives;
(3) a discussion of elements within specific individual
institutions; and (4) a discussion of factors independent
of, or a combination of, the first three areas.

Methodology and the rationale for the procedures used
in conducting the study will be discussed in Chapter III.
The third chapter explains the statistical analysis used in
the study along with the basic assumptions that might affect
the design and results. Chapter III also includes a descrip-
tion of the instrument used in the investigation and a dis-
cussion of the evolution and appropriateness of the format of
the data. Also included will be a presentation of the data
and the analysis that was used.

Chapter IV is devoted to a discussion of the data.

Chapter V concludes the presentation with a summary
of the study and the conclusions that can be drawn from the
results. Implications for the student personnel profession
are discussed and recommended additional research is

delineated.

11

Summary

Elements within college student personnel work which
could cause increasing attrition were indiCated by people
such as Thomas Dutton, Louis Stamatakos and others. Given
the rapid growth rate in American higher education, coupled
with growing student unrest and student demands for a more
personalized education, increased attrition is a potentially
serious problem.

The review of the literature in Chapter II indicated
that little in the way of systematic examination of college
student personnel attrition had been done. This lack of
data dictated the need for additional investigation in the
area.

The general purpose of this study was to better under-
stand some of the dynamics of the mobility of student personnel
attrition. The general purpose was accomplished in two ways.
First, was the discovery of whether certain sub-groups within
the student personnel profession left for different reasons.
The sub-groups studied included the generic positions of dean
of students, dean of men, dean of women, director of housing,
and immediate assistants to each of these positions. Other
sub-groups included were those as indicated by differences
in sex, enrollment of the institution of the former position,
and degrees of academic student personnel training of the
former student personnel worker. Second, was a better under-
standing of just why these same former student personnel

workers left the profession.

12

The goals of this study were accomplished through a
questionnaire and the resulting statistical analysis, as
discussed in Chapter III, which is further examined in the
discussion in Chapter IV. Chapter V summarizes the study,
states conclusions that may be drawn from the results, and
discusses implications that this study has for additional

research.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Introduction

 

This chapter is devoted to a review of the literature
pertinent to a study of attrition of college student per-
sonnel administrators.

A great deal of speculation and research has been.
reported in the literature concerning aspects of the student
personnel profession which may influence the perceived
satisfaction or dissatisfaction of people employed in those
positions. However, nothing in the literature of the pro—
fession was found which systematically investigated actual
reasons for attrition. Because of the lack of direct
investigation into the reasons of student personnel attri-
tion, this review must be limited to areas which could lead
to unhappiness and dissatisfaction in college student
personnel work.

For the purpose of clear presentation, the discussion
of the related literature will be divided into four parts.
The first section will deal with factors that are generally

felt to be intrinsic within the profession of college

student personnel work. The second section will be addressed

to factors which are caused by the individual colleges or

13

14

universities rather than those that arise from the student
personnel profession. Thirdly, factors frequent within
individual student personnel divisions, but generally felt
to be somewhat independent of the goals and objectives of
the profession as a whole,will be discussed. Finally, the
fourth part will deal with a discussion of factors inde-
pendent of, or a combination of, the first three. Chapter
II will be concluded by a brief summary.

Factors Internal to the College
Student Personnel Profession

 

 

Throughout the brief history of the college student
personnel profession, student personnel divisions have had
the responsibility for the quasi—legal aspects of student
behavior. Austin (3) reported that the quasi-legal respon-
sibilities hinder the dean in fulfilling his proper role,
i.e. as a liaison between the students and the administration.
The dean must play two contradictory roles, according to
Austin, and he also often has to act as both the prosecutor
and judge in student disciplinary affairs. These two
functions, along with an investigatory role, can often cause
difficulties in meeting other goals and objectives in
student personnel work.

Dutton, Appleton and Birch, in a study of NASPA chief
student personnel administrators and other key college or

university officers, indicated that Austin's thinking is

15

supported by some empirical findings. The three researchers
reported that:
It appears that (chief personnel administrators) feel
that discipline interferes with counseling and renders
the dean less effective as a source of help to the
student (10: 6).

Mueller (28) discussed three other inconsistancies
within the student personnel profession which could contri-
bute to the dissatisfaction a student personnel dean might
feel. First, she recognized a real conflict between the
goals and objectives of the profession and many of the
realities of contemporary American higher education. Ele-
ments contributing to the conflict could include inter-
departmental jealousies and territoriality and the assignment
by the institution of tasks that actually interfere with the
accomplishment of student personnel goals, an example of
which was previously discussed by Austin.

Nonnamaker (29) also referred to some instances where
moderate faculty resistance was experienced when student
personnel departments assumed a responsibility for academic
advisement.

Increasing involvement in academic advising is indica—
tive of other changes that are occurring in student personnel
‘work today. Mueller (28) also expressed her concern for a

dilemma in authority caused by the role transition from the

rapidly fading in loco parentis control, to the realities of

 

today's world. She further stated that the current situa-

tion in college student personnel work had caused added

16

uncertainity and frustration in some deans. She saw a
second dilemma in the goal of encouraging social development
in the midst of the current educational bureaucracy. The
apparent causes are conflicts between different elements
within the college community. These cross-purposes,
ambiguities and inconsistancies could strain the talents
and patience of any dean.

Traditionally college administrators, including
student personnel workers, had been expected to show
strong loyalty to the institution. They had been expected
to refrain from criticism of the institution publicly, and
sometimes privately. Klotsche and Butler (20) reported
that student personnel workers needed to define an area
of "professional freedom" for themselves similar to the
"academic freedom" of their faculty colleagues. This was
felt necessary because the lack of a clearly defined form
of professional freedom, in addition to other uncertain
elements within the profession, could lead to eventual
dissatisfaction. A form of "professional freedom" could
lead to a clearer sense of professional identity.

Shaffer believed that student personnel workers need
to have an independent professional identity, and listed
four characteristic elements that he felt should be present.
The four elements were that they:

I. perceive themselves as a part of the instituv
tional environment.

l7

2. continue their professional growth.

3. emphasize the student's responsibilities in
securing his education.

4. strive to preserve the mental health of the
institution and its students (38: 179).

At least two research studies have been addressed to
the identification of elements in student personnel work
which practitioners must adapt to in order to effectively
function in a college student affairs position.

Foy (11), in his survey of 1,300 student personnel
affiliates of the National Association of Student Personnel
Administrators (NASPA) found unhappiness related to the
number of years of experience in the profession. The two
most frequent causes of dissatisfaction were both age
related; they were "student activism" and "administration."
Student personnel workers with the fewer years of experience
tended to be more dissatisfied with administration than
student activism. For those workers with more time on the
job, the findings were reversed. Foy also asked the
practicing student personnel administrators for the reasons
of their predecessor's leaving. His findings are below:

Reason for Predecessor's Percentage
Leaving Former Position

09

Not known

Promotion

Other position preferred
Unsuccessful

Released

Illness

Retirement

Death

New position

NH

hHwNU'Imobw
cocoon...

CHQWUIQUIQSD

w

18

Position to which Predecessor Percentage
Moved

No answer %
Don't know

PrOmotion in SPW

Lateral move in SPW

Demotion in SPW

Promotion in an education field
College teaching

Public schools

Graduate school

Business or industry

Government

On leave

Illness

Retirement

Death

New position

Marriage

Religious service

h‘ H
meHmwowwmwoqwoqwo

N

3
9
3
4
0
6
8
3
7
O
9
6
0
8
1
0
7
9 (11: 73)
1

Another research study, done by Upcraft in 966 (45),
involved the chief student personnel administrators in
universities with an enrollment of more than 10,000 students.
Upcraft found that the "ideal" college student personnel
worker, in the eyes of a sample of nearly 90 chief adminis-
trators, was seen as; a male, between ages 30 and S9,
needing no specific previous experience in educational
administration, student personnel administration, and/or
experience in college teaching; he should hold a doctorate.
Participation in community affairs was not seen as important,
but involvement in university matters was valuable. He
should have a close relationship with the faculty and be
concerned with research and evaluation in his department.

Those college student personnel workers surveyed felt

that public relations was an important part of the position.

19

The chief student personnel officer should allow students

a great deal of freedom and involve them in university
governance. He should, of course, know student leaders on

a personal basis. Participation in the activities of his
profession and in the decision making process of the
institution were also viewed favorably, as was some autonomy
from the president. Upcraft also reported that the size of
the institution apparently affected the chief student
personnel administrator's perception of his role.

Factors Frequent Within the
Profession

 

 

Several writers referred to certain areas that are
common across the college student personnel profession, not
central to the profession, but which could influence some
to leave the profession.

The growth of the college from one of a handful of
staff with interrelating duties to the highly specialized
multiversity frequently removed the student personnel dean
from the academic function of the university. Sheldon (39)
reported her perception that student personnel workers
were becoming more and more dissatisfied with the growing
estrangement of the dean from the academic affairs in the
institution. Sheldon also felt that there was a decided
scarcity of women in policy making positions in today's
colleges and universities. She added that this scarcity
contributed to the unhappiness of many women in college

student personnel work.

20

Nygreen (30) appeared to closely agree with Sheldon.
He wrote that many student personnel workers considered
themselves to be in only marginal academic positions. He
credited this factor with influencing many of the ablest
practitioners to leave the student personnel field for
teaching or administration. Nygreen observed that when
many or most of the elder statesmen of a profession leave
the field, as he sees them doing in college student personnel
work, their departure belittles the field as a profession.

Like Nygreen, Koile (21) thought that too often today
student personnel services tend to remain on the fringe of
the educational program of the institution. Many people
enter the college student personnel profession because they
want to be broadly involved in the education of the young.
Finding oneself on the outside of the actual educational
process, while holding these hopes and expectations, could
be very disheartening and conceivably lead to attrition.

Professional commitment to a field is possibly an
important.factor in longevity in that field. [Many institu-
tions have traditionally not sought professional student
personnel workers to fill the appropriate positions.
(hmmeron (5), in a research study, found that 25% of the
student personnel deans in the profession at the time of
Ibis study (1965), entered the field only because they were
assigned to it from some other position within the university.

Is it unreasonable to expect that a person in that position

21

would have less ofwa commitment to the field than a person
who has tied his professional life to college student
personne1.work?

When such a situation as Cameron referred to occurs,
the need for intensive and thorough in-service training
would appear to be great; however, some slight research
would indicate that the need remains unfilled. Raines (34),
in a study of 200 junior colleges, found a great many
student personnel programs staffed with people without
professional training. In addition, he found that these
junior colleges completely lacked, or had ineffective in-
service training programs. The fact of little or no pro-
fessional training, coupled with insufficient or no in-
service training, could leave the student personnel worker-
in a position in which he might easily feel a lack of
confidence in his own ability to act even in routine, and
certainly in crisis, situations.

Many people in student personnel work have frequently
been heard to say that a dean's job was a thankless job.
IKenniston discussed this possible source of frustration when
he wrote:

Even if the dean goes to bat for the students,
he nevertheless continues to be associated with
the power structure in the mind of the dissenter
(18: 184).;
fkmme deans may have difficulty accepting this attitude as

lth being meant as a personal statement directed at them.

22

- Ayres, Tripp, and Russel (4), in a 1965 report of a
study of 723 institutions, related some findings that are
consistant with those of Raines. These researchers found
that the length of tenure of the chief student personnel
administrators was related to institutional type and size.
The large universities' chief student personnel officers
tended to be more stable in their positions, while junior
colleges experienced greater mobility. A similar situation
was found when deans of men and deans of women were studied.
As Nygreen and Koile expected, Ayres, Tripp, and Russel
found student personnel deans to be only slightly involved
in the academic functions of the institutions. They also
found that deans performed a very wide range of tasks not
directly related to their position. The broad variety of
non-professional duties may possibly indicate that student
personnel divisions are being frequently used as a "catch-
all" area. The possibility arises that this apparent
"catch-all" nature of their function could lead to the
attrition of some student personnel administrators who do
not wish to be the "jack of all trades, but master of
none . "

Incongruities between the educational and develop-
:mental objectives of student personnel programs and institu—
tional support through money and facilities can lead many
student personnel workers to feel that the institution does

not indeed see them as educators. An example is apparent

23

in many college housing programs. Most colleges that
operate housing programs have a paragraph in their catalogues
that refer to the educational role of a college residence
hall, but in practice often little interest is given in the
educational area. Riker writes:

. . . few (institutions) see housing as an important

factor in the education of students so that the

business function is the end . . .

The performance record of college housing is
. marred by shallow concepts of its role as an

educational facility, (and) hollow lip-service

to its uses as a part of the institutional program

. . . (35: 1).
A student personnel worker with educational objectives who
is involved in a housing program such as that could easily
feel frustrated.

Dutton, Appleton and Birch (10) reported that their
research uncovered some of the same things Riker discussed.
They found that many, if not most, presidents felt that
maintenance of control and order was a major responsibility
of the dean of students. Apparently the educational and
developmental goals were secondary.

Factors Within Individual Student
Personnel Departments

There are some elements which are quite common within
individual student personnel departments and which are
independent of the goals and objectives of the student

Personnel profession. Many of these elements could lead

to dissatisfaction and attrition. Sometimes contrary to

24

student opinion, student personnel deans do have human
feelings. Also, human beings have a variety of values,
orientations, attitudes, ideologies, and ideas. Any com-
bination of traits and beliefs, when greatly incongruent
from those of students, could create some critical problems
at times. Hodgkinson (16) wrote that many of the student
personnel deans' problems were of their own making. He

felt that protective ideologies could cause some deans to
become too concerned with trivialities such as student
dress, and ignore the more important problems. The orienta-
tion that Hodgkinson referred to could very easily create
dissatisfaction and unhappiness, especially relative to
today's students. Quite possibly this factor could influence
the attrition rate.

A second element frequent in various college student
personnel departments was discussed by Greenleaf (14). She
reported that often in college one finds a rather poor
definition of just what role a student personnel dean should
play} The student personnel area exists; but no one really
Ines a clear understanding of just why it is there. Green—
lrnaf recognized that this confusion could easily cause
thrustration and dissatisfaction in deans and might lead
to disharmony and confusion in the administrative system.

Many student personnel workers, no less than other
professionally committed people, are ambitious. They like

to feel that their ability is recognized and good work

25

rewarded; these rewards can be expressed in a variety of
ways. A worker may gain personal satisfaction merely by
being appreciated for what he is and does. Money is also
an important factor, but possibly the most visible and
personally valuable reward is a vocational promotion. Many
people like to feel that competency is the best criterion
for promotion. But is this the way it really works?
Sherburne (40) surveyed member institutions of the Western
Athletic Conference (Big Ten) on patterns of student per-
sonnel worker career mobility. One finding was that women
administrators were more frequently passed over for pro-
motion than were men, even though the women deans often had
credentials and training superior to the men who were pro-
moted over them. Sherburne also found that mobility and
professional preparation did not seem to be very closely
related. High morale would probably be quite difficult to

maintain in such an environment.

Independent Factors
Many characteristics of the milieu of college student
{xersonnel work do not fit neatly into any of the three
jprevious categories. Some are a combination of the three
previous divisions, other are unique; therefore, this
section will concern itself with these difficult to catef

90rize aspects.

26

Ingraham, in a major research study, published in
1968, reported that he found four common undesirable char-
acteristics of the dean of students position. These four
were:
'1. The ambivalence between counseling and discipline
(Ingraham considers counseling and discipline to

be cross-purposes)

2. The dean of students' jobs are often twenty—four
hour a day jobs

3. Faculty generally lack an appreciation for the
variety of skills needed to perform in the posi-
tion

4. Various odd jobs are often thrust upon the admin-
istrator which do not relate to his training,
position, or interest (such as parking) (17:
224-225).

Consistant with his findings, Ingraham also found that
deans of students appeared to be more dissatisfied with
their status in the university community than were any of
the other top university administrators. Could this dis-
satisfaction encourage them to leave the field of college
student personnel work?

Another common complaint of deans reported by Ingraham
‘was that deans of students, who generally felt that theirs
‘was primarily an educational function, did not feel that
they were considered to be educators by many of the faculty.
Ingraham, in further investigation into faculty attitudes,
reported the perception appeared accurate. His findings
are generally consistant with those of Austin, Shaffer

Nygreen, and Ayres, Tripp and Russel, which have been

Previously discussed.

27

Dutton, Appleton and Birch (10) also uncovered a
dilemma produced by possibly inaccurate perceptions. They
found that students tended to see the dean in a way very
different from the way he saw himself, and also that there
was great student unawareness about how the dean felt con-
cerning crucial issues.

A review of many of the standard and respected sources

in the literature of college student personnel work, includ-

 

ing those by Lloyd-Jones (25), Lloyd-Jones and Smith (26),
Mueller (27), Williamson and Foley (47), Leonard (22),
Williamson (46), Wrenn (49), Arbuckle (2), Shaffer (37),
and Siegal (41), revealed little relating to personality
characteristics and/or other potential sources of dissatis-
faction with student personnel work that could possibly
lead to attrition.

As Foy and others have indicated, student personnel

 

workers sometimes left the field of student affairs for
reasons completely independent of the demands, pressures
or characteristics of the profession. Foy's study dis-
closed that some left to fulfill a military obligation;
others left because of ill-health, which of course could
have been aggravated by the demands of the job; and appar—
ently the geographical location was a factor leading to
attrition in some additional cases.

Another possible reason could lie in a theory proposed

by 1313 Iaurence Peter. His theory has been commonly referred

 

28

to as the “Peter Principle." Its primary concept stated
that, "In a hierarchy, every employee tends to rise to his
level of incompetence" (32: 7). There he will stay until
his departure, which may be initiated by a variety of
reasons. He may leave because his superiors ask him to go:
he may die; he may retire; or the frustrations and dissatis-
faction with doing an inadequate job might become too great
for him to function comfortably, so he quits. The latter
case might be an important factor in college student per—

sonnel attrition.

Summary

An in-depth review of contemporary literature in
college student personnel work and related areas indicated
that little has been written about the reasons why college
student personnel workers have left the profession. However,
there was a large body of information indicating that a
great deal of thought, investigation and speculation had
been done about the characteristics of the student personnel
field that might cause unhappiness, frustration and dis-
satisfaction. The information could be divided into four
categories of investigation and thought. One category
consisted of factors that can be considered to be internal
to the college student personnel profession. Among them
are the dean's quasi-legal responsibilities, conflicts
between the goals of student personnel work and realities

in American higher education, and inter-departmental

 

 

 

29

jealousies and territoriality. Others included a lack of
professional freedom, student activism and administration.

A second category consisted of factors frequent within
the profession which are not generally felt to be central
to the goals of the profession. These included a frequent
lack of professional or in-service training, removal of the
dean from academic affairs, lack of appreciation of the
dean's role by many students and faculty, and the frequent
assignment to the dean of duties with little relationship
to his position.

The third category consisted of factors that were
frequent within individual student personnel departments,
but independent from college student personnel professional
goals, such as over-concern with trivialities, poor defini-
tion within the department of the role of the student
personnel worker at the institution, and a lack of rewards,
especially promotion.

The fourth category consisted of aspects independent
of, or a combination of the first three. An important
example of this last category is the general feeling that
the student personnel dean does not play an educational
role in the institution. Another element might be the
operation of the Peter Principle.

This review has indicated that there are many gaps
in our understanding of why people leave college student

Personnel work, but it does point the way to potential

 

 

30

areas of fruitful inquiry. A goal of this study was to
uncover answers to some of the questions that this review

has raised.

 

CHAPTER III

DESIGN OF THE STUDY

Introduction

 

This chapter will present the methods used to determine

 

the factors which influenced the attrition of selected
former college student personnel workers. Included in
Chapter III will be a complete discussion of the sample,
how it was derived, how information was gathered, and the
testable hypotheses. The instrument, design and methods

of statistical analysis will also be considered.

The Population of Interest

 

 

The sampled population included all the former college
student personnel workers who had worked in any of the 845
National Association of Student Personnel Administrator
member institutions and had held a position in one of the
following eight categories:

1. Dean of Students

2. Immediate assistant(s) to the Dean of Students
3. Dean of Men

4. Immediate assistant(s) to the Dean of Men

5. Dean of WOmen

6. Immediate assistant(s) to the Dean of WOmen

31

 

32

7. Director of Housing

8. Immediate assistant(s) to the Director
of Housing

In addition to the exclusion of the student personnel
pOSitions other than the above eight, the population was
further delimited by requiring that the following additional
criteria be met:
1. The population of interest only included people
leaving the profession between August, 1966 and

October, 1969.

2. Reasons for the attrition must have excluded death,
retirement or temporary leave.

3. The former student personnel worker had to have

shown a commitment to the profession, as defined
in Chapter I of this report.

Identification of the Sample

 

Former student personnel workers who met the criteria
for inclusion had to be identified. Since, prior to this
survey, no list or record of former student personnel
workers appropriate to this study had ever been compiled,
the population to be used first had to be established.

After consultation, in person and by mail, with several
authorities in research in student personnel work, including
Drs. Robert Callis, Robert Shaffer, Thomas Dutton, and
Harold Grant, a method of identification was derived.-

‘Method of Identification
of’the Sample

 

 

All institutional voting delegates to the National

Association of Student Personnel Administrators (NASPA)

 

33

were requested by mail to supply the names, current for-
warding addresses, if available, and former positions of
all people meeting the previously stated criteria who had
worked in their departments. The voting delegates were
requested to respond on an enclosed busineSs reply card.
A space marked "NONE" was provided for institutions having

no one who met the criteria. Based on findings in other

comparable research studies a 50% response rate was

 

arbitrarily determined to be the minimum acceptable return.

Copies of the mailed materials may be found in Appendix B.

Effectiveness of the Method
of Identification

 

All 845 voting delegates were requested to supply the
desired information. About three weeks after the initial
mailing, a follow-up letter to non-respondents again requested
their cooperation. After an additional three weeks, replies
had been received from a total of 737 of the voting delegates.
This number represented 87.2% of the total, which is well

above the previously set minimum acceptable level.

Scope of the Problem

 

A brief analysis of the replies from the NASPA voting
delegates provided an indication of the scope of the
attrition problem in college student personnel work. Of
the 737 responding institutions, 359, or 48.7% reported

at least one person fitting the criteria, and a grand total

 

34

of 652 former student personnel workers were noted. Tables

1 and 2 represent the scope of the problem.

Surveying the Sample

 

All former student personnel workers on the compiled
list were sent:
1. a copy of the instrument
2. an explanatory cover letter

3. a business reply mail envelope to be used in
the return of the completed instrument

The cover letter briefly explained the study and, in order
to verify the NASPA voting delegates' accuracy, the most
important criteria were stated again. If the criteria were
not appropriate to each individual, the respondent was
asked to return the uncompleted questionnaire with a brief
note explaining why it was inappropriate, or if he felt
that he met the requirements, he was asked to complete the
instrument. After receiving the responses, they were
immediately examined to determine if indeed all of the
criteria were met. If any exceptions to the stated require-
ments were uncovered, that respondent was eliminated from
the study. Several respondents were omitted because they
did not meet the requirements for "commitment to the
profession" (two years in one of the full-time college
student personnel positions indicated and/or at least a
minor in college student personnel work or closely related

area in a graduate degree program). A few were eliminated

35

TABLE l.--NASPA voting delegates cooperating with study.

(in per cents)

 

per cent of

 

Number total
Number of NASPA voting
delegates 845 N/A
Number of NASPA voting
delegates responding 737 87.2
Number of NASPA voting
delegates reporting 359 48.7

attrition in positions
of interest

Number of NASPA voting
delegates reporting no
attrition in positions
of interest 1

378

(of respondents)

51.3
(of respondents)

 

TABLE 2.--Frequency of attrition.

 

Number of student personnel
workers reported to have left
the profession 652

Frequency of attrition per
reporting institution .9

Frequency of attrition per
institution reporting some

attrition in positions of

interest 1.8

individuals left
profession per
institution

individuals left
profession per
institution reporting
some attrition

 

36

for other reasons. Table 3 indicates the frequency of
response of the former college student personnel workers.
A response rate of 40% was arbitrarily set as necessary
for the study. In this study the percentage of response
used was actually an interpolated estimate derived by the

following formulae:

where,
R=number of usable responses1
P=number in sampled population meeting
criteria
Q=total number of respondents (including
unusable responses) 2
N=total number of non-respondents
Using the formulae, the estimate can be made that
80.0% of the total population of the sample which met the
criteria completed the questionnaire. This percentage
far exceeded the previously set standard of 40% response.

Therefore, the assumption is made that the responding

group is representative of the population of interest.

 

1When the total population was of interest, this
nmmber referred to the total p0pulation. When one of the
positions was of interest, it referred to that number.

21bid.

 

 

 

37

 

m ucmo Moo 0
I u omumefiumw .Az. I
m m

+mflm

mucopcoommuncoc mo Mensa: Hmuounz pom .Ammmcommmn maommscs
mcflosaocwv mucoocoommu mo umnfidc Hmuouuo .mfluwufluo ocaumofi
GOMDMHSQOQ omHmEmm ca HmQEDcnm .mmmcommwn canons mo umoEdcum

.mumnz

"mMHDEHOM on» ma om>wumo

fit.
.mmmmmuoom

ucwfiowmmsmcfl mo wmzmomn unmasupmsw on» om>fimomu muwxuoz chcomuwm unmosum HmEHOM omuuommu Ham #02
t

 

 

o.om w.mh ooa omm ooa Hue ucmfiduumcfl
« mcfi>wmoou mHmEMm Hence
d\z d\z H.H v m.v om omuuomwu no: GOwuHmom
m.~m m.mm e.m em H.m mm mcflmsom
mo Houomuwo ucmumwmmd
m.mm G.Hm m.m Hm H.@ mm mahmsom.uo nonomufio
N.mm N.mm N.v ma w.m NH COED: MO ammo unnumwmmfl
m.ve H.mn w.oa mm o.HH mm cmEoz mo ammo
m.mn m.on n.v ea H.m vm co: m0 ammo ucwumwmmfi
h.~m H.Hm m.HH me m.HH mm no: mo ammo
m.mm n.Hm H.wH mm H.mH an mucmosum mo ammo ucmumwmwm
. ....,\A
g .. -
m.mn m.nn H.mm omH m.mm boa mnemosum mo ammo
PS
ocwocoommu m m o n a
«« cofiUHmom mafioco Mon swoco men msfioooommn Hmuou mo omHaEMm
mo usmo moo Cauwmo mo Hmuou no “@9852 Demo mom umoEdz cowuwmom
ucmo uwm ucmo Mom

omumsflumm

 

.HCTEDHflmfifl mumfimflnmEOO OGHCHDuQH GHQF—Mw HOMHO3 Hmfiflomhwm “CGUDHW HQEHOM MO “C00 Hmnmllom NQQANB

38

The Instrument

 

As indicated in Chapter II, no research was found
comparable enough to the goals of this study to allow the
use of another questionnaire. For this and other reasons,
a new instrument had to be designed. This section will
describe the evolution of the instrument. A copy of the
research questionnaire may be found in Appendix A.

Reasons for the Use of the Questionnaire
as the Method of Inquiry

 

 

Other methods of inquiry were considered and rejected,
among them were: personal interviews, various persOnality
inventories, and open-ended questions.

Logistical and financial reasons negated the personal
interview option. A representative sample of the eight
positions of interest would have required a prohibitively
large number of individuals in each group, randomly
sampled. Geography, money, and time made this option
impossible.

The use of various personality inventories such as
the Omnibus Personality Inventory, the Myers—Briggs Type
Indicator, and others was felt to be undesirable for two
major reasons. Firstly, the instruments available were
not especially appropriate to the purposes of this study:
and secondly, the response rate in similar studies using
standardized instruments often had not indicated the degree

of cooperation desired.

 

 

39

Open-ended questions, as the sole method of eliciting
information, was rejected because the areas of inquiry
would lack in breadth. This lack would be caused by the
necessarily limited number of questions that could be used
within reasonable time limits. Another negative factor was
the extreme difficulty of subjectively quantifying data
for appropriate statistical analysis. Because open-ended
questions do not suggest responses, and therefore are not
as limited as more objective questions which have a variety
of suggested responses, some open—ended questions were
incorporated into the final instrument.

Therefore, the objective questionnaire was selected
as the best instrument for use in this study. It was
chosen because:

1. it permits inquiry into a wide variety of areas
in the least amount of time.

2. it elicits subjective responses in an objective
form and therefore is easily quantifiable.

3. it readily permits meaningful statistical
analysis.

4. it is readily adaptable to the specific purposes
of this area of study.
Format of the Instrument
The final instrument consisted of two major parts.
The first part was made up of twenty-four items. This"
part was designed to inquire about the former student
personnel worker's evaluation of the environment of his

former position. Twenty-three of the questions had four

 

40

responses arranged in a modified continuum, which is dis-
cussed later in this section. The twenty-fourth question
had two possible alternatives.

The design of Part I was modified from a model by
Likert (23), (24) which was used to evaluate the inter-
personal environment in a corporate organization. His
model asked the respondent to evaluate the organization
in the stated areas at any place on a continuum with four
descriptive points. The attrition study instrument
differed from Likert's model in that the survey respondent
must describe the environment of his former position at
one of the four descriptive points. However it was similar
to Likert's model in that the descriptive points are
arranged in linear order.

The second part of the instrument consisted of
twenty-seven questions asking whether or not many of the
same elements found in Part I were factors in the former
student personnel worker's decision to leave his previous
position. The respondent was asked whether the various
elements were "not a factor," "a contributing factor," or
"a major consideration" in his decision to leave the
position.

The questions in Part II were paired with the ques—
tions in Part I, where each question in Part I asked the
respondent to evaluate the environment, the paired question

in Part II inquired whether that aspect was a factor in

 

41

his decision to leave. Some exceptions included two

questions that had no appropriate application to Part I.

The Pre—test

 

Given the nature of the study and the sample popula-
tion, a classical pre—test was not felt by the researcher
to be appropriate in the student personnel worker attrition
study. However, this does not mean that the need to
establish the appropriateness and validity of the instrument
Was considered unimportant. A variety of alternatives to
the classical pre-test were available and those used are
discussed below.
NASPA Research and Publications
D1v1s1on

The research and publications division of the National
Association of Student Personéel Administrators expressed
interest in the attrition study and seriously considered it
for funded research under their auspices. According to a
letter from Dr. James Appleton, director of the Research
Division, a policy had been recently instituted providing
for research funding only under the direction of a member
of that division; therefore, it was not possible to fund
this study. Appleton later indicated that the division had
seriously considered making an exception to the policy in

this case. The division did evaluate the design of the

study and a preliminary instrument during their 1969-70

 

 

 

4’2
winter meeting. After consideration the committee made no

major recommendations for revision of the instrument or the

design.

Bias Examination of the Instrument

 

Each question was examined by the rules delineated by
Payne (31). Any question indicating undue bias was modi-
fied; however, in some cases, words with special connota-
tions remained because either there was no adequate sub-
stitute, or the word or phrase itself was an integral part
of the theme or concept of the writer(s) who suggested the
question. Therefore, an attempt was made to keep bias and
wording which might indicate a preferred direction of

response to a minimum.

Validity

Content validity (8), (1), which is often cited in
studies of this type can also be claimed in this case.
Experts in college student personnel work were consulted
in the design of the instrument through personal conver-
sations or via the literature of the profession. In
addition, experts in research design from the College of
Education's Office of Research Consultation at Michigan

State University also examined the questionnaire.

Modified‘Pre-test

 

Several student personnel workers and graduate

students were asked to evaluate critically a preliminary

43

form of the instrument. Their impressions were informally
discussed and they were interviewed to determine the
effectiVeness of the questions in their inquiry into the

I
intended areas.

Administration of the Instrument

The instrument was mailed to the sample of former
college student personnel workers during the first quarter
of 1970. The contents of the initial mailing have been
previously discussed. The second mailing consisted of a
second cover letter requesting cooperation, another copy
of the instrument, and the pre-paid envelope. In the
event that some potential respondents doubted the con—
fidentiality of their responses, the second mailing included
the option to return an unsigned questionnaire while
signing a Business Reply Mail postcard stating that they
had completed, but not signed the instrument. The postcard
was to be returned in a separate mailing, to assure ano-
nymity. Copiee of all mailed items are in Appendix B.

Format of the Analysis
of the Results

 

 

The analysis indicated by the nature of the question-
naire was descriptive in nature and in a form that permitted
statistical analysis. The statistical analysis is discussed
in depth in a following section of Chapter III, but briefly,
the analysis determined differential responses by position,

sex, enrollment of the institution of former employment,

44

and academic training. Common factors and intercorrelation
were determined as well as the construction of frequency

distributions by position and for the total group.

Testable Hypotheses
The analysis of this study tested the following null

hypotheses:

Null Hypothesis I: No difference in reasons for leaving
the profession will be found by category of former
position as measured by the student personnel
attrition study instrument.

or symbolically,

HO P-‘=P=P=P4=P=P6=P7=P8

1‘ 1 2 3 5

where, P1 = Dean of Students; P2 - Assistant Dean

of Students; P
Dean of Men; P

3 = Dean of Men; P4 = Assistant

5
Dean of WOmen; P7 = Director of Housing; and

= Dean of Women; P6 = Assistant

P8 = Assistant Director of Housing.

Null Hypothesis II: No difference in reasons for
leaving the profession will be found by sex in
response to the student personnel attrition
study instrument.

or symbolically,

where, S1 = males

females

0')
ll

Null Hypothesis III: No difference in reasons for
leaving the profession will be found by enrollment
of the institution of the former student personnel
position on the student personnel attrition study
instrument.

 

 

45

or symbolically,

H03: E1 = E2

where, El Enrollment of the institution of the
former student personnel position less
than 7500 students.
E2 Enrollment of the institution of the
former student personnel position

7500 students or greater.

Null Hypothesis IV: No difference in reasons for leaving
the profession will be found by the absence or
presence of significant academic student personnel
training in response to the student personnel
attrition study instrument.

 

or symbolically,

no significant academic student personnel
training

significant academic student personnel
training.

where, To

T

 

Statistical Analysis

The purpose of the statistical analysis for this study
was twofold; firstly, the statistical analysis described the
attitudes that the former student personnel workers had
toward the environments of their prior student personnel
positions. Also, the first part of the analysis examined
the former student personnel workers' perceptions of their
reasons for leaving the profession. Attention was given to
both the individual positions and the group as a whole.

The second phase of the statistical analysis deter-

mined.whether reported differences in attitudes toward the

 

 

 

1 {lit-II I

46

environment and perceptions of reasons for leaving the
profession existed in the following areas:

1. by position

2. by sex

3. by enrollment of the institution of the former
student personnel position

4. by the presence or absence of significant
academic student personnel training

The statistical analysis was performed 0n the CDC

 

3600 computer in the Michigan State University Computer
Center, using programs developed by members of the Computer
Institute for Social Science Research (C.I.S.S.R.) staff,
and by David Wright in the College of Education's Office

of Research Consultation. The data were transferred by
hand from the instrument to optical scanning forms, and
then transferred mechanically from the optical scanning
forms to data punch cards. The data punch cards served

as the method of information input into the CDC 3600.

Frequency Distribution

 

The initial phase of the statistical analysis was
the construction of a frequency distribution for the entire
sample that returned usable questionnaires. The sample
was then categorized by former position and a frequency
distribution was made for each group.

A frequency distribution was the simplest way of

systematically presenting the data. It permits the reader

47

to see how the groups responded to each item. Frequency

distributions in Chapter IV are reported in percentages.

Pearson Product Moment Correlation

 

Stage two of the statistical analysis consisted of

the construction of correlation matrices, using the Pearson
Product Moment Correlation. The purpose of the correlation
matrices was to examine relatedness between items. However,
as Underwood, Benton, Duncan, Taylor, and Cotton tell us:

A correlational study rarely indicates which variable

influences which, or even whether either variable is

influencing the other one directly. And in any case,

a correlation coefficient, as a statistical procedure,

can never tell us anything about causality at all

(44: 140).
In brief, for the purpose of the student personnel attrition
study, the correlation coefficient only tells us whether
two items are related, and how closely related they are.
According to Downie and Heath (8), the one assumption that
must be made concerning correlation is that of linearity.
A visual inspection of the data for this study indicated
that the assumption was valid in this case.

Each item in Part I was correlated with every other

item in Part I, to make one matrix. Each item in Part II
was correlated with every other item in Part II to complete
the second matrix. Correlations, per se, are not important
to the analysis, but rather were necessary in the generation .

of factor scores, which will be discussed in the following

section.

 

48

Factor Analysis

 

The third phase of the statistical analysis was a
factor analysis. The purpose of a factor analysis in this
study was to go a step beyond just correlation. Neither
correlation methods nor factor analysis added anything to
the original data; but both were useful tools in trying
to understand the data.

The first objective of factor analysis was simplifica-
tion. Wolfle stated that if correlations are separated
into various factors, the correlations can be reduced into
a smaller number of factor loadings, and, "Since many of
these loadings will be so close to zero that they can be
disgarded, still greater simplification is achieved"

(48: 1).

The second objective of factor analysis was to find
- a set of responses which will be fewer in number and more
basic in nature than any one of the individual items could
be.

As in other statistical techniques, for a measurement
to be valid, certain assumptions must be applicable.
‘Wolfle summarized the assumptions of several sources, and
the most important of the assumptions are further sum-
marized below:

1. Responses to an instrument are not undifferent-
iated, but rather consist of a number of factors

or traits, each of which is elicited by a variety
of different problems.

49

2. Tests may differ factorially in one or both of
two ways . . . in their complexity and in their
factor loadings.

3. It is assumed that the abilities involved in.
performing any task combine by simple addition
(48: 2).

In this study the factor analysis had two purposes.
Primarily, the factors that arose in the factor analysis
were used in developing factor scores which in turn were
used as input into the final phase of the statistical
analysis, which was the analysis of variance. Secondly,
they were used to further illuminate the information first
brought to light by the Pearson Product Moment Correlation.
It not only indicated what items were related to other
items, but it also separated out those items that were
closely related to one another, but only slightly or not
at all related to any of the other factors. An example
of a use of this knowledge would be that a composite score
of responses in a given direction to items within one
factor could be a better predictor of attrition than would
be any individual item. Because of the assumption of
additivity, more subtle, but widespread attitudes of dis-

satisfaction became more apparent, through an examination

of the factors.

Analysis of Variance

 

The analysis of variance determined whether the
various positions examined differentially responded to the

research instrument. Diagram 1 indicates the model used

50

 

Factors Factors

 

 

 

osition Individuals F Pagt IF F F Pagt I; F
l 2 3 4 l 2 3 4
dean of 51 51
students S S
.2 .2
13 S130 S130
asst. dean of 31
students 32
5 S58
dean of
men

A

 

asst.dean of
men

I'-'

 

dean of women

w

 

asst. dean of
women

I-‘

 

director of
housing

0:

 

asst. director
Of housing

a» . Mid an OIQPJ mo . MIA mo OIOFJ do . NIH up.. MPH mo . MIA cu . MIA

N

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

¥

 

 

DIAGRAM l.--Model of repeated measures analysis of variance.

Legend: F1 equals Factor I; F2 equals Factor II: etc.
81 equals subject 1 in that position; 8; equals
subject 2 in that position; etc.

51

to investigate differences by position. Inquiry into sex,
enrollment and presence or absence of academic student
personnel_training was done using similar models.

The method of analysis of variance used was the
repeated measures design, discussed by Greenhouse and
Geisser. This method is used for analyzing quantitative,
non-categorical profile data, such as instruments of this
type. Use of the repeated measures design necessitated
the following assumptions:

1. variables must have a multi-normal distribution

2. the variance-covariance matrix is arbitrary
(13: 95)

Greenhouse and Geisser reported that it was their opinion
that the method is appropriate to much research in the

social sciences, where there are multiple observations on-
individuals who have been sampled from one or more popula—

tions.

Summary

The testable hypotheses, the population of interest,
identification of the population of interest, construction
of the questionnaire, the pre-test, and the statistical
analysis have been discussed. The population of interest
consisted of former student personnel workers from eight
categories of positions. It was stated that the former
student personnel workers were identified through the

cooperation of 87.2% of the voting delegates to NASPA. An

52

interpolated index of the rate of response to the question-
naire by the appropriate former student personnel workers
who received the instrument was 80.0%. 7

The most important statistical analyses used were
the frequency distribution, factor analysis, and analysis
of variance. Any differences between groups were deter-

mined by the analysis of variance.

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS OF THE DATA

An analysis of the data collected in the study is

presented in this chapter.

of the hypotheses in the study, the data were examined from

Analysis Format

 

For the purposes of clear presentation and the testing

six perspectives. They were:

1.

Construction of a frequency distribution of
responses to the student personnel attrition
study instrument for the total sample.

Construction of a frequency distribution of the
responses to the student personnel attrition
study instrument for each of the positions
studied.

Analyses of variance to determine if differences
existed in response to the student personnel
attrition study instrument by category of former
position.

Analyses of variance to determine if differences
existed in response to the student personnel
attrition study instrument between male and
female respondents.

Analyses of variance to determine if differences
existed in response to the student personnel
attrition study instrument by the enrollment of
the institution of the prior student personnel
position.

Analyses of variance to determine if differences
existed in response to the student personnel

53

54

attrition study instrument by the absence or
presence of significant academic student personnel
or closely related training.

Brief Review of the Nature
of the Sample

 

 

As indicated in the preceding chapters, only the

following student personnel positions were studied:

1. dean of students

2. assistant dean of students

3. dean of men

4. assistant dean of men

5. dean of women

6. assistant dean of women

7. director of housing

8. assistant director of housing
In addition to formerly holding one of the above eight
categories of positions, other requirements had to be met
for inclusion into the sample; they were a demonstrated
commitment tx> the student personnel profession and attri-

tion from the field between August, 1966 and October, 1969.

Brief Review of the Instrument

 

The research instrument was constructed after a review
of the literature to identify those elements in the profes-
sion which could potentially influence attrition. From the
review of the literature a question pool was developed and
then slowly reduced as a result of consultation with experts

in student personnel, research design, and statistics. The

55

final instrument contained two major sections. Part I
inquired about the sample's perception of the environment
of their prior position and Part II asked respondents to
judge whether many of these same areas contributed to their
decision to leave student personnel work.

Brief Review of the Statistics
Used and Their Rationale

 

 

The frequency distributions were meant to present a
clear picture of the nature of the research instrument data
as a total group and by former position.

The analyses of variance were used to discover dif-
ferences in response of the various sub-groups previously
discussed.

A factor analysis was done to produce groupings of
questions for input into the analyses of variance. The
procedure also made the use of the analysis of variance more
appropriate for the data. A more complete discussion of the

results of the factor analysis follows.

Results of the Factor Analysis
As previously mentioned, the instrument was divided
into major components ("environment" and "reasons for leav-
ing") and a factor analysis was done on each separate part.
In each analysis, four factors were developed accounting
for 33% and 40% of the total variance for each respective
part. The factors that were developed and the items included

are found in Tables 4 and 5.

TABLE 4.—-Items contained in factors of Part I,

56

 

PART I

Item

Factor Loading

 

Factor
1.

2.
3.
4.
5.

6.
7.

Factor

1.
2.
3.

4.

Factor

1.
2.
3.

Factor

'1.
2.

I

Presence of "professional
freedom"

Opportunity for promotion

Level of bureaucracy
Appreciation by superiors
Institutional resistance to
stud. pers. dept. goals
Institutional openness to change
Confidence shown by superiors

II

Adequacy of training for position
Prestige in students' eyes

New position more in line with
training

Perceived conflict between
counseling and discipline

III e

Level of responsibility held
Involvement in discipline
Faculty status

IV

Amount of departmental change
Amount of student activism

.588
.386
.741
.724

.617

.595
.723

.440
. 515

.404'
.340

.399
.450
.433

.536
.576

 

57

TABLE 5.—-Items contained in factors of Part II.

 

,PART II

Item Factor Loading

 

Factor I

1. Departmental rate of change

2. Amount of "professional freedom"
3. Bureaucracy

4. Had too little responsibility

5. Lack of appreciation by superiors
6. Institutional resistance to SPW goals
7. Attitude toward departmental goals
8. Institutional resistance to change
9. Level of decision making
10. Confidence expressed by superiors
ll. Clarity of objectives

12. Level of internal politics

Factor II

1. Faculty status

2. Prestige in eyes of institution
3. Salary

4. Position's educational function

Factor III

1. Adequacy of training for position

2. Level of involvement in discipline

3. Level of training more appropriate
for new position

4. Conflict between couns. and discip.

Factor IV

1. Demands of children
2. Demands of marriage

.681
.660
.781
.529
.749
.717
.491
.672
.686
.610
.539
.755

.832
.446
.408
.394

.565
.626

.517
.575

.785
.760

 

 

58

For the purpose of easier communication, the factors
were assigned names which were felt to best represent the
commonalities within each of the factors. They were:

Part I (environment)

Factor I -- Openness

'Factor II -- Prestige and training
Factor III -- Definition of position
Factor IV -- Orientation of change

Part II (reasons for leaving)

Factor I -- Openness

Factor II —- Prestige

Factor III -- Training and discipline
Factor IV -- Personal

As can be seen in an examination of both Tables 4 and
5, and the assigned factor names, there appeared to be a
fairly high correlation between factors in each part.

Of the 24 items in Part I, 16 fell into one of the
four factors, and 22 of the 27 items in Part II had
factor leadings large enough for inclusion. Most auth—
orities considered these ratios to be quite high for a

study of this type.

Presentation of the Data
This section is divided into two major units. First
will be a discussion of the contents of the frequency

distributions, and second will be a presentation of the

59

testable hypotheses, which were tested by the analyses of

variance.

Part I (environment)

Part I, Factor I--Openness of
.the Former Environment

Table 6 contains a summary of the responses by position
and for the total group to the items in Part I, Factor I.

Of the respondents, 44% felt that any form of "profes-
sional freedom," possibly such as feeling free to speak their
minds on controversial issues, was either moderately or
greatly limited, with deans and assistant deans of men seeing
the most limitations and deans and assistant deans of stu-
dents, as groups, reporting the greatest amount of freedom.

About one in every four respondents saw the level of
bureaucracy as a major problem, but about one—third reported
it to be generally helpful and responsive to them in the
performance of their duties.

Again dealing with the university structure, a fairly
high level of consensus was present in all eight positions
relative to their views of the institution'sresistance to
the goals of their department; almost one-half reported
moderate or strong resistance to what they felt their former
department was trying to accomplish.

But with the exception of the deans of students and
assistant deans of women, responses were about equally

divided concerning their views on the institution's openness

 

 

60

 

o.HH m.~H ~.m h.m m.n o.o o.h o.va m.mH omcmso Hommcflcmmfi .omEEa 0» ammo
m.~q mqhm m.mm 0.0m m.mm H.h¢ m.am m.mm H.mv . mmsmo

HmflusmquSm co momma cm£3 musooo

v.om m.mv m.Hv m.mm h.vv v.a~ m.hm m.mv 0.5m musmmmum mcouum Hopes musooo maco

m.m m.v v.ma o.o m.oa m.m~ m.mH m.H m.m m>wumemmu hamEmuuxm
mmsmno ou mmmscmoo m.sowusuwumcH

m.mH m.om H.mH m.ma H.H~ m.o m.vH m.ma m.mH mocmumflmon on no mauufla

m.mm m.hm m.Nm n.ov m.mm m.hm m.mm m.mm m.mm mesa» um mocmumwmmu meow

h.mm o.m~ m.m~ o.o m.mm o.mm «.mv m.mm h.mm mocmumemou mumumoos

o.mH h.mH m.m~ o.ov «.ma m.Hm n.ma m.nH H.hH mocmumfimmu msouum
mamom 3mm mo .uwumcw mo mocmumfimmm

o.mm m.nm «.ma m.mH «.ma m.ba m.mH m.mm m.w~ Hams peasaomummm one 3mcx

o.a~ m.mm «.ma m.mm m.mm «.mm m.mm m.a~ m.a~ saasm umnumu emanaomumam can swag

m.m~ o.mm o.m~ o.ov m.mH N.Hv m.vm w.hm m.om omowa3ocx meow on:

m.mH m.v m.~m m.mH o.m~ m.HH m.m~ c.mH m.mH manned omumaowuoom one zmcx
mmumcHoHOQSm
mo scanneomummm m.uowummsm

m.mm a.mm H.wH m.mm m.>m m.mm m.o~ o.Hm m.o¢ m>fimsommmu adamumcwm

m.nm H.mm m.Hv o.o~ v.mm H.5v m.Hv m.mv H.mm monummumusw mmEHDmEOm

m.mH v.na m.m~ n.m N.wH m.m~ m.mm m.mH ~.mH mocmfiuomuwm omumocwn maummum

m.m m.v «.mH o.o~ m.oa m.m o.vH m.m m.o odomxuo3cs >Hamwucmmmm
womnosmousn mo Ho>mq

H.mm ~.mw h.m m.vH H.mm m.m m.m H.vm m.vm wuasomm mm mewm

m.Hm ~.mm h.mm m.~v m.v~ m.mm m.mm m.mm m.mm Eoommum HosOAmmmmoum omoun hanflmw

m.mm m.mm ~.m¢ ¢.Hm H.mm H.>v m.mv o.Hm m.m~ Eoomoum Hmcowmmmmonm omuHEwH

m.m m.m m.o v.HN v.m m.HH m.HH m.m o.oa Eoomwum Hmsoflmmmmouo oc
=Eoommum Hmsoflmmmmouo= mo mocmumflxm

A1309 mom—4. moo 309w 300 2004 SOD moad moo mmcommmu one EmuH

 

Amucmo mom say

.H uumm .H Houomm cw omcflmucoo mama“ mo Qoflusowuumflo wocoswmumll.m mamfie

 

61

.mcwmsos mo uouowuflo .ummm mamsoo mood “mswmsor mo Houomuwo mamsom moo “cmfioz mo

ammo .ummm mamsom zoom “cmfios mo ammo mamsvm 300 name mo ammo .ummm manage zoom “sea
mo ammo mamsom zoo “mnemosum mo ammo .ummm mHmoom moom “mucmosum mo ammo mamsom moo

“common

 

 

m.m m.o~ m.m o.o m.m m.m m.m m.oa m.m museum new:
cw nwmuumo umoEHm sowuoEOHm
v.m~ n.av o.o~ n.m m.m N.Hv m.m~ n.om m.mm coauoeoum How mocmno @000
m.mm m.o~ m.mm m.mm ~.vm H.nv m.nm H.mv m.mm sowuoeoum you ensure mapped
¢.¢m e.ma o.ov o.ov m.mm m.m m.nm m.mm N.om coauoeoum mom mocmro on umOEHm
cowuoeonm How wuflcsunomoo
v.mm m.mm o.m~. 0.00 H.mv H.5v m.w~ m.>m m.mm mocmoflmcoo aumameoo
«.mm m.m~ m.Hv o.ov m.mm m.mm m.o~ ~.mm m.mm mocmowmsoo ameucmumnsm
m.m~ n.mH m.mm o.o~ n.m~ m.mm m.mm n.om n.>H ocflocmommocoo mum3
m.h o.o «.ma m.ma m.~ m.m m.m m.oa ~.m HHm um uoc
muoeumoom
mo g3orm mmumcflpuoosm ca mocmowmcou
gases mega moo some zoo zooa zoo moor moo mmnoommu can smuH

 

.fimsaflucooll.m mqm¢fi

62

to change. The two exceptions appeared to have seen the
institution more responsive to change than the other six.

Slightly over one half of the sample perceived that
superiors had either a moderate or high level of apprecia-
tion for the problems faced by their subordinates, whereas
about one in five felt that superiors knew and appreciated
little.

Also the respondents felt that their superiors saw
them as capable. This was illustrated by the fact that
about two-thirds of the total felt that their superiors had
shown either substantial or complete confidence in them.
This figure would have been even higher were it not for
the deans of men and directors of housing, who both reported
a much lower level of confidence.

A contrasting finding was that over two-thirds of the
total group perceived poor chances for their promotion in
the near future. The only exception to the pattern was in
the assistant director of housing position in which almost
the same results were found, but in the opposite direction.
Part I, Factor II--Prestige
and Training

Table 7 contains a summary of responses to items in
Part I, Factor II.

A strong consensus appeared when the respondents were
asked to rate their opinion of the adequacy of their aca-

demic, informal, and in-service training for their former

 

 

63

.mnflmnon no uouomnflo .umme maenoe moo<.xmnwmnon mo uouoeuwo maenoe moo “none; mo

neeo .umme maenom zone «neEo3 mo neeo maenoe zoo “nee mo nemo .umme maenoe zone knee
mo neeo maenoe zoo “muneonum mo nemo .umme maenoe mood “muneonpm mo neeo maesve moo

“onemmq

 

 

«.mm m.mm o.m~ o.ow H.~¢ H.5e m.- m.hm m.~m nunaecoo new“ on
m.vm «.mm m.n¢ o.ov m.mm m.m~ m.o~ «.mm m.mm mmmzm>wuommum
£UH3 COMMON Hwflgfl m TEA.“ OEOm
a.mH o.m~ H.0H o.o m.mH m.HH a.a~ m.oa h.na mmmcm>nuomeew emonemu cmumo
a.~n m.~n m.~H o.o m.m m.AH m.m~ m.mH m.HH mmmcm>wuomeem
oeuoewme waveeno powamnoo
mnflaowomfio one mnflaemnnoo
nmesuen uoaamnoo oo>fieoumm
m.o~ H.e~ h.m o.ov >.mm m.nn m.nn n.o~ H.m~ mafia an «nos Boss
m.m~ H.e~ «.mn m.mH h.m~ m.an m.o~ m.vm 5.5m mafia an muos saunmnnm
m.o~ H.am m.m~ e.o~ b.m~ m.mm ~.em m.m~ m.o~ mafia an snflmsvm
m.- H.mm m.nn m.mm q.nm m.mm m.~n m.nm m.mn mans an mmma
economy» can:
nofluwmom 3en mo xuwawnwuemfioo
e.m~ «.4 a.a m.mn m.mm m.nn m.mH m.mn ~.nm can: sum>
e.om o.om b.5o m.ma m.mm m.mm m.mm m.me m.aq amen sampmumeoe
a.on e.nq H.mH a.o m.on «.mm m.m~ m.mn m.na 30H samumumeos
m.~ ~.¢ m.m e.m m.m o.o m.m F.H m.H 30H sum>
muneonum mo mewe nH omflumeum
m.ov ~.a~ e.mm “.mm «.mv m.mm ~.om V.Hv m.mv emumamua Hams
o.ev m.~e «.mq o.o~ m.mv m.~m m.mm m.oa c.4v mumsvmem sandmw
m.m o.o a.m m.mn H.m m.HH o.eH m.m m.on uqmnofleesmqn sauna“
m.~ m.m m.m 0.0 o.o o.o m.~ ~.m m. mnmseoemcn snampou
nofiuwmom now mnflnfieuu mo >0enooo<
neeoe some moo zoom zoo zoom zoo mooe moo mucoammm was swan

 

Amunmo Moo nflv

.H puma .HH genome an emcnmpcoo mamas mo connsnflupmfle socmsomumuu.a mnmee

64

position, with almost 90% feeling adequately or well pre-
pared for the position that they left.

Consistant with this perception, there are indications
that the former student personnel workers did not leave
their former position because the new position they were
assuming was more appropriate to their background. When
asked if they felt that their present position was more in
line with their training and preparation than their prior
position, only a little over 40% indicated that it was
either slightly or much more appropriate. About one fourth
saw it as less in line. The remainder saw the two posi-
tions as equivalent regarding their preparation.

A conflict between discipline and counseling, perceived
or real, did not appear to significantly interfere with the
former student personnel workers' being able to effectively
function in their former position. Only slightly over one
fourth of the sample felt that the conflict either often or
greatly detracted from their effectiveness.

Possibly the perceptions of a lack of conflict between
counseling and discipline were related to the view that the
respondent's former role was generally felt to be prestigious
in the eyes of the student body. Only two in every ten
people in the sample felt that the level of prestige would

have been rated either moderately or very low by the students.

 

65
Part I, Factor III--Definition
of the Position

Table 8 contains a summary of the responses to items
contained in Part I, Factor III.

Most of the former student personnel workers sampled
reported that the amount of responsibility they held in
their former position was just about right for the job,
but not indicated in any of the tables or appendices was
the frequency of handwritten addenda to this question adding
that too often, the respondents felt, the degree of respon-
sibility far exceeded the authority contained in the position.

A dichotomy appeared in the responses to the question
inquiring about the level of involvement in disciplinary
affairs. The full deans had the greatest amount of discip-
linary responsibilities with the assistants in every case
being much less involved. About 65% of the full deans felt
that they were very much involved in disciplinary matters,
whereas only slightly over 40% of the assistants gave similar
responses. It was interesting to note that deans of men saw
themselves "very much involved" almost twice as often as did
deans of women.

The majority of former student personnel workers had
faculty status, with exceptions to the pattern being found
only in the housing office, and in the assistant dean of
women position. Almost 20% more of the assistant deans of

men had faculty status than did their female counterparts.

66

 

.mnflmnon mo Houoenao .uwme maeovm mood “mnemoon mo Houoeuao maenoo moo «nosos mo

nemo .umme maeooo sood “neeoz mo neeo maeooe zoo “nee mo neeo .umme maeove zood «nee
mo neeo maeove zoo «muneonum mo neeo .umme maenoe mooe “muneooum mo neeo maeooe moo

“oneueq

 

 

m.ov >.mw n.>w o.ow m.Hm ~.Hv m.~m o.om n.w~ woueUm muanoem on oen

m.mm m.mm ~.mm o.o¢ «.mm m.mm v.hm m.mv m.Hh mnueum hvasoem oen
moueum wuaooem

m.v m.NH ~.m m.ma o.o m.nH o.o o.m o.a oe>ao>nw ue>en no Eooaem

o.mH m.hm H.wH m.mv v.ma m.mm n.v m.m~ H.0H oe>Ho>nfl meEwueEOm

«.ma n.0H m.m~ m.ma m.wm m.mm m.HH v.~m o.va oe>ao>nfl mannesoouw

m.mm m.mm m.vm n.mm h.vv m.mm h.mm H.mv v.vn oe>Ho>ne none aue>
.owomfio nw unoEe>Ho>nw mo eeumeo

H.m m.m m.m m.mH e.~ a.m o.e ~.m H.m sunnnnnmcommmu on amazon

¢.mH ~.m~ o.a~ m.mH msoa .m.mm m.m~ >.om m.¢a aufiawowmnoomeu mapufia 00»

H.om m.mm ~.mv m.mm o.nm m.~m m.mm m.om m.mm muflawoemnoomeu mo unDOEe umoouo

«.ma ~.v v.mH o.om «.ma m.m o.vH m.mH m.m~ muflawoflmnoomeu none 00»
ode: muwawowmnoommn mo He>oo

A<BOB none moo 30nd Boo Zoo¢ zoo moo< moo monommwm one EmuH

 

Amuneo Hem nay
.H poem .HHH uouoem nH ownweunoo maepfl mo nowuoowuumwo moneooenmlu.m momea

67
Part I, Factor IV—-Orientation
Towards Change

Table 9 contains a summary of the responses to ques-
tions contained in Part I, Factor IV.

Despite moderate differences in response, when asked
to describe the rate of change that was occurring in their
former departments, the respondents generally seemed to
feel that their departments had been either moderately or
greatly changing. In every case, however, the assistants
tended to see less change than did their immediate superiors.

Some student activism was reported to be present at
more than 95% of the colleges and universities where the
former student personnel workers had been employed. It is
interesting to note that the factor analysis indicated such
a close relationship between change in the department and
student activitism. The Pearson Product Moment Correlation,
computed preliminary to the factor analysis, found responses
to these two questions to be the most highly correlated of

any two items in Part I (sig. at 1% level).

Part II (reasons for leaving)

What reasons did former student personnel workers
see as influencing their decisions to leave? This was
the general question raised in Part II of the student
personnel attrition study instrument. The results of Part

II are grouped by factors, and summarized below.

 

68

.mnemoon mo uouoeuwo .pmme maeoue mooe “unannon mo nowoeueo maenoo moo “neeoa «o

neeo .umme maeove zoom “neeo3 mo neeo mdeovo zoo “nos mo neeo .umme maeove zood «nee
mo neeo maenoe zoo “munmooum mo neeo .umme maeooe mood “munmonum mo neeo maeooo woo

"onemmo

 

 

H.vm m.nm m.~m h.w m.am v.a~ n.mm h.mm v.mm omneno mo Heeo ueeuo

h.Hv o.m~ m.Hv «.mm m.mm v.m~ ”.mm m.nm m.mv emneno eueueooa

v.mH o.m~ w.- o.oe «.ma m.mm h.oH b.o~ m.ma eoneno eHuuwH

m.v m.~H ~.m o.o m.oa a.m m.m h.H m.~ eoneno on
emneno no open Heunmsuueoeo

>.~H m.~H h.m h.m m.m m.m H.n H.vm m.mH Emfl>wuoe «0 demo uemum

H.~m b.aq m.mm m.mm memo m.~m «.mm m.ov ~.mm Emw>wuoe mo unocEe eueueoOE

v.om m.mm m.vm o.ov m.w~ v.m~ m.mm m.h~ m.v~ Emw>wuoe uneosum eHuuHH

m.v m.~H o.o o.o m.m m.HH H.n >.H v.m Ema>wuoe uneonum on
Emfl>fluoe uneonum mo He>eo

$809 $004 moo 309m 30a 2094 zoo mood moo momnommom one EmuH

 

.H poem .>H nouoeo nfi oenweunoo mama..." mo noufioowuumao monesveumune H.393.

69

Part II, Factor I--Openness

Table 10 contains a summary of the responses to ques-
tions contained in Part II, Factor I. The responses in
Factor I can logically be divided further into the sub-
factors of openness within the institution and openness
within the department.

Institutional resistance to innovation and change was

if;

cited as a "contributing" or "major" consideration in

IF __

nearly half of the responses. The two positions apparently
most disturbed by any resistance to change in the institu-
tion were the deans of men and directors of housing, where
only about one third of the group saw the resistance to
change as "not a factor" in their decision to leave.

Resistance by the institution to the goals that their
former department held important was a ”major" or "contribut-
ing" factor for about 45% of the sample surveyed.

The institutional structure had a negative influence
again with more than half of the respondents reporting that
the extent of bureaucracy was either a "major consideration"
((22.3%), or a "contributing factor" (30.4%) in their decision
to leave.

Limited professional freedom did not appear to be too
great a reason to leave, with the responses fairly consistant
by position. Of the total sample,lJ3 described it as a

"major consideration" and 23% as a “contributing factor."

l0

 

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 nouoew e yon

0.00 0.00 5.00 5.0 0.00 0.Hv 0.00 0.00 H.00 nouuem mnwusoauunoo e

5.00 0.0a 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0a nodueueowmnoo acnee e
emneno on .umwmeu .uwumnH

0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.Hv 0.50 0.00 0.H0 nouoew e yon

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.5 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.0a uouoem unflusownunoo e

0.0 0.0 0.00 0.0V 0.00 0.0 5.0 0.5 0.0 nOwueueowmnoo “Ghee e
maeom .uoeo onesou eoouwuud

0.00 0.00 0.Hv 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 uouoem e uon

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0a 0.00 0.0a 5.00 0.00 0.00 nouoem onwunowuunoo e

0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0a 0.HH 0.5a 0.0a noflueueowmnoo Homes e
maeom 3mm cu eoneumemem

5.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.Hm 0.0m uouoem e non

0.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ,0.H0 0.H0 .0.v0 uouoem mnwusowuunoo e

0.00 0.0a 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 noflueueoflmnoo homes e
mucoueosm an nowueeoeuoon

0.H5 0.00 5.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 5.05 0.00 uouoem e non

0.0a 0.00 0.00 5.0 0.0a 0.00 0.00 5.00 H.0H Houoeu onwusofluunoo e

0.0 0.0a 0.00 0.00 0.0a 0.HH 0.0 0.0 0.0 noflueueowmnoo nomee e

muwaflowmnoomeu mo eeumeo\\

0.50 0.00 0.00 5.00. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Houoem e uon

v.00 m.mm 5.00 5.0 ~.mn 0.0m 0.04 H.v~ 0.0m “canoe manusnnuucoo m

0.00 0.0 0.00 5.00 5.00 0.5a 0.00 0.00 0.00 noflueueowmnoo Henee e
>oeuoneeunm

0.00 0.05 0.00 5.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 nouoem e no:

0.00 5.00 0.00 0.0a 0.0a 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 uouoem oneunoeuunoo e

0.HH 0.0 0.0a 0.00 0.0H 0.0 0.HH 0.0a 0.HH noHueueowmnoo HeneE e
geooeeuu..mmemouo= mo unno&<

0.00 0.05 0.00 5.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 H.00 5.00 Houoew e uon

«.00 0.0a 0.00 5.0 0.00 0.Hv 0.vm 0.00 0.00 uouoew mnfiusowuunoo e

«.00 0.0a 5.00 5.00 0.0a 0.00 0.00 H.0H 0.0a noHueueowmnoo nomee e
emneco no open Heuneeuueoeo

Adaoa mood moo 30o< 30o zood zoo mood moo omnoomom one EoUH

 

Amuneo neo n00
.HH uneo .H Houoeo no omneeunoo mEmuH mo noflusnwuumwo mnemooeumll.oa momda

71

 

.onwmoon mo uouoeudo uneumemme maesoe mood “unease: mo Houoeuao maeooe
zoo «neeo3 mo neoo unevuamue maesve 30o knee mo neeo pneumemme maenoe soot “nos 00
neeo maenvo zoo “munoooum mo neeo uneumwmme maeove wood “muneosum mo neeomaesvo moo “onomen

 

 

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.50 Houoeu e no:

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.50 0.00 Houoeu unwvnowuunoo e

5.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.50 nowueueowmnoo uoflefi e
noauaaoo HenuounH

0.00 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.05 uouoew e von

«.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 «.00 0.00 0.50 5.H0 nouoem onwuooauunoo e

v.0H 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 «.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 nodueuoowenoo wanes e
me>wuoenoo mo auwueao

0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.55 5.00 Mouoeu e uon

«.5H 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0a 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.50 uouoeu unqunowuunoo e

0.0a 0.0 0.00 5.0 v.0H 0.0 0.00 H.0a 0.00 nOwueueonnoo honee e
.ueonm ho oemmmuoxm eonooamnoo

0.00 0.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 nouoem e yon

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0a 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.H0 0.00 uouoeu unwunoauunoo e

0.00 0.0 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0a nOAueuooamnou acnea e
moneE nofimwoeo mo 0e>eo

A0909 mooe moo soon zoo :ooe zoo moon moo emnoomem one EeuH

 

 

.emsnwunoouu.cn memes

 

72

When asked whether they felt that the rate of change
in their former department was a consideration in their
decision to leave the profession, about 60% of the total
sample said that it was not a factor, but approximately one
out of six former student personnel workers saw it as a
"major consideration."

Only about one in twelve of the former student per—

A

sonnel workers felt that a disagreement with their former

m;-

department's goals were a "major" reason for leaving, in
contrast with the almost three fourths who did not think
that it had influenced them at all.

About one third of the responding sample reported that
the clarity of the objectives of their position was either
a major or contributing factor in their decision to leave
their former position. Again, deans and assistant deans of
men and directors of housing proved to be exceptions, with
over 60% of these groups reporting the lack of clear objec—
tives as influencing their decisions.

Although responses to the paired question in Part I
indicated that nearly one third of the respondents reported
that little or no confidence in them was expressed by their
superiors, it appeared that in most cases, the lack of
expressed confidence was not a major factor influencing the

former student personnel worker to leave. Nearly seven of

every ten respondents indicated that it was not even an element

of consideration. It is interesting to note that while well

73

over 90% of the deans of women stated that indicated confi-
dence in them was "not a factor," less than half of that
percentage of their immediate assistants agreed.

However confidence and appreciation were two different
things. Feeling appreciated by superiors appeared to be im-
portant to the majority of former student personnel workers
in that one-fourth reported a lack of expressed appreciation
contributed in a major way to their departure. An additional
quarter saw it as "a contributing factor."‘ Deans and assist—
ant deans of men and directors of housing attributed lack of
appreciation for their performance as a factor more fre-
quently than did the other positions.

Almost 40% of the directors of housing reported the
level of decision making to be "a major consideration" in
their decision to leave; however, they appeared to be an
exception to the general pattern. When the entire sample was
considered, only about 16% indicated that same amount of im-
Iportance assigned to the level of decision making. An addi-
tional 25% of the respondents felt it to be "a contributing
factor."

The level of responsibility contained in their former
position did not seem to exert too_great an effect on the rate
of student personnel attrition. Almost three-quarters of the

entire sample listed it as "not a factor."

 

However this was not the case with the issue of "internal

politics.“ It appeared that this element in the respondents

former environment frequently contributed to attrition.

74

Nearly 30% of the total sample stated this reason as a "major
consideration" in their decision to leave the field. This
question received the highest percentage of ”major consider-
ation" markings of any item in the research instrument. An
additional 23% reported it to be "a contributing factor." In
all cases the assistants to each of the positions credited
this reason for leaving less frequently than did the immedi-

ately superior position.

Part II, Factor II--Prestige

Table 11 contains a summary of the responses to ques-
tions contained in Part II, Factor II.

Only about one of every 18 respondents reported that
lack of involvement in the educational function of the
institution was "a major consideration" in their decision to
abandon the student personnel profession. In contrast, over
75% indicated that it was ”not a factor." A closer examina-
tion of the results shows that several assistant deans of
men, assistant deans of women, and directors of housing all
apparently wanted to be more involved in the educational
function than they were at the time.

As would be expected, considering the relatively high
number of the sample who reported that their former position
had faculty status, few of the former student personnel
workers reported a lack of faculty status to be a factor
influencing their decision to leave.

If faculty status was considered to be prestigious, it

should be obvious why only about one-fourth of the total

 

I .mnflmoon mo Houoenwo .umme maeooe moon one “mnemoon mo Houoeuwo mHenUo
moo unmeo3 mo neeo .umme maenoe zoon «neEo3 mo neoo mdenoe zoo “non mo neeo .umme

maeooe zoo “munoonum mo nemo pneumwmme maeooe moon “munoonum mo neeo maeooo moo "onomeo

 

 

0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 5.05 0.00 0.05 Houoem e uon

0.0a 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.5 0.Hv 0.00 0.0 0.0a Houoem onwuoowuunoo e

0.0 0.0 5.0 0.0a 0.0 0.HH 0.0 0.0 0.0 nowueumowmnoo “Owen e
nowuwmoo mo nofiuonnm .onom

0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.05 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Houoem e non

0.00 0.00 0.00 5.0 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.50 0.0a nouoem mnaunowuunoo e

0.HH 0.00 0.00 5.0 0.5 0.50 0.0a 0.00 0.0 nowueneoflmnoo aches e
aheaem

0.05 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 H.05 0.55 0.00 Houoem e uon

v.0H 0.00 0.00 0.0a 0.0a 0.00 0.00 0.0a 0.0a Houoem mnwunoflnunoo e

0.0 0.00 0.0a 5.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 noaueueowmnoo nonen e
.uwumnw no 0000 n0 emflummuo

0.50 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 Houoem e yon

0.0 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0a 0.0 0.0 5.5 uouoem mnfiunownunoo e

H.m 0.4 5.0 5.0 m.m 0.0 m.~ 5.H m.n nonpaymeflmnoo poems m
moueum wuaooeo

Adaoe moon moo good 30o zoom Zoo moon moo mmnoomom one EmuH

 

Amunoo Moo nay

.HH uneo .HH nouoem nH omnfleunoo mfieuw mo nowuoofinumwo wonoooeumun.aa manna

76

sample felt low prestige in the eyes of the institution to be
a factor in their attrition, and only six per cent of the
total saw it as "a major consideration.“

A very wide range of responses were given to the ques-
tion concerning salary. Over 80% of the deans of students
reported salary not to be a factor, while only 17% of the
assistant deans of men gave the same response. It is also
interesting to note that nearly 90% of the assistant dean of
men's distaff counterparts felt that it was also not a factor.
In this day of women's liberation movements, this response was

especially intriguing.

Part II, Factor III—-Training
and Discipline

A summary of the responses to questions contained in
Part II, Factor III can be found in Table 12. Greater com-
patibility of training with their new position relative to
their former student personnel position did not seem to be a
significant motivating factor causing attrition in the sample,
constant across all of the positions of interest. Less than
one-third felt that the new position that they were assuming
was more appropriate to their background.

As might have been expected after reading the previous
paragraph, as a rule the former student personnel workers in
the sample felt that the training in their background had
adequately prepared them for the position that they had left.
There were no large deviations from the stated pattern.

While almost 80% of thesample had reported that they

were either frequently or very much involved in discipline

 

77

.mnwmnon mo nouoenwo .umme maenoe moon “mnflmnon mo nouoenwo maenve zoo “neEo3 mo

“munmosum mo neeo mHeooe moo

neeo .umme maenoe zooe unenos mo neeo maeooe zoo “nee wo neeo .umme maenow zoom “nee
mo neeo maesoe zoo “munmonum mo nemo .umme maesom moon

«onmmoo

 

 

0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.05 5.00 0.00 H.05 0.05 uouoem e uon
0.00 5.00 0.00 5.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.5a H.00 uouoem onwuoownunoo e
H.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 noeuenmoflmnoo women e
vowamnoo .owomwo one mnflaomnooo
0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 5.05 5.00 0.00 nouoem e uon
0.00 0.00 H.0H 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 Houoem mnaunofluunoo e
0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 noHuenooflmnoo women e
noHuwmoo
noEHOM How mnfinflenv mo woeooeon
0.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 Houoew e uon
5.00 0.00 5.00 5.0 5.00 0.00 0.0a 0.00 0.00 nouoem mnflunofinunoo e
5.00 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.00 0.0 H.0H noeuenmowmnoo aches e
enaaoflomwo n0 uneEe>Ho>nH
0.50 0.00 5.00 0.00 5.05 0.05 H.0m 0.05 0.00 nouoem e uon
0.00 5.0a 0.00 0.0a 0.0a 0.5a 0.00 0.0a 0.H0 nouoeo mnwunoflnpnoo e
v.0H 0.00 0.0a 5.0 0.0a 0.0 0.0a 0.0 0.0a nofluenmoflmnoo Homee e
, nOfiuHmoo
Sen n00 manHenu mo moeooeon
oneoa moon zoo zoon 30o zoon zoo moon moo emnoommm one neuH

 

Amuneo Moo nwv
.HH uueo .HHH uouoeo n0 oenmeunoo mEouw mo nofipooflnuwflo zoneooeumll.ma manna

78

in their former position, only about one-third saw that in-
volvement as contributing to their departure from the profes-
sion. A notable exception to this finding was in the dean of
men position where more than one-half saw it as a factor;

most of that as a "major consideration."

Part II, Factor IV--Persona1
A summary of the responses to the questions contained a
in Part II, Factor IV can be found in Table 13. I H
Any demands placed on the former student personnel
workers by their children apparently were not significant
enough to encourage the peOple in the sample to have sought
another career. Only in the case of the assistant deans of
men did more than 20% of any group feel it to exert any
influence on their decision.
Similar results were found when the sample was asked
thesame question relative to marriage; however, this time
there were some exceptions. The demands of marriage were
felt to be a "major consideration" by 11.8% of the assistant
deans of men, 18.5% of the deans of women, and.33.3% of the

assistant deans of women.

Major Reason for Leaving the Student
Personnel Profession

 

 

Each of the respondents was asked, through an open-
ended question, what they felt was the major reason influ-
encing their decision to leave the profession. Table 14
indicates that there was no general pattern in the responses.

The most frequent response, with 17.7%, was that the former

79

.mnwmnon mo nouomnwo .umme maenom moo< "mnemoon mo nouoenwo maeooo zoo unenoz mo
neeo .umme maeooe zoom “nenoz mo neoo maenoo zoo “nee mo nemo .umme maeoom zoon “non

mo nemo maenoo zoo “wunmooum mo neoo .umwe maesoo moon “wunmonum mo neeo maeooe moo

“onemeo

 

 

0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 nouoew e non
0.HH 0.0a 0.0a 5.0 0.0 0.00 0.5 0.0 H.0H nouoem onwuoofluunoo e
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.HH 0.0 0.0 0.0 nowuenmoemnoo women e

eoeflnuen mo moneEmo
0.00 5.00 H.50 5.00 0.00 0.05 0.H0 5.00 0.00 nouoem e Don
0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.HH 0.HH 0.0 0.0a nouoem mnflunowupnoo e
0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.HH 0.5 0.0 0.0 nowuenmowmnoo Mohee e

nonoafino mo moneneo

onaoe moon zoo zoom zoo zoon zoo moon moo mmnoomem one EmuH

 

.HH uneo .>H nouoem n0 oonfleunoo

Amuneo moo n00

mneufl mo nOfluooHnumHo monmooonoll.0a moone

80

TABLE l4.--Stated major reasons for leaving student personnel
work.
(in per cents)

 

Stated reason per cent

 

I-‘

l—‘NNN NMNWUWWU-b 15.51501me
60

1. Found new position more attractive
2. Incompatible with immediate superiors
3. wanted to teach
4. Salary
5. Opposition to the president
5. Stale, just needed a change
5. Unable to influence policy
8. Talents or philosophy not compatible
with department
9. wanted to do graduate work
10. Personal reasons
10. Internal politics
12. Physical or mental health
12. To much work involved
14. Marriage
15. No opportunity for promotion
16. Student activism
16. Too much resistance from faculty and
president
16. Demands placed on family life
19. Too much involvement with discipline
20. Lack of support from within institution

\0 eoww WU'IQI-‘HhthN concoct-Moms:

N
U1
.

None listed, or “other"

 

‘. , .- -"

81

student personnel worker simply found the new position to be
more attractive than their former position. One important
indication of these results was the small number of responses
that were not covered by questions in the research instrument;
however, at least one respondent left for a reason not
included in the instrument. He stated that his major reason
for leaving college student personnel work was to get away

from "these damn questionnaires.”

Length of Student Personnel Experience

 

When asked about their length of tenure in the student
personnel profession it appeared that most of the former stu-
dent personnel workers had been fairly permanently employed
in the area of student affairs. Of the 360 respondents,
28.1% had been in the profession for nine or more years, and
the median student personnel experience for the sample of
former student personnel workers was five years. Only a
little over 30% had been in the field for less than four
years. A complete listing of the respondents' length of

time in the profession can be found in Appendix C.

Analysis of Variance

The repeated measures design of analysis of variance
was used to investigate for differences between categories
of subégroups of former student personnel workers, and to
test the four null hypotheses. A t-ratio test was used to
locate the major areas where significant differences occurred.

A summary of F-ratios may be found in Table 15.

 

 

 

82

TABLE 15.--F-ratios for differences in "reasons for leaving
student personnel work" and perceptions of the
former environment.

 

 

Degrees
of F-Ratio
Freedom

Differences in perception
of former environment by ' **
position 7, 351 2.706
Differences in reasons for
leaving profession by **
position 7, 351 2.747
Differences in perception *
of former environment
by sex 1, 357 .844 NS
Differences in reasons for
leaving profession by sex 1, 357 1.596 NS
Differences in perception
of former environment by
enrollment of institution 1, 339 2.489 NS
Differences in reasons for
leaving profession by
enrollment of institution 1, 339 3.343 NS
Differences in perception
of former environment by
academic training 1, 351 2.366 NS
Differences in reasons for
leaving profession by *
academic training 1, 351 4.308

 

*
Significant at 5% level.

**
Significant at 1% level.

NSNot significant.

83

Differences by Former Position

The first hypothesis, which was initially stated in
Chapter I, and then again in a testable form in Chapter III,
delt with reasons for leaving the student personnel profes-
sion that might be differentiated by former position. In a
null form, the hypothesis was stated as,

No differences in reasons for leaving the profession

will be found by category of former position, as

measured by the student personnel attrition study
instrument.
The repeated measures design of the analysis of variance
produced an F-ratio of 2.747, which was significant at the
1% level and permitted the rejection of the null hypothesis.

A t-ratio to test for differences between means per-
mitted an identification of just where the differences by
former position lay.

Former directors of housing more frequently cited items
in Factor I as reasons for leaving the student personnel pro-
fession than did the group as a whole (sig. at 5% level). In
other words, former directors of housing mentioned bureaucracy,
lack of appreciation by superiors, level of decision making,
lack of responsibility, and internal politics as reasons for
leaving the profession more frequently than did the total
sample.

Factor II, or "Prestige" related items (faculty status,
salary, and/or prestige in the eyes of students and the in-
stitution as a whole) were mentioned more frequently as

reasons influencing the decision to level the student affairs

84

profession by assistant directors of housing (sig. at 5%
level), and assistant deans of men (1% level) than were
related by the total sample.

Deans of men more frequently attributed reasons of a
conflict between counseling and discipline, involvement in
disciplinary matters, and adequacy of training (Factor III)
as reasons for attrition more often than did the sample as
a whole.

Deans of students differed from the sample as a whole
in both the areas of "Openness" (Factor I, sig. at 5% level)
and Prestige (Factor II, sig. at 1% level). However, in both
instances the former deans of students attributed these
reasons for leaving the profession significantly less frequently.

When the F-ratio test was applied to differences in the
perception of the former environment, differences significant

at the 1% level were also found by former position.

Differences by Sex

 

The second hypothesis tested was concerned with reasons
for leaving the student personnel profession that might differ
between males and females. The hypothesis, as stated in null
form said, "No difference in reasons for leaving the profession
will be found by sex in response to the student personnel
attrition study instrument.“ The F-ratio generated by the
analysis of variance was not significant at any level, there-
fore, the null hypothesis for different reasons for leaving

the profession by sex cannot be rejected.

85

The statistical analysis also indicated that males and
females in the sample did not significantly differ in their
perceptions of the environment of the institution of their

prior student personnel position.

Differences by the Enrollment of the Institution
of the Prior Student PersonneI—Employment

 

 

The third hypothesis to be tested dealt with differen-

tial reasons for leaving the student personnel profession by

 

the enrollment of the institution of the respondents' prior
student personnel position. The null hypothesis for this
test was stated as, "No differences in reasons for leaving I
the profession will be found by the enrollment of the institu- I
tion of the former student personnel position on the student
personnel attrition study instrument." The F-ratio indicated
that again it was not possible to reject the null hypothesis.
Therefore one cannot say that reasons of leaving the student
personnel profession varied by the size of the institution.

Also, when the data relating to perceptions of the
environment of the former position were subjected to an
F-ratio test, no significant differences were found by the
enrollment of the institution of the prior student personnel

position.

Differences in Formal Academic Training
in College Student Personnel WOrk

As stated previously, significant academic training

in college student personnel work was defined as having

86

completed at least a minor in a graduate degree program in
college student personnel work or in a closely related
area. The fourth hypothesis tested related to whether
former student personnel workers with significant academic
student personnel training left the profession for reasons
different from those former workers with no significant
training. As stated as a null hypothesis, it said that,
"No differences in reasons for leaving the profession will
be found by the absence or presence of significant academic
student personnel training in response to the student
personnel attrition study instrument." ‘An F-ratio of 4.308
permitted the rejection of the null hypothesis at the 5%
level. The results therefore indicated that those former
student personnel workers with no academic student per-
sonnel training did leave the profession for reasons dif-
ferent from those with training.

As was the case in the test for differences by position,
a t-ratio was used to determine in what areas the differ-
ences could be found. The only significant t-ratio uncovered
was on Factor I (Openness, sig. at 5% level). Those student
personnel workers with no significant academic student
personnel training tended to leave the profession less
frequently for reason of bureaucracy, resistance to change,
lack of appreciation, level of decision making, and the

other elements in Factor I, than did the total sample.

87

No significant differences were found by the F-ratio
test in perceptions of the environment of the former student
personnel position by the presence or absence of significant

academic student personnel or closely related training.

Summary
Chapter IV has presented the analysis of the data

gained through responses to the research instrument. The
statistical analysis using the repeated measures design of
analysis of variance has permitted the rejection of two of
the four null hypotheses.

Null hypothesis I, which stated that no differences
would be found by category of former position was rejected
at the 1% level of significance. Also rejected was null
hypothesis IV, which stated that no differences in reasons
for leaving the student personnel profession would be found
by the absence or presence of significant academic student
personnel training. ’

A review of the frequency distributions of Part I
indicated that a lack of opportunity for promotion, a lack
of appreciation of superiors for subordinates' problems,
heavy involvement in disciplinary affairs, and frequent
‘student activism was perceived by many respondents as
common in the environment of their former position. Most
of the respondents felt that they had been adequately or
well prepared for the demands of their former position.

Their prior position was held to be prestigious in the eyes

88

of both the institution in general and the student body.
Less than half of the respondents stated that their training
was more.compatible with their new position than was their,
former job.

Responses to Part II indicated that the most frequent
reason for leaving dealt with what was called "internal
politics“ within their former departments. Other frequent
considerations reported as factors in the former student
personnel workers' decisions to leave were a lack of
expressed appreciation for their talents by their superiors,
the level of bureaucracy, perceived resistance by the
institution to innovation and change, and resistance within
the institution to the goals of the student personnel
department.

When asked directly why they left the profession, the
sample's responses were quite varied, but the most frequent
response was that they just saw their new position as more
attractive to them than was their former student personnel

position.

 

 

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

Chapter V summarizes the study as a whole. It will
briefly review the purposes of the study, the sample used
and how it was identified, the research instrument and how
it was developed, and the results. This chapter also will
contain the conclusions, recommendations, and implications

1
for research that the student personnel attrition study

offers.
Summary
Purpose

The major purpose of this study was to determine if
selected sub-groups within the student personnel profession
left the field for differential reasons. The sub-groups
investigated were categorized by former position, by sex,
by enrollment of the institution of the prior student
personnel employment, and by the absence or presence of
significant student personnel or closely related academic
training. An important, but secondary, purpose of this

study was to examine and identify reasons why student

89

90

personnel workers decided to leave the student affairs

profession for another occupation.

Objectives

 

Prior to the research, five major objectives for the

study were established. They were:

1.

to develop an instrument that would provide the
data necessary to answer the questions suggested
in the purposes of the study.

to determine differential reasons for various
sub-groups leaving the student personnel
profession.

to determine why the former student personnel
workers in the sample left the profession.

to tabulate, analyze, present, and conclude the
findings accurately and clearly.

to develop recommendations for further research
in the area.

 

The Sample

The sample used in the student personnel attrition

study consisted of former student personnel workers who had

left the profession sometime between August, 1966 and

October, 1969, had shown a commitment to the profession

prior to leaving, and who had held one of the following

eight positions:

1.
2.
3.
4.

5.

Dean of students

Assistant dean of students
Dean of men

Assistant dean of men

Dean of women

 

91

6. Assistant dean of women
7. Director of housing
8. Assistant director of housing
The sample was identified through the cooperation of
87.2% of the voting delegates to the National Association
of Student Personnel Administrators (NASPA), who were asked
to furnish the names and forwarding addresses of people form-
erly in their department, who met the established criteria.
The 737 voting delegates to NASPA who responded sub-
mitted the names of 652 former student personnel workers,
471 of whom received the instrument (others had insufficient
addresses, or were found not to meet the stated criteria).
Approximately 80% of those receiving the instrument
satisfactorily completed and returned it. The two mailings
that were required were concluded during the first quarter

of 1970.

Design and Procedures

 

In brief, the design of the study consisted of four
phases. First was the identification of the sample, which
has just been discussed, second was the formation of a
questionnaire which would accomplish the purposes and
objectives of the study, third was the surveying of the
sample, and fourth was the use of statistical analyses which
would most accurately examine and clearly present the results.

The research instrument was an original questionnaire

which was constructed by presenting the thoughts, theories,

92

research and speculation of writers in the student personnel
literature in the form of researchable questions. ’More
precisely, the review of the literature was used to identify
areas of potential dissatisfaction and unhappiness in student
personnel work that could affect attrition. From the liter-
ature was developed a large question pool which was reduced
after consultation with authorities in college student
personnel work and research design. Bias examination and
a modified pre-test further reduced the questions to the
number that were contained in the questionnaire.

The format of the instrument included two major parts.
Part I requested the respondentito evaluate various elements
within the institution of his former position, and Part II
asked him to state whether he felt that many of those same
elements were "a major consideration," "a contributing
factor," or "not a factor" in his decision to abandon the

I
I

profession. The research instrument also incorporated
various demographic and open-ended questions to gain further
information that could not be garnered through the type
questions asked in Parts I and II.
Statistical analysis for the student personnel attrition
study was conducted in three major parts.
1. A frequency distribution was formed for each of the eight
position categories, and for the group as a whole. The
purpose of the frequency distribution was to present the

data in a way that exposed responses to individual

questions in a systematic manner.

 

93

2. The data were factor analyzed. A factor analysis groups
items both by relatedness to one another and non-
relatedness between factors. It was felt that groups
of highly related questions would prove to be superior
to any individual item as a discriminating test of the
areas of interest in this study. Factor scores were
generated for each respondent, and in turn were used

as data input into the final phase of the statistical

 

analysis.

3. The last statistical technique applied to the data was
an analysis of variance for repeated measures. The
repeated measures design was superior to other types of
analysis of variance because it permitted the use of
unequal group sizes. Its purpose was the discovery of
statistically significant differences in responses to
the research instrument by the various sub-groups that

were studied.

Results of the Analysis

 

The factor analysis provided four significant factors
in each of Parts I and II. The results that appeared in
the frequency distributions will be summarized in the order
suggested by the factor analysis.

Factor I of Part I was arbitrarily assigned the
descriptive name of "Openness," because the items that were
contained in that factor appeared to have that commonality.

Several questions in this portion of Part I revealed what

94

could be considered negative elements in the environment of
the former position. The question receiving the largest
response in the least favorable alternatives (numbers 1 and
2) was the one dealing with prospects for promotion, with
over two-thirds of the sample seeing little or no chance of

professional advancement. Another item indicating what

 

might be a major area contributing to dissatisfaction was

concerned with open or covert resistance to the student

 

personnel department's goals by elements within the institu-
tion, with almost half of the respondents perceiving either
moderate or strong opposition. Other questions indicating
negative perceptions of the former position's environment
dealt with a lack of "professional freedom," a lack of
appreciation by superiors, and the institution's lack of
openness to change and innovation.

Factor II of Part I was labled “Prestige and Training."
In general, the respondents saw the elements of the environ-
ment in this area in a fairly favorable light. Adequacy of
their training for their former position and their prestige
in the eyes of the students received an especially high
number of positive responses.

Items in Factor III appeared to relate to the defini-
tion of the former position. Results indicated that the
former student personnel workers had been very much concerned
with disciplinary matters. Almost 80% reported that they

had been either very much, or frequently involved in this

95

facet of student life. About 40% of the sample implied
dissatisfaction with the amount of responsibility embodied
in their former position.

Factor IV indicated a high correlation between the
level of student activism on the campus and the rate of
departmental change; in fact,exactly the same percentage
(4.8%) that saw no student activism reported that there
was no change in their former department.

Part II dealt with reasons for leaving the profession
and the first factor to be identified was similar enough
to Part I, Factor I to be given the same name-—Openness.
Internal politics, lack of appreciation by superiors, and
bureaucracy were all repeatedly cited as reasons contribut-
ing to attrition. In fact, less than half of the sample
failed to cite internal politics as a factor in their decis-
ion. The institution's resistance to change, the level of
departmental decision making, and the institution's attitude
toward the student personnel department's goals were also
often referred to, but not so frequently as the first three.
The respondents' attitude towards the goals of the former
department and their level of responsibility appeared to
least influence attrition.

Items in Factor II querying reasons for leaving the
student personnel profession all dealt with some form of
"Prestige." Faculty status, prestige in the eyes of the

institution, salary, and the educational function of their

 

96

former positions all appeared to affect only a few former
student personnel workers in their decision to abandon the
student affairs field.

"Training and discipline" appeared to be the common
elements in Factor III. Again this factor did not seem to
influence many to enter another profession. The most common
reasons for leaving student personnel found among items in
Factor III were on the questions dealing with adequacy of
training for the position and the level of involvement in
disciplinary matters. In each case, a little over a third
of the sample ascribed those reasons to be at least a
"contributing factor."

The personal reasons of Factor IV again did not appear
to be significant in contributing to decisions to leave the
profession. Only by examining the results by position does
a slight exception emerge. Some former deans of men and
deans and assistant deans of women did attribute the demands
placed on them by marriage as a factor in their decision to
leave the student affairs profession.

The analysis of variance F-ratio tests permitted the
rejection of two of the four null hypotheses. Null hypo-
thesis I, which stated that no differences were present by
category of former position, was rejected at the 1% level
of significance. A further examination of the results,
using a simple t-ratio test for differences between means,

found that former assistant directors of housing and assistant

 

97

deans of men more frequently mentioned prestige related
items as elements contributing to their attrition than did
the total sample. Apparently "training and discipline"
related elements encouraged deans of men to depart more
frequently, as did aspects concerning "Openness“ for
directors of housing. Deans of students significantly dif-
fered from the entire group in that they tended to attribute
reasons of "Openness" and "Prestige" less frequently as
influencing their attrition.

The analysis of variance also discovered that the
different categories of positions differed from one another
in their perceptions of the environment of their prior
position (sig. at 1% level).

The second null hypothesis rejected (at the 5% level)
dealt with differential reasons for leaving the profession
between those with no significant academic student personnel
training, and those with training. The test by t-ratio
uncovered only one set of differences between means; and
it was that those former student personnel workers with no
significant academic student personnel preparations tended
to leave the student affairs profession for reasons of
bureaucracy, resistance to change, appreciation, professional
freedom, and other items in Factor I, less frequently than
did the group as a whole. These with significant academic

student personnel training did not appear to view the

98

environment of their former position any differently than

 

did those with no significant training.

The.analysis of variance did not allow the rejection
of the null hypotheses concerning differences by sex or by
the enrollment of the institution of the prior student
personnel position. Also, no differences were discovered
between males and females, nor between former student

personnel workers from small (less than 7,500 students) and

 

large Schools (7,500 or more students) in their perceptions

of their former environments.

Conclusions

 

It is possible to reach several conclusions after a
thorough examination of the data and findings of this study.
1. It may be concluded that the instrument that was

developed and used for the student personnel attrition
study proved to be an effective means of discriminating
between categories in at least two sub-groups of former .
student personnel workers. However, no significant
differences were found with categories of sub-groups
based on sex and enrollment of the institution of prior
student personnel employment. This lack of differences
could be interpreted in one of two ways. One inter-
pretation could be that differences between subdivisions
on these two variables might have existed, but that the
instrument was unable to discriminate between them. It
could also be hypothesized that no differences did exist.
Two bits of information suggested that the latter of the

two cases was the accurate interpretation. First, few

99

responses were received to the open-ended question
inquiring into previously unmentioned reasons for
leaving the profession. Secondly, the question inquir-
ing into the respondent's perception of the major reason
for leaving the profession elicited responses that
closely corresponded with the areas investigated in

the main portion of the instrument. Therefore, it is
further believed that the instrument would have been
adequate in identifying differences by sex or enrollment,
had they existed.

It may be concluded that attrition from college student
personnel work was frequent and possibly increasing.

Of the 737 colleges and universities represented by the
cooperating voting delegates to NASPA, nearly one half
reported that at least one person from their institution
had abandoned the student personnel profession when they
departed the student affairs position at that institution,
and some universities indicated that as many as seven
people had left the profession from that school. An
incidential and unanticipated discovery was that there
was evidence to indicate that the rate of attrition is
rapidly growing—-possibly in geometric proportions. Of
the former student personnel workers sampled, 11.3%
stated that they had left the profession three years

ago, 27.9% two years ago, and 51.5% left only last year

 

 

100

(the remaining 10.3% neglected to respond on this item).
This rate of increase can be seen as approximately a
1:2:4 ratio.

It is not the role of this researcher to ascertain
whether an attrition problem does exist, only those
people directly involved-~students and university
officials—-can make that conclusion; however,the results
imply that the level of attrition is such that problems
could be present or arise.

The rejection of null hypothesis I led to the conclusion
that people from different positions tended to leave the
profession for different reasons. It also appeared

that people from different positions tended to view their
former environment differently.

Former student personnel workers with significant academic
student personnel or closely related training tended

to leave the profession for reasons different from those
with no significant training. This conclusion was based
on the rejection of null hypothesis IV.

It may be concluded that former student personnel workers
most frequently left the field for reasons relating to
openness and interpersonal relations. This conclusion
was based on the frequency with which items in Part II,
Factor I of the research instrument were given as reasons
for attrition. The most frequently cited reasons for

leaving the profession were, in order; internal politics,

 

101

lack of appreciation by superiors,and bureaucracy. All
of these items imply a closed department; both struc-
turally and interpersonally.

6.- It may be concluded that the former student personnel
workers sampled only infrequently left the profession .
for reasons that might be classified as "personal" in
nature. Questions inquiring into health, marriage,
and children received minimal responses, which in turn
indicated that they were not important considerations
in the former student personnel worker's decision to
quit the profession. Furthermore, personal reasons
were seldom mentioned in response to the open-ended
question concerning the major reason for leaving the
profession. The only minor exception to this pattern
was in the cases of assistant deans of men, and deans
and assistant deans of women, all of whom slightly more
frequently cited the reason of marriage as a factor in

their decision.

Recommendations

 

The results and conclusions of this study led to
several recommendations which, if followed, could possibly
contribute to a reduction in the rate of attrition from
student affairs.

1. Since attrition was apparently most strongly influenced
by elements dealing with openness, it is recommended

that student personnel departments first look at

102

themselves and how they are viewed by the people working
within them. Some of the same questions that were asked
in Part I of the research instrument could be modified.
for departmental self-evaluation. Some questions which
may need to be asked could include: are the procedures
and bureaucracy of the department helpful, or rather
something to overcome? are the talents for decision
making within the department most effectively used?
whatare the real criteria on which promotions are
based?

Responses also indicated that often what might be labled
"inter-personal openness" was also a factor contributing
to attrition. Student affairs departments should examine
all aspects of their inter-personal environments. Are
unnecessary restrictions formally or informally placed
on workers relative to their "professional freedom?"

Are the limits, if any, really necessary, or do they just
make it more comfortable for the superiors? Do internal
bickering and behind the scenes politicking play a

major role in the day-to-day Operations of the depart-
ment? Are workers recognized as human beings with human
needs and feelings? Are workers complimented for good
work and encouraged in looking at old problems in
creative ways? Is there open and comfortable communica-
tions between levels within the department? What is the

general morale of the department?

'

 

103

3. Responses to the research instrument further indicated
that many times resistance within the institution was
perceived toward the goals and objectives of the student
personnel departments; therefore,it is recommended that
departments make a concerted effort to explain what they
hope to accomplish to all elements of the institution
in order to dispel any inaccurate ideas. In most cases,
any attitudes that the objectives of the student personnel
department are contradictory rather than complementary
to the other elements within the college or university,
are absurd. Closer cooperation between all facets of
the institution will most frequently contribute to the
accomplishment of the college's goals and objectives.

In conclusion, this researcher feels that a clearer
recognition of the potential problem areas in student per-
sonnel departments could be the first step toward the
reduction of much unnecessary attrition from college student

affairs work.

Implications for Further Research

 

The student personnel attrition study has illustrated
the need for further research in patterns of career mobility,
especially as it relates to attrition. There are many ways
in which this task could be accomplished.

1. An in-depth longitudinal study beginning with graduating
student personnel students and continuing for several

years might help to better understand the dynamics of

 

104

mobility. Standardized and original instruments
investigating personality characteristics and role
perception could be administered at the outset of the
study and at the conclusion (an arbitrary number of
years later). The sample could be then later followed-
up to determine if there were any apparent predictors
in the results of the instruments of any mobility that
might have occurred in the interim.

The relationship between professional training and
mobility and attrition needs to be better understood.
Relevant questions pertaining to professional prepara-
tion include: a. does the professional training
adequately prepare the new student personnel worker
for the world that awaits him on his new job? b. is
the assumption that is frequently made in hiring prac-
tices, that a person with a graduate degree in student
personnel will tend to persist in the profession longer
than one without a professional degree, supported by
empirical data? c. are there patterns of personal
values that are related to mobility?

Uncovered in this study, but unrelated to its specific
objectives, was the finding that the apparent rate of
attrition is increasing. One possible explanation of
the apparent phenomenon is that the voting delegates
to NASPA, who supplied the information, tended to be

selective in their memories in more frequently recalling

 

105

those people who had been in their departments most
recently. A second feasible explanation is that the
findings are substantially correct, and that attrition.
from student personnel work is increasing rapidly.
Research needs to be done to determine which, if either,
of these explanations is actually correct.

An additional area of potentially fruitful inquiry of
the dynamics of mobility and attrition would be the
development of a study complementary to this student
personnel attrition research, but directed at those
people who remain in the profession. Just how do they
differ from those who abandoned the field, such as the

ones in this survey?

A limitation of this study was that the research

instrument had to be quite broad so that it would be
applicable to former student personnel workers from each
of the eight categories of positions and from a wide
variety of institutional types. An in-depth study

investigating one specific position at one type of

linstitution, such as directors of housing at large

state universities, is needed. This would allow the

use of a more precise instrument designed for that
group, or case studies as methods of investigation.

A final recommendation for further research is that this
study, or a similar one, be periodically replicated to

permit the maintenance of a current view of the situation.

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

106

10.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ahmann, J. Stanley, and Marvin D. Glock. Evaluating
Pppil Growth. Second edition, Boston: Allyn
andIBacon, 1963.

 

 

Arbuckle, Dugald 8. Student Personnel Services in
Higher Education. New York: McGraw-Hill,II953.

 

Austin, C. Grey. "Student Protests and the Establish-
ment." The Journal of Higher Education, 39(1968)
223-225. '

Ayres, Archie; Phillip Tripp, and John Russel. Student
Services Administration in Higher Education.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health,
Education and Welfare, 1966.

Cameron, A. R. An Analysis of the Interests, Educational
Preparation and Vocational Background of Student
Personnel Deans. Ann Arbor: The University of’
Michigan, 1965.

 

Campbell, Donald T., and Julian C. Stanley. Experimental
and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research.
Chicago: Rand McNally and Co., 1963.

Cox, D. R. Planning of Experiments. New York: John
Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1958.

Downie, N. M., and R. W. Heath. Basic Statistigel
Methods. New York: Harper and Row, 1965.

Dutton, Thomas B. "Research Needs and Priorities in
Student Personnel WOrk." The Journal of the
Association of Deans and Administrators 05——
Student Affairsi:5 (April l968),339-343.

 

Dutton, Thomas B.; James R. Appleton; and Edward E.
Birch. Assumptions and Beliefs of Selected Members
of the Academic Community. The Journal of the
Association of Deans and Administrators of Student
Affairs, Monograph Series No. 3, Bloomington, Ind.,
April 1970.

107

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

108

Foy, James. Career Patterns of Student Personnel
Administrators. Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation,
MiChigan State University, 1969.

 

Grant, W. Harold. "The Dean and Student Value Develop-
ment." Slst Anniversary Conference Papers, '
National AssoCiation of Student PersonneI—
Administrators, (April 1969), 22-27.

 

Greenhouse, Samuel W., and Seymour Geisser. "On
Methods in Analysis of Profile Data." Psychometrika,
24 (1959), 95-112.

 

Greenleaf, Elizabeth A. "How Others See Us." The
Journal of College Student Personnel, (1969),
225—231.

 

Hayes, William L. Statistics. New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston, 1963.

 

Hodgkinson, H. L. "Governance and Relevance for those
over Thirty." Paper read at the American Associa-
tion for Higher Education, Summer Conference,
Dallas, July 1968, as reported by College Student
Personnel Abstracts (1969), 191.

 

Ingraham, Mark H. The Mirror of Brass: The Compensa-
tion and Working Conditions of College and
University Administrators. Madison: The Uni-
versity of Wisconsin Press, 1968.

 

 

Kenniston, Kenneth. "Deans and Dissenters." The
Journal of the Association offipeansand Aaminis-
trators of Student Affairs, 5 (1967), 183-193.

 

 

Klopf, Gordon J., editor. College Student Personnel
Work in the Years Ahead. American Personnel and
Guidance Association, Monograph Series No. 7,
Washington, D. C.: 1966.

 

 

Klotsche, J. M., and William Butler. "Should Student
Personnel Administrators be Given Tenure?" The
Journal of Colle e Student Personnel Adminis-
trators, 8 (1967;, 225-230.

 

Koile, Earl A. "Student Affairs: Forever the Brides—
maid.” The Journal of the Association of Deans
and AdmifiiStrators of Student Affairs, 4 (I966),
65—72.

 

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

109

Leonard, Eugenie. The Origins of Personnel Services
in American Higher Education. Minneapolis: The
University of Minnesota Press, 1956.

 

 

Likert, Rensis. New Patterns of Management. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1961.

 

. The Human Organization, Its Management
and Value. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.

 

 

 

Lloyd-Jones, Ester. A Student Personnel Program for
Higher Education. First edition, New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1938.

 

 

Lloyd-Jones, Esther, and Margaret R. Smith. Student
Personnel Work as Deeper Teaching. First edition,
New York: Harper, 1954.

 

Mueller, Kate H. Student Personnel Work in Higher
Education. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1961.

 

 

. "Three Dilemmas of the Student Personnel
Profession and their Resolution." Journal of
the National Association of WOmen Deans and
Counselors, 29 (1966) 81-91.

 

 

 

Nonnamaker, Eldon Ray. The Role of the Enrollment
Officer at Michigan State University. Unpublished
Ph. D. dissertation, Michigan State University,
1959.

 

 

Nygreen, Glenn. "Professional Status for Student
Personnel Administrators?" The Journal of the
Association of Deans and Administrators of Student
Affairs, 3 (January 1968), 289.

 

Payne, Stanley L. The Art of Asking Questions.
Princeton, N. J.: Princeton Un1versity Press,
1951.

Peter, Laurence J., and Raymond Hull. The Peter Prin-
ci al. New York: William Morrow and Company,
1969.

 

Pruitt, Anne S. "The Differential Rewards of Student
Personnel Work." The Journal of the National
Association of WOmen Deans and Counselors, 30
IFall 1966), 40- 45.

 

 

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

43.

44.

110

Raines, Max R. "Progress Report on the National Study
of Junior College Student Personnel Programs."
45th Annual Convention of the American Association
of Junior Colleges, March 1965, Dallas, Texas, as
reported in College Student Personnel Abstracts,
(Fall 1967), 67.

Riker, Phillip. College Housing as Learning Centers.
American College Personnel Association Monograph,
Student Personnel Series No. 3, Washington, D.C.,
1965.

Rudolph, Frederick. The American College and University.
New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1962.

Shaffer, Robert H. Student Personnel Services In
Higher Education. New York: Center for Applied
Research in Education, Inc., 1966.

 

. "Meeting the Challenges of Today's
Students." The Journal of the Association
of Deans and Administrators of Student Affairs,

Z (1967;, 177-1820

Sheldon, Miriam. "Contemporary Challenges to Tradi-
tional Concepts." The Journal of the Association
of Deans and Administrators of Student Affairs,

6 (1968), 3—9.

 

Sherburne, Paul R. .Rates and Patterns of Mobilitygof
Student Personnel Administrators: A Pilot Study
in the Western Conference Institutions of Higher
Education. Unpublished Ed. D. dissertatIOn,
Michigan State University, 1968.

 

Siegal, Max, editor. The Counseling of College
Students: Function, Practice and Technique.
New York: Free Press, 1968.

 

Stamatakos, Louis C. Resolution to the Annual Business
Meeting of the American College Personnel Assoc-
iation, washington, D.C., April 4, 1966.

Stinchcombe, Arthur L. Constructing Social Theories.
New York: Harcourt, Brice and WOrld, Inc., 1968.

Underwood, Benton J.; Carl P. DunCan; Janet A. Taylor;
and John W. Cotton. Elementary Statistics. New
York: Appleton-CenturyPCrofts, Inc.,—1954.

 

45.

46.

47.

48.

49.

111

Upcraft, Lee. Role Expectations for Chief Student
Personnel Administrators in Large UniversiEies.
Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1967.

 

Williamson, E. G. Student Personnel Services in
Colleges and Universities. New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1961.

 

Williamson, E. G., and J. D. Foley. Counseling and
Discipline. First edition, New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1949.

 

Wolfle, Dael. Factor Analysis to 1940. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press, 1940.

Wrenn, C. Gilbert. Student Personnel Work in College.
New York: Ronald Press Co., 1951.

APPENDICES

112

APPENDIX A

ATTRITION STUDY INSTRUMENT

113

 

Directions--Respond to the following questions by circling
the appropriate number or filling in the blank.

Name 1'3

(for use in records ONLY)

 

How many years experience have you had in a college student
personnel position? 4

Sex
1. Male
2. Female

How long ago did you leave your last student personnel
position? 5

What was the enrollment of the institution of your former

student personnel position? 6
1. Less than 1500

. 1500—2749

. 2750-7499

. 7500-20,000

. Over 20,000

UIIBWN

Marital status

 

Please list college degrees earned, with majors and minors,
if any. 7-8
Degree Major Minor Minor

 

 

 

Part I

:Many college student personnel departments are undergoing a
jperiod of change in function. Which statement best describes
the rate of change in your former department? 9

1. No change

2. Little or no change

3. Moderate change

4. A great deal of change

114

115

Which statement best described the level of student activism
in the institution of your former position? 10
1. No student activism
2. Little student activism .
3. A moderate amount of student activism
4. A great deal of student activism

Did your former position offer a form of "professional
freedom" similar to your teaching collegues'“academic
freedom?" 11

1. No professional freedom

2. Professional freedom only in limited areas

3. Fairly broad professional freedom

4. Essentially the same freedom as the teaching faculty

How would you describe the opportunity for promotion in
your former position? 12
. Almost no chance for promotion

. Little chance for promotion

. Good chances for promotion

. Almost certain of promotion in the near future

hWNI—J

What was the level of prestige of your former position in
the eyes of the rest of the institution, generally? 13

1. Very low
2. Moderately low
3. Moderately high
4. Very high

How would you rate the adequacy of your training for your
former position (a combination of formal, informal and in-
service training)? 14

1. Totally inadequate

2. Fairly insufficient

3. Fairly adequate

4. well prepared

Iknw many duties did you have in your former position that
you.did not personally consider to be student personnel
duties? 15

l. A great many

2. Some

3. A few

4. None

Which statement best describes your former position? 16
l. Essentially unworkable because of the level of
bureaucracy
.2. Bureaucracy and red tape greatly hindered my performance

 

116

3. Bureaucracy sometimes interferred with my performance
4. The bureaucracy was generally responsive and helpful
in the performance of my duties in my former position

Which statement would best describe your former position? 17
1. Had too much responsibility
2. Had about the proper amount of responsibility
3. Had too little responsibility
4. Had almost no responsibility

How well did superiors appreciate the problems faced by
subordinates? 18
l. Knew and appreciated little
2. Had some knowledge
3. Knew and appreciated rather fully
4. Knew and appreciated very well

What was the extent of your responsibility in disciplinary
matters in your former position? 19
1. Very much involved
2. Frequently involved
3. Sometimes involved
4. Seldom or never involved

What was the level of prestige of your position in the eyes
of the students, generally? 20
1. Very low
2. Moderately low
3. Moderately high
4. Very high

How would you describe the geographical location of the
institution of your former position? 21
1. Very unappealing to me
2. Moderately unappealing to me
3. Somewhat attractive to me
4. Very attractive to me

How much resistance, hidden or open, was there to your
former department's goals in the institution? 22
1. Strong resistance
2. Moderate resistance
3. Some resistance at times
4. Little or no resistance

How closely did you agree with your former departments
goals? f

1. Very little agreement

2. Moderate disagreement

3. Moderate agreement

4. Almost full agreement

23

117

Which statement best describes the institution which
employed you in your former position? 24
1. Intransigent, extremely resistive to change
2. Change occurred only under strong pressure or evidence
3. Change occurred when based on substantial evidence or
justification
4. Open to immediate meaningful change

Did your former position have faculty status? 25
1. Yes
2. No

How would you describe your salary in your former position?
1. Very inadequate 26
2. Rather low
3. Sufficient for the position
4. Very good

 

Do you feel that the position you now hold is more in line
with your training and preparation than was your former
position? 27

1. Less in line with preparation

2. Equally in line with preparation

3. Slightly more in line with preparation

4. Much more in line with preparation

In your former department, at what level were decisions
usually made? 28
1. Almost completely at the top
2. Policy at the top, but with some limited delegation
3. Broad policy at the top, more delegation
4. Throughout

 

In your previous position did your superiors show confidence
in their subordinates? 29
. Not at all

. They were condescending

. Substantial confidence

. Complete confidence

hWNI-J

Did you perceive a conflict between counseling and discipline

in your former position? 30
1. Serious conflict, greatly affecting my own
effectiveness
2. Frequent conflict, often detracting from my
effectiveness

3. Sometimes interferred with my effectiveness
4. No real conflict

118

How did you see your level of involvement in the educational
function of the institution of your former position? 31
1. Little or no involvement in the educational function

2. Some involvement in the educational function

3. Moderate amount of involvement in the educational
function '

4. Greatly involved in the educational function

How clearly were the actual objectives of your former
position defined? 32
1. Not at all
2. Only slightly
3. Fairly well
4. Very clearly

 

119

Part II

In the following section, place a check mark in the appro-
priate column to the right of the question.

A major A contri- Not a
consider- buting factor
ation factor

 

Was the degree of openness
to change in your former
department a factor in your
decision to leave your
former position? (33)

Was the level of student
activism a factor in your
leaving? (34)

 

Was a lack of "professional
freedom" a factor in your
leaving? (35)

Was the lack of faculty
status a factor in your
leaving? (36)

 

was the level of prestige your
former position held in the eyes
of the rest of the instit. a
factor in your leaving? (37)

Was the compatibility of your

training with your new posi-

tion a factor in your leaving?
(38)

‘Were your-non—student per-
sonnel duties a factor in
your leaving? (39)

Was bureaucracy a factor in
your leaving? (40)

was the lack of responsibility
held by your former position a
factor in your leaving? (41)

was the level of understanding
and appreciation your superiors
had for the problems inherent
in your position a factor in
your leaving? (42)

 

 

 

120

was the level of involvement
in disciplinary-matters a
factor in your leaving? (43)

Was geographical location a
factor contributing to your
change in position? (44)

Was covert or overt resistance
to the goals of your former

department by the institution“
a factor in your leaving? (45)

Was your attitude toward your
department's goals a factor
in your leaving? (46)

Was institutional resistance
to innovation and change, if
it existed, a factor in your
leaving your former position?
(47)

Was the lack of faculty status,
if it existed, a factor in your
leaving? (48)

was salary a factor in your
leaving? (49)

Was the level of departmental
decision making a factor in
your leaving? (50)

was the lack of appropriate
training and preparation for
your former position a factor
in your leaving? (51)

Was the level of confidence in

you as expressed by your supere

iors a factor in your leaving?
(52)

Was a conflict between counseling
and discipline, if it existed,
a factor in your leaving? (53)

A major
consider-
ation

A contri-
buting
factor

Not a
factor

 

 

 

 

 

 

121

A major A contri- Not a
consider- buting factor
ation factor

 

Were the demands of your
children, if any, a factor
in your leaving? (54)

Were the demands of marriage
a factor in your leaving
your former position? (55)

 

Was your personal physical
‘health a factor in your
leaving? (56)

 

Was the degree of peg:
involvment in the educational
function of your institution
a factor in your leaving? (57)

Was a lack of clarity of
explanation of the objectives
of your position a factor in
your leaving your former
position? (58)

Was internal politics a factor
in your leaving? (59)

 

 

 

122

Were there any other factors influencing your decision to
leave that you have not already mentioned? If yes, what
were they? (60-61)

 

 

 

What was your former position?

 

 

 

 

 

762)
What did you like best about your former position?
(63)
What did you like least about your former position?
'_T64)

What was the major factor influencing your decision to leave
your former position?

 

 

(65)

Additional comments: ’ . (66-67)

 

APPENDIX B

LETTERS TO NASPA VOTING DELEGATES

AND TO RESEARCH SAMPLE

 

123

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY East Lansing, Michigan 48823

 

Justin Morrill College Snyder Hall
December 8, 1969

Dear :

 

Because of your administrative leadership position and com-
mitment to the college student personnel profession as seen
by your status as voting delegate of NASPA, you undoubtedly
are aware that many student personnel workers are leaving
their jobs for another field outside of college student
personnel work. Very possibly this attrition has caused
difficulties in your own department.

 

Thomas B. Dutton, director of the NASPA Division of Research
and Publications has written that research needs to be done
in order to determine ” . . . what factors influence attri-
tion or continuation in (college student personnel work)."

I am attempting to answer the question suggested by Dr. Dutton's
statement and need your help if I am to be successful. I am
asking for you (or your secretary or assistant) to provide me
with the names and current forwarding addresses, if you have
them, of the people who have met the criteria below and who,
to the best of your knowledge, are no longer in a college or
university student personnel position. For the purpose of my
study I am only concerned with those who have worked in your
institution 5 student personnel division during the past 3
years (since September, 1966). The positions that I am
specifically interested in are:

l. The chief student personnel administrator.

2. The student personnel worker with responsibility for
male students, 223 his immediate assistant(s).

3. The student personnel worker with responsibility for
female students and her immediate assistant(s).

4. The director of E55 student personnel housing
program epg_his immediate assistant(s).

This research is important and in order to be valid, it must
be done with a representative sample. Only you and others
like you can supply me with that sample. Please take a moment
of your or your secretary's time to fill out the postage-paid
address form. Thanking you in advance for your cooperation,

I am

Cordially yours,
Welter B. Shaw

Instructor, Justin Morrill College

Michigan State University Enclosure

124

125

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY East Lansing, Michigan 48823

 

Justin Morrill College Snyder Hall
January 17, 1970

Dear NASPA Voting Delegate:

Several weeks ago I sent you and the other voting delegates
to NASPA a letter requesting assistance in a research project
concerning factors influencing attrition of college student
personnel workers. Although I have received most of the
replies, I have not yet received your reply. In order for
this study to be complete I would like to have 100% response
if at all possible.

All that I am requesting from you are the names and current
forwarding addresses of persons who formerIy held the foIIowing
positions in your department and who are no longer engaged in
those or equivalentypositions at‘amy institution and have not
died or retired. The positions that I am concerned with are:

 

 

l. The chief student personnel administrator.

2. The student personnel worker with responsibility for
male students, and his immediate assistant(s).

3. The student personnel worker with responsibility for
female students, and her immediate assistant(s).

4. The director of the student personnel housing
program and his immediate assistant(s).

Attrition from our field is a serious problem which needs to
be more fully understood and only you or your associates can
supply the information necessary for proper investigation.

Please complete the enclosed pre-paid card. If you have no
one who meets the stated criteria, just check the box marked
"None." This information is also important. Also, please
sign the card, which will help me with my records.

I am looking forward to your response.
Cordially,
V Walter B . Shaw

Instructor, Justin Morrill College
.Michigan State University

Enclosure
VWBS

126

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY East Lansing, Michigan 48823

 

Justin Morrill College
March 3, 1970~

AI am asking for your cooperation in a research project
that will help us to better understand the reasons why people
leave college student personnel work.

I understand that you have worked in college student
personnel work as a dean of students, dean of men, dean of
women or as director of housing, or were an immediate assistant
to one of these positions sometime during the past three and
one half years. I also understand that you are no longer
employed in one of these positions. I intend these titles to
be generic rather than specific because I am interested in
positions with other titles that perform these same duties.

Please take about 15 minutes of your time and fill out the
enclosed questionnaire and return it in the prepaid envelope.
Your name is requested ONLY to allow me to follow-up on anyone
who does not respond. It will not be used in the report or
in any other tabulation. Name associated data will be held
in complete confidence.

Attrition from these areas in the student personnel pro-
fession is a big problem about which much has been speculated;
however, an examination of the literature in the field indicates
that probably this study is the first systematic national
survey of the phenomena.

Only you and others like you who have left these areas can
supply the information necessary to allow for a more clear
understanding of the dynamics of this aspect of mobility.
Please take the short time necessary to allow for a formula-
tion of a representative picture of the situation.

If for some reason my information is incorrect and you
have not worked in one of these occupational areas, are still
employed in one of the positions, or left the position prior
to August, 1966, you don't need to complete the questionnaire;
however, please do return the form anyway, with a note explain-
ing why you don't meet the criteria. '

The success of this study completely depends upon your
cooperation. Thanking you in advance, I am,
Yours truly,

walter B. Shaw
Instructor

 

127

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY East Lansing, Michigan 48823

Justin Morrill College

From:
Walter B. Shaw
Justin Morrill College
Michigan State University
East Lansing, Michigan 48823

A few weeks ago I asked your cooperation in completing a
brief questionnaire. As of yet I have not received your
response. If you have only forgotten, please take the few
minutes necessary to complete the questionnaire. I have
enclosed a second copy.

If you hesitated to reply because you desired greater
anonymity than my personal assurances of confidentiality
offered, please complete and return the questionnaire unsigned.
If you choose the second option, please sign and return the
signed enclosed card in a separate mailing. If you, as several
did, have already returned the questionnaire unsigned, just
complete the card and mail it.

Once again, I am asking for your help in a national survey
of certain former student personnel workers who have left the
profession sometime since August, 1966. The positions I am
interested in are those which generally have the duties
usually assigned to positions most frequently called Dean of
Students, Dean of women, Dean of Men, and Director of Housing.
~ I am also interested in people who have served as immediate
assistants to any of these positions. If my information is
incorrect, and you do not meet the criteria I have just stated,
only return a note explaining why you do not meet the criteria.

Attrition from college student personnel work is a major
problem in American higher education today. To the best of
:my knowledge, this study is the first systematic attempt to
:more fully understand the dynamics of attrition. Only you and
people like you have the true answers to the questions that
this study raises.

I hope that I can count on your help in this study. It
is important to me and potentially important to the college
student personnel profession.

Yours truly,,

walter B. Shaw
Instructor
Enclosures/ 2

 

 

APPENDIX C

FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS NOT INCLUDED

IN TEXT OF DOCUMENT

 

128

’47]

QUESTIONS IN PART I NOT
INCLUDED IN THE TEXT OF
THE DOCUMENT

Number Per cent of

 

 

total
Level of prestige in eyes of institution
very low 16 4.5
moderately low 108 30.3
moderately high 181 50.8
very high 51 14.3
Amount of non-student personnel duties
a great many 50 14.0
some 110 30.9
few 123 34.6
none 73 20.5
Geographical location
very unappealing 31 8.7
moderately unappealing 44 12.4
somewhat attractive 98 27.6
very attractive 182 51.3
Agreement with departmental goals
very little agreement 26 7.4
moderate disagreement 53 15.0
moderate agreement 91 25.8
almost full agreement 183 51.0
Salary
very inadequate : 32 9.1
rather low 114 32.4
sufficient for position 163 46.3
very good 42 11.9
Level of decision making
almost completely at top level 84 23.7
policy at top, limited delegation 94 26.5
broad policy at top, more
delegation 104 29.3
throughout ‘ 73 20.6
Involvement in educational function
little or no involvement 64 18.0
some involvement 101 28.4
moderate involvement 85 23.9
greatly involved 106 29.8

129

130

Clarity of position's objectives
not at all clear
only slightly understood
fairly clear
very clear

Number

35
120
152

49

QUESTIONS IN PART II NOT
INCLUDED IN THE TEXT OF

THE DOCUMENT

Non-student personnel duties
a major consideration
a contributing factor
not a factor

Geographical location
a major consideration
a contributing factor
not a factor

Health
a major consideration
a contributing factor
not a factor

OTHER QUESTIONS NOT
INCLUDED IN THE TEXT
OF THE DOCUMENT

Highest earned degree

B.A., B.S. or less

M.A., M.S. or M. Ed.

Graduate or professional work
beyond masters level but not
doctorate

Ph. D. or Ed. D.

Marital status
single
married
divorced
separated
widowed or widower

18
271

16
31
307

18
43
294

32
166

36
117

91
254

Per cent of
total

9.8
33.7
42.7
13.8

I‘

 

131

Number Per cent of
total
Years of experience in a student
personnel position
1 year 21 6.0
2 years 53 15.1
3 " 47 13.4
4 " 42 11.9
5 " 28 7.0
6 " 20 5.7
7 " 19 5.4
8 " 23 6.5
9 or more years 99 28.1
Best liked aspect of former position
prestige or power 24 6.8
working with students 244 68.7
co-workers 33 9.3
opportunity to influence policy 13 3.7
geographical location 3 .8
experience gained 9 2.5
freedom offered by position 13 3.7
other, or no response 21 6.0
Least*liked aspect of former position
lack of trust, authority, or
responsibility 25 7.1
general direction of department 29 8.2
lack of understanding of SPW by
top administrators 18 5.1
discipline 59 16.7
superiors 31 8.8
resistance to change 12 3.4
generally disliked position 7 2.0
hours, routine, too much to do 72 20.3
interference by people outside dept. 36 10.2
other, or none listed 71 20.0

 

 

WALTER BAXTER SHAW
Candidate for the Degree of

Doctor of Philos0phy

Final Examination: July 28, 1970

Dissertation: A Study of Attrition Among Selected
Former Student Personnel workers

Outline of Studies: Major Subject: Administration and
Higher Education

Minor Subject: Anthropology

Biographical
Information: Born, June 8, 1942, Greenville,
South Carolina

Undergraduate Degree: Miami
University, Oxford, Ohio, 1960-64,
B.A.

Graduate Degrees: Miami University,
Oxford, Ohio, 1964-66, M.S., Michigan
State University, 1968-70

Experience: Residence Assistant, Miami University
1964. Head Resident, Miami University
1965. Assistant Swim Coach, Miami
University, 1964-66. Graduate
Assistant to the Executive Dean for
Student Affairs, Miami University,
1965-66. Assistant Dean of Students,
State University of New York, College
at Potsdam, 1966-68. Research
Assistant, Justin Morrill College,
Michigan State University, 1968-69.
Instructor, Justin Morrill College,
Michigan State University, 1969—70.

132

 

GQN STQTE UNIV LI

IIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIII II III IIIIIIIIIIIII