THE USE OF DEPTH INTERVIEWING TO EXPLORE THE ’MOTIVATIONAL FACTORS UNDERLYING ACHIEVEMENT OF ELEVENTH GRADE HIGH SCHOOL GIRLS Thesis for the Degree of Ph. DI MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY JANE A. BONNELL 19.62 This is to u-rtill] that the thesis wmillml presented hI] no 14““I'WOT ' nu.» .-.‘- has been accepted hmmwls tuliillnu-III 01 the rorquiI‘qurIIts tur h V _ . A r M degree m --u Tr agar“, Mnjnr lu‘nitj‘sxul‘ l‘n‘f 15% "-C' [.310_ V \ 1W" 3%. 733' k? “” ‘ IIIIIIIIII 10723 8655 , THE USE OF DEPTH INTERVIEWING T0 EXPLORE THE MOTIVATIONAL FACTORS UNDERLYING ACHIEVEHENT 0F ELEVENTH GRADE HIGH SCHOOL GIRLS By Jane A. Bonnell Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education Guidance and Personnel Services 1962 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LIS’B OF TABLES a o C a n c o c o o o o I o o I o o c ACKNOWLEMMENTS I o I n o o c o o o o o a o o a o o I ABSTRACT. . o o a o I o o a o I a o I o o I o o c o o I. THE PROBLEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Purpose of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . fiw'flmonr.. .. .. ... .. .. ... .. .. Relation of Study to Total Research Problem . . . Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11, REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Identification of the Deviant Female Achiever . . Personality Traits of the Deviant Female Achiever Parent Child Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . The Female Under—Achiever . . . . The Female Over—Achiever. . o C o O O o o o O 0 ii Page viii ix 10 10 15 17 20 21 r. 1 '1.‘?\7r‘1‘n‘!»’~-' / n , \\ TABLE Cr vhuinuib ICcntinued/ Chapter III. DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Definition of the POpulation . . . . . . . . . Description of the Sample . . . . . . . . . . . The Design of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . Instrumentation and Collection of Data . . . . TheStUdentcoo-00000000.... Instruments and Theory Based Questions . . . . T119 Parents 0 O O O O O I O O O O O O O O O T118 Teachers 0 O C O O O O O O O I O O O O 0 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Iv. TIE ANALYSIS OF DATA 0 o o o o o o o o o o o 0’. 0 Factors Underlying the Generalized Situational Choice Inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Factors Underlying the Human Trait Inventory . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Factors Underlying the Perceived Parental Attitudes Inventony . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Parent-Student Response Comparison . . . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TeacherhStudent Response Comparison . . . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cumulative Records and Teacher Interviews . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Chapter V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, COMPARISON WITH COMPARABLE AND IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH . . . . . mm 0 O O O O O O I O O O O O O O O I O O The Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Instrumentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Findings and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . RESEARCH, Theory Basic to the Situational Choice Inventory . . Theory Basic to the Human Trait Inventory Theory Basic to the Perceived Parental Attitudes Inventory . . . . . . . . . . . Comparison of the Parent-Student Reaponses the Perceived Parental Attitudes Inventory the Word Rating List . . . . . . . . . . . Comparison with Comparable Study on Boys . . New Relationships and Implications for mtherResearCh00000000000... Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BIBLIOGRAPIH I O O C I O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O AIDPm-DIX O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 iv from and O O O O O 54 54 54 55 55 56 57 57 57 58 59 61 63 66 73 74 --. _wv g._ It”- : 4-,,L Table Number 1.1 1.2 1.3 4.3 LIST OF TABLES Summary of Theory of High Need for Academic Achievement and Low Need for Academic Achievement Motivation Basic to Current Research . . . . . . . . . . . Personality Characteristics of Over- and UnderbAchievers Basic to the Current Research . . . . . . . . . . . . Theoretical Factors Hypothesized in the Parent-Child Relationships Related to Academic Achievement . . . . . . . . . Distribution of the Sample by Ability Level Indicating Achievement Discrepancy. Average Reliability of Ratings with Between Rater Variance Removed of Three Judges on Ten Students for the Factors Underlying the GSCI . . . . . . . Tests of Significance of the Means of Ratings Made by Three Judges on Ten Students for the Factors Underlying the GSCI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Average Reliability of Ratings with Between Rator Variance Removed of Three Judges on Ten Students for the Factors Underlying the HTI Page Number 24 36 37 39 —-'-1~3ic:‘F-L-~r". “#13:- ,_ 3—.— =.. :33: _ Table Number 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 5.1 5.2 5.5 5.4 LIST OF TABLES (Continued) Tests of Significance of the Means of Ratings hade by Three Judges on the Ten Students for the Factors Underlying tl’Iefl................ Average Reliability of Ratings, with Between Rater Variance Removed, of Three Judges on Ten Students for the Factors Underlying the PPAI . . . . . . Tests of Significance on the Means of Ratings Made by Three Judges on Ten Students for the Factors Underlying the PPAI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chi-Squares and Phi—Coefficients Calculated on the Parent—Student and Parent—Criterion Groups Responses to the Twenty Significant Items from the PPAI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chi-Squares and Phi-Coefficients Calculated on the Teacher-Student and Teacher-Criterion Groups Responses to the 50 Significant Items from the flRL_ . . . . . . . . . . Underlying Factors of the Achievement Situation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Underlying Factors of the Personality Tl‘ai ts O O O O O O O C O C O O O C O O Underlying Factors of the Perceived Parental Attitudes Inventory . . . . . Judges' Rati.gs on Factors Underlying the PPAI O O O O C C O O O O O O O O O Page Number 40 44 47 Table Number 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 LIST OF TABLES (Continued) Comparison of Parent—Student Responses on tlle PPAI . O I O O O O O O O I O 0 Comparison of Parent-Student Responses on the m C O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Reliability of Judges' Ratings on the fl . C O C C O I O O O O O O O O O 0 Significance of Judges' Ratings on the RBI 0 O O O O C C O O O O O O O O O 0 Reliability of Judges' Ratings on the PPAI O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Significance of Judges' Ratings on the PPAI O O O O C O O O C O O O O O O O O Page Number 66 V’ ACKNOWLEDGMENTS At the time she chooses to pursue a doctoral program, the student also selects friends and advisers to help her in her work. Their assistance, planning, and encouragement are large contributors to the success she achieves. Dr. Walter F. Johnson, Jr. and Dr. William I. Farquhar have been the advisers of this work. To Dr. Johnson, the co—chairman of my committee, go my thanks; to Dr. Farquhar, the director of this dissertation, my gratitude. It has been a singular pleasure to work with them; my appreciation for their ready assistance and prompt and thorough review of my work. I wish to thank Dr. Michael P. Joseph, a co—worker on this dual project, for his help in the planning and execution of the data collection and his assistance in other aspects of the study. David A. Payne and Ronald G. Taylor have given information whenever called upon to do so. I wish to acknowledge the su port and encouragement given me during the preparation of this work by my friend and neighbor, Mrs. Myrtle Royce. I wish also to acknowledge the help of Judith Slot, Jackie Runnels and Laura Rae Barker, the former two with the typing, the latter with data information. It has been a happy and worthwhile exterience to have been associated with the Farquhar Motivation Project Team and to have participated in their work at Michigan State University. viii Jane A. Bonnell W This phase of the investigation carried on by the Farquhar Motivation Project sought to explore further motivation for academic achievement with focus on the attainment of new insights relative to motivation of fenale deviant achievers. Factors based on theories of the motivational situation in the academic setting, of he personality characteristics of deviant achievers and of parental attitudes as related to academic achieve- ment were formulated by members of the Farquhar Research team at Michigan State University. The eleventh grade classes in-nine high schools became the sample of the Farquhar Study. Deviant achievers were identified by means of a two— step regression technique using the students' scores on the Differential Aptitude Test-Verbal Reasoning, the California Test g£_hental maturity- ngguagg.and their grade point averages. Ten deviant female achievers were chosen for this study. The sample represented the full range of academic ability as measured by the DATfEfi, An under- and an overbachiever were chosen from each ability quintile. Questions were formulated to investigate the factors of the theory, and question-based interviews were held with each girl in the study. The recorded interviews were rated on bi-polar scales by three clinically trained judges. Judges had no previous knowledge about the students. An analysis of the variance technique was used to measure the average reliability of all ratings, with between-rater variance removed, for each factor. The significance of the difference in the means of the ratings given to the ten deviant achievers on each of the factors was tested by t-tests. Reliability coefficients ranged from —.119 to .885, and the t-tests were significant at the .05 level for the following: ix Over-Achievers Under-Achievers 1. Long Term Involvement 1. Short Term Involvement 2. Unique Accomplishment 2. Common Accomplishment 3. Independence 3. Dependence Factors which did not discriminate significantly between over- and under—achievers are: Over—Achievers Under—Achievers 1. Competition with a 1. Competition with a Minimal Maximal Standard of Standard of Excellence Excellence 2. Controlled Anxiety 2. Free-Floating Anxiety 3. Positive Authority 3. Hostility Toward Relationships Authority 4. Academic Orientation 4. Soeial Orientation 5. Adequate Interpersonal 5. Inadequate Interpersonal Relationships Relationships Parents of the girls in the study were interviewed to study the presence of certain factors theoretically related to the academic achievement of their daughters. Interviews were recorded and presented to the three judges who rated the students on the factors mentioned above. Ratings were made on a five-point scale which represented the factors. One end of the scale represented those for parents of over—achieving children, the other end of the scale represented parents and under-achieving children. The average reliability of ratings with between rater variance removed, was calculated for each factor. The significance of the difference in the means of the ratings given the factors for the over—achieving group and the under-achieving group, was tested when t-tests were made. The range for the reliability coefficient was .438 to 1.000. None of the factors differentiated between over— and under—achievers. Significant items from two of the Farquhar Project inventories were presented to parents and teacher. items from the Perceived Parental Attitudes Inventory were presented to the parents, and teachers were asked to respond to items from the Word Rating List. These responses were compared to those given by the sample of ten deviant achievers, and to the responses given the items by the Farquhar validation groups of under— and over-achievers. Chi-squares were calculated to measure the relationship between the eight response groups: 1. Parents and Over-Achieving Daughters 2. Parents and Under-Achieving Daughters . Parents ~nd Validation Group of Over-Achievers Parents and Validation Group of Under-Achievers Teachers and Over-Achieving Students Teachers and Under-Achieving Students Teachers and Validation Group of Over—Achievers Teachers and Validation Group of UnderbAchievers CI)\IO\\n-{~»\N 0 Significant chi—squares (at .o01 level) were found for all but the Parent- Validaticn Group of Under-Achievers. Over-achievers and their parents' responses to the items on the Perceived Parental Attitudes Inventory were found to agree more than could 1 be expected by Chance when the whole group is considered together. When individual students and parents were compared, the correlation was average. On their responses to the Perceived Parental Attidudes Inventory, under-achievers and their parents did not agree. Parents did agree with the direction given the item by the validation group of under-achievers. These parents were found to reapend almost in the same manner as parents of over—achievers. Students saw themselves as their teachers perceived them on the characteristics stated in the significant items from the dord Rating List. More teachers of over-achievers rated their students in the direction given by validation groups, than did teachers of under-achievers. This study was carried out with a small sample of ten students. Little study had been done previously so that the present study suggests channels of further study. Extensions of theory and areas for further research which would eXplore the student's personality, her family and school relationships, have been formulated. CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM High level achievement has been found to be a complex of many factors. One of the most important of these is motivation. Insishts about some phases of motivation have derived from studies whose foci were on other educational concerns; studies focused directly on investigation of motivation have had limitations in selective populations and inadequate theory. While knowledges have accrued from previous studies, much remaizs to be done if a thorough understanding of motivation for academic achievenent is to evolve. Comprehensive instruments and reliable techniques of assessment need careful formulation, trial, and perfecting. Farquha justifies the construction of objective instruments for adequate study of motivation on the basis of need for better educational selection and nlacement. Further benefits could derive, viz., to the school program through improvement of teaching procedures; to counseling through more refined and accurate understandings of p pils' motivations. Zubin2 sees the lack of objective instruments as symptomatic of a prinitive level of measure ent. Subjective evaluation dies not permit transcendence of self- reference as a criterion. He states: Jailliam w. Farquhar, "A Comprehensive Study of the Motivational Factors Underlying Achievenent of Eleventh Grade High School Students," Research Project No. 836 8458) in cooperation with the U. 8. Office of Education, November, 1959, p. l. 2 . Joseph Zubin, "The heasureyent of Personality," Journal of c u ee ' s_E,"i2[gthony, 1 (Fall 13:54), p. 159. "We have not yet found exteinal criteria for measuring motivation, feeling, and sentiment...0ur problem is to find a suitable model or structure...which can be examined scientifically." To date there has been no published objective assessment which comprehensively measures motivation for academic achievement. Educators have eXpressed a need for a measuring device which takes into consideration both personality characteristics and the motivational situation. Such an instrument could result from the present extended research on motivation for academic achievement. Purpose of the Study The Farquhar Motivation Study Group began its research at Michigan State University in 1959. Its purpose was to deve10p comprehensive and objective measures of academic achievement motivation. The purpose of this research is to eXplore further motivation for academic achievement through depth interviews with a small sample of students. The additional exploration focuses on the attainment of new insights and the perception of new relationShips. The investigators of the Farquhar Group chose eleventh grade public high school students in order to give the study as broad a base as possible and a meaningful student age focus. Previous studies were reviewed. Descriptive material from previous work was structured into instruments to which students might respond. Objective scales were designed to differentiate over— from underbachieving students. Two separate groups, an over—achieving group and an under-achieving group, were identified. The Farquhar researchers subsequently adept l the torn "discrepant achievers" as descriptive of both groups. Emphasis was placed on studying the students in their present surroundings, in the family, school, and community. The interview was a technique considered for use in studying the achievement motivation of students. However, because of research and fund limitations, personal interviews were not incorp rated into the larger Farquhar motivation study. -3... For the depth probing of the motivational dynamics of the small sample of students of this study, a semi-structured interview technique was employed. This dissertation presents the nor: done with female public high school eleventh grade girls. This phase of the project parallels the work done by Joseph vith eleventh grade boys}. This research is conceived as an identical study focusing attention on discrepant achievers also, specifically on over— and under—achieving girls. The instruments of the Farquhar hotivation project were constructed to explore the motivational aspects of achievement in the students' personal, family, school, and extra-curricular life. The Perceived Parental Attitudes Inventogy contains statements assessing the attitudes of parents toward their children and their practices in child rearing. Students responded to items as they felt their parents would respond answering in a range of four degrees from "Strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." Teachers used a second questionnaire, the Word Ratingfiéigt, on which they described students‘hy choosing an adjective on a four degree continuum ranging from "never" to "always." Using the same Word Ratinglgist students were asked to check the words descriptive of how they felt teachers felt about them. The Generalized Situational Choice Inventory presented the eleventh graders with a series of dual situations, and they were requested to check the one they preferred. Students also responded to the Human Trait Inventory_which uses items designed to study the personality of the student in more depth. The instrument required a choice on a four degree continuum "never, rarely, to usually, always." Lastly, a Preferred Job Characteristics.§ga;g’required each student to choose, from a pair, the one characteristic he valued more for his future job, after completing his formal education. Detailed description of scales and instruments can be found in the research reports of the Parquhar Motivation Project. 3Michael P. Joseph, "The Use of Depth Interviewing to Explore the Motivational Factors Underlying Achievement of Eleventh Grade High School Boys," Ph. D. Dissertation, Michigan State Universit , 1961. -4- References will frequently be made to the companion study done by Joseph4, and procedures which are described at length in his work Jill only be briefly presented here. The arrangement of the chapters and their parts in this dissertation will be kept identical so that comparison can be made between the findings concerning the sexes. The Theory The research work of which this study is a part takes into considera- tion the nature of the motivation situation, the personality characteristics of discrepant or under- and over-achievers and parental factors as they might relate to achievement. FollowingI-IcClelland's5 for achievement is determined in early child rearing practices and that in theorizing that the basic motivational pattern these practices are laid the strong ties the child feels for goals that the parent rewards or punishes, the members of the Farquhar study research team described those who respond to goals of school success as having "high need for academic achievement," and those who find school accomplislnent less important as having "low need for academic achievement." McClelland's6 motivation for achievement is typified by: l) long-term involvement, 2) competition with a standard of excellence, 3) unique accomplishment. The Farquhar group then assigned the reverse of these attributes to the low-need students. Modification of the McClelland second factor con— cerning competition with a standard of excellence is explained by Ther1e7. 4 Joseph, 931. Cit. 5D. McClelland, J. Atkinson, et. al., The Achievement Motive, Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York, 1953. 6Ibid. 7Marion D. Thorpe, "An EXploration of Factors Accounting for Item-Intercorrelation in an Objective Scale of Achievement Motivation," Ph. D. Dissertation, Michigan State University, 1961. TABLE 1.1 Summary of Theory of High Need for Academic Achievement and Low Need for Academic Achievement Motivation Basic to the Current Research Motivational Situation , High Needfigghievement Low Needfigphievement 1. Long term involvement 1. Short term.involvement 2. Competition with a maximal 2. Competition with a minimal standard of excellence standard of excellence 3. Unique accomplishment 3. Common accomplishment The Generalizeg.Situational Choice Inventogg incorporated these factors into pairs of statements which were designed to explore the presence of a need for academic achievement. One of the personality characteristics which appeared to differentiate between over— and under—achievers was that of perceived attitudes of significant others. These perceptions were eXplored in two of the instruments used in the research, the Perceived Parental Attitudes Inventory and the Word Rating_List. Taylor8 reviewed the literature on personality traits significantly characteristic of discrepant achievers. The following table gives the traits which appeared most frequently. 8Ronald G. Taylor, "Personality Factors Associated with Scholastic Achievement": Paper presented at the 1961 Convention of the American Personnel and Guidance Association, Denver. -5- TABLE 1.2 Personality Characteristics of Over- and Under-Achievers Basic to the Current Research Over-Achievers Under—Achievers 1. Controlled 0.xiety l. Free—floating anxiety 2. Independence 2. Degendence 3. Academic orientation 3. Social orientation 4. Adequate interpersonal 4. Inadequate inter—personal relationships relationships 5. Positive authority 5. Hostility toward relationships authority Personality trait items which were designed to discriminate between over— and under-achievers were incorporated by Taylor9 into the Human Trait Inventogy. Paynelo reviewed the theorizing on motivational patterns for achievement growing out of family child-rearing practices. He hypothesized factors as follows: TABLE 1.3 Theoretical Factors Hypothesized in the Parent-Child Relationships Related to Academic Achievement OverbAchievers Under-Achievers l. Achievement Pressure 1. NOn-Achievement Pressure 2. Permissiveness 2. Non-Permissiveness 3. Poor Parent-Child Interaction 3. Good Interaction 4. Non-Possessiveness 4. Possessiveness 5. Undemocratic Guidance 5. Democratic Guidance 6. No Discipline 6. Discipline 7. Rejection 7. Acceptance 9 Taylor, 92. 93.1; . loDavid A. Payne, "An Investigation Into the Relationship Between Perception of Parental Attitudes and Academic Achievement": Paper presented at the 1961 Convention of the American.Personnel and Guidance Association, Denver 0 -7- The factors listed in the table formed the basis for the Perceived Parental Attitudes Inventory thus Opening up a source of information about child-rearing practices in the home of the student. A detailed exploration of the behavioral patterns characteristic of each of these factors can be found in Payne11 and JosephlZ. Relation of the Study to the Total Research Problem The technique of depth interviewing to provide further information was considered. It was felt that semi-structured interviews could be employed to provide further information about the factors underlying the design of items for the inventories just described. These interviews with students and parents, along with the teacher ratings, would further explore motivational dynamics of the students and their environment. Further investigation of the meanings of certain items to the student would provide more depth understandings about responses on the instruments. The additional study carried on as a part of the original research design would search out the attitudes and practices of parents in child rearing. It would reveal new relationships and additional insights. The current study and Joseph's study, employing the semi—structured interview technieue, were projected. Both studies were planned to use A selected members of the criterion group, five male and five resale inder- rd and five male and five female over-achievers. Tle theory and scales of the previously mentioned investirators would previdc the basis for the student, parent, and teacher interviews of the two new studies. The data from the interviews would further examine the content and validity of the items derived from the previous investijators, who, in turn, had originated their theoretical hypotheses and scale itins from their study and riview of of ex1sting I3 existing theory and research. Amplification and modificatio theory could also be carried on concurrently. llPayne, 9-H. 9&0 12Joseph, 0 . Cit. -8- Hypotheses Because the ultimate purpose of the Farquhar Motivation Study is the design of an objective measure of the factors characteristic of discrepant or over— and under—achievers, the items used have been designed to so discriminate. The Null-Hypotheses of the creators of the Generalized Situational Choice Inventory, the Perceived Parental Attitudes Inventory, the Human Trait Inventory, and the Word Rating List are the same: There is no significant difference between the responses of overb and under-achievers on theory-based cues. In this phase of the project, the factors which served as the theoretical bases for the instrumental cues are investigated in the series of semi-structured interviews eXplained above. The hypotheses, stated directionalLy, are: There is a difference, in the predicted direction, between over- and under-achievers in the theoretical factors defined in this study. Parent responses to the Perceived Parental Attitudes Inventory, and teacher responses to the werd Rating List were also secured. Based on these responses, it hypothesized that: 1. There is a positive relationship between the responses of the sample of overb and under- achievers and their parents on the items (from the Perceived Parental Attitudes Inventory) finally selected for inclusion in the objective instrument designed to measure academic achievement motivation. 2. There is a positive relationship between the direction of the responses made by the parents of the overs and underbachievers, and the direction of the reaponses made by the criterion groups of over- and under-achievers respectively. 3. There is a positive relationship between the responses of the sample of over- and under-achievers and their teachers on the items on the werd Rating List. .9- 4. There is a positive relationship between the direction of the responses made by the teachers of the over— and underbachievers, and the direction of the responses made by the criterion groups of over— and under-achievers, respectively. The criterion groups for this investigation are the same groups used for validation of the items of the Parquhar Project. Reference has been made to the Farquhar Motivation Study of which this study is a part. Mention has also been made of the investigations, theories, and instruments of other project workers. A detailed description of their work is to be found in their studies. The purpose of the depth interviewing procedure is further exploration of new relationships which might underly motivation for academic achievement. The interviews with students, parents, and tea hers will provide greater understandings of what underlies the theorized factors and traits of the over—all research. They will also serve as a channel for furtler study of the dynamics undergirding reSponses of students, parents and teachers to instruments of other project workers. In the next chapter, a review of the work relating to discrepant or under— and over-achieving female students will focus on relevant aspects of the studies. The third chapter presents the method of interview and data collection. The method of sample selection is described. Questions asked by the interviewer for this study are essentially the sane as those used in the companion study with males and presented by Joseph in his study. Chapter four includes the analysis of the data of th's study, examines the hypotheses in relation to the data, and discusses findings. he final chapter will summarize the total study and the relationship of this investigation to the overball project. Discussion which might provoke further research will conclude the study. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE The current interest in the kind and quality of education available to the American student and the current emphasis on the role of the counselor in the life of the student have led to a demand for 1) better knowledge about the characteristics of students, and 2) better techniques for measuring the motivations of students. The literature reports many studies in these areas. Few of the studies deal with the characteristics and motivations of the female student. The identification of the female deviant achiever, her personality traits, her parent—child relationships, and her role in American society have received little direct investigation and study. A concern with such study is the focus of this research. Shaw and IicCuen1 have written, "Much research has shown the necessity of treating males and females separately in studies of underachieVement." Few research studies report having done so. Because this study is focused on the female student, attention is given to the work where data on girls are provided. Further, some related research which has included girls among the subjects studied, is reviewed. A composite picture of the female deviant achiever taken from the studies where some sex role differentiation has been noted is also presented. Identification of the Deviant Female Achiever There is a general agreement that the problem of deviant achievement has its genesis early in the lives of the students. Shaw and lMerville C. Shaw and John T. McCuen, "The Onset of Academic Underachievement in Bright Children," The Journal 9:,Educationa1 Psychology, Vol. 51, No. 3: 1960, p. 104. -11- McCuen2 found little research to determine the source of the deviancy. Their study focused on the under-achiever and involved procedures of identification of male and female students. They selected students who were in the upper 23% of the school population with regard to ability and classified them as achievers or underbachievers on the basis of their cumulative grade-point averages in Grades 9, 10, and 11. Only eleventh and twelfth graders were included in the study. The ability test used was the Pintner General Ability Test: Verbal_Series, which had been administered to all selected students in Grade 8. A student who achieved an intelligence test score which placed him in the upper 23% of the pepulation (over 110) and who had earned a grade-point average below the mean of the class he was in, was classified as an underbachiever. Male and female underbachievers were treated separately with 17 female under—achievers making up a part of the final group of the study. Using Farquhar's3 Under- and Over-Achievers," a comparison of the identification technique "Proposed Criteria of Effective Selection of of the Shaw and McCuen study is made with the present study as follows: A. The achievement criterion should be academic —— not contaminated with activity courses. Shaw and thuen state, "The general plan...was...to classify them as achievers or under-achievers on the basis of their; cumulative grade-point averages in Grades 9, 10, and 11." The present study calculated a grade point average for each student using combined ninth grade and half of the tenth grade. Academic was defined as courses which had homework. B. The achievement criterion should equate different grading systems of various communities. Shaw and McCuen report, "...a S in ‘his study...must have attended school only in the school district served by the 2311aw and I-icCuen, 51p, Cit., p. 103—108. ‘7 ”William W. Farquhar, "A Comparison of Techniques Used in Selecting Under- and Over-Achievers": Paper presented at the 1961 Con— vention of the American Personnel and Guidance Association, Denver. p. 8. 4Shaw and McCuen,IQp, Cit. p. 104. ‘1; _12_ high schools in the study. All Ss then, have had all of their formal education in a single school district." The student‘s grade point average had to fall "below the mean of r the class she was in," to be classified as an under—achiever.) The present study equated grading systems by asking the schools in the study which courses had homework, then eliminating the grades of those courses which didn't have homework. The aptitude predictor should be heavily loaded with valid and reliable academic predictor factors. Shaw and thuen used the Pintner General Abilitv Test-Verbal J. Series. J. Wayne Urightstone is quoted in the Nine sen—Forty Rental Measurements Yearbook: "...Inadequate data are provided in the Manual about the reliability and the Validity of these tests, but it may be presumed that in both these aSpects, the tests are as good as most currently6available tests of verbal intelligence." The present study used the Verbal Reasoning Scale of the Differential Aptitude Test. On pilot studies the 40 item verbal scale of the DAT was found to work twice as well as the 80 item scale of the California Mental Maturity Testfiggggggg_. While the manual of the DAT indicates use of the Verbal Reasoning, Numerical Reasoning, and Language Scales together as a predictor, the pilot study showed that the Verbal Scale is an adequate predictor. The aptitude predictor should be a stable estimate free as possible of such spurious effects as chance high scores by low achieving non-readers. Shaw and McCuen used one aptitude measure, the Pintner General Abiliyy Test-Verbal Series administered to all Ss included in the study at the time they were in Grade 8. 5William W. Farquhar, "A Comprehensive Study of the Motivational Factors Underlying Achievement of Eleventh Grade High School Students," Talk to Counselors, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1961. 6J. Wayne Wrightstone, Educational Research Bureau, Vbl. 18, April, 1939, p. 117-118. Oscar Euros, The Nineteen-Forty Mental Measure— ments Yearbook, The Gryphone Press, Arlington, Virginia, 1945. p. 1418. -13- The present study did not want to include peeple who were chance high scores. Two measures were used (CTIdvI—V, pig-v.) and all unstable Ss were removed. Two measures were felt to be stable estimates and a good indication of performance. E. The aptitude predictor should be a stable estimate free as possible of such spurious effects as chance low scores due to confusion in test administration and poor test motivation. Shaw and McCuen suggest an overball lack of motivation for all females until they approach adolescence. This implies the possible presence of chance low-scores due to poor or slow—maturing“motivation. The present study attempted to remove unstable samples through screening for patterns of test resistance, i.e., poor test motivation, and confusion in test administration. F. The selection model should represent the full range of achievement and ability. Shaw and McCuen used a central tendency split technique. "A student who achieved an intelligence test score which placed him in the upper 25% of the population (over 110) and who had earned a grade-point average below the mean of the class he was in, was classified as an underachiever."8 Over- achievers were not identified. This group could have been selected by reversing the above procedure. The present stu used the regression model selection technique ‘a la Gerberich. Selection was based on a discrepancy between predicted and actual achievement of at least one standard deflation. G. The selection model should be built separately for the two Sexes 0 Shaw and EcCuen, using the central tendency split technique, identified 168 students. This group was subsequently divided into subgroups of males and females. 7Shaw and McCuen, QR, Cit., p. 107. 8Shaw and McCuen,.Qp, Cit., p. 104. 9R. Gerberich, "Factors Related to the College Achievement of High Aptitude Students Who Fail Expectation and Low-Aptitude Students Who Exceed Expectation," Journal 9:.Educational Psychology, 1941, Vol. 32, p a 253-265 0 I. -14- The present study built selection models separately for each sex and for each of the participating schools. The selection model should classify the criterion groups wish a minimum chance of overlap. Shaw and thuen's sole tion procedu; e is analyzed b"r Farquhar. His consideration of the procedures suggests the poss.ibility t_\nt the samfle of the study inclules some 3 "ho "ere not under-achievers and excludes some who were under—achievers. The present study established statistically li“h chances that the criterion groups were truly deviant achievers. The selection model should meet the assumptions of a parametric statistic. Shaw and HeCuen'ss st udy presents findin: s w}.ich are not in comple ce accord wit those of other studies. If the assumption is that the selection model af: ords a true and reliable “'as‘re of the pepulation of under-achievers, Farquhar's analy3is raises some questions stout the sample selection device. The present study employed a technique for es; lo selection known as Regression Model “election. A discussion of its values is presented oy Farquhar. 1 The selection model should control re”ression effects. Shaw and thuen‘s technique (extended for selecting under- and ove1-—achievers) used a quadr rant split technique. Discrepancies were determinrd by contrasting extreme groups in achievement—a‘titude distriwutions, and by eliminating a middle group. In the present study, a re ression technique was develOped which based selection on a discrepancy between predicted and actual achievement of at least one standard deviation. Under- achievers were defin d as those uh as actual "*ed point averave fell at least one standard error of estimate belo: tle re; :ssion line prediction of achievement. Similarly, over-achievers were designated as those who fell one standard error of estimate above the regression line. Reduction of the sample served to control regression effects. loFaqub-ar, _O_Eo Sly-o, p. 120 llFaqumar, 9-2. Cite, p. 9-12. -15- Personality Traits of the Deviant Female Achiever Shaw and thuean found evidence that under-achievement among the female group does not show itself until Grade Six. Prior to this time under-achieving females tend to do better than achieving females. The authors suggested that females do not display their self—directing tendencies until they approach adolescence. From that point on the underb achieving female becomes a chronic under-achiever. Shaw and Grubbl3 characteristic of the bright high school achiever. heasures of hostility undertook to study the trait of hostility as were administered and data for females were computed separately. The authors found evidence to suggest that female underbachievers do not respond as do male under-achievers to hostility items on the scales administered in the study. They raised a question relative to the "realness" of the difference since it was felt that females may not express hostility in the same manner as do males. Mitchelll4 personality characteristics among groups of self-acceptant and self- analyzed patterns of goal-setting behavior and related rejectant college female deviant achievers. Underbachievers in this study were found to be poorly motivated, unwilling to exert much effort to accomplish school work, and unable to follow through on school tasks. They appeared to lack concern about achievement and tended to satisfy ego-needs and to find contentment in other ways. The self-acceptant under—achievers were easy-going, lacking in concern about achievement, and well-adjusted. The self-rejectant under— achievers were less consistent in their mane-up and highly anxious and defensive. 12Shaw and HeCuen,.Qp, Cit., p. 106-107. 13Mervi11e c. Shaw and James Grubb, "Hostility and Able High School Under-Achievers," JOurnal'gf.Counseling Psychology; Vol. 5, Ho. 4., 14James V. Mitchell, "Goal-Setting Behavior As a Function of Self- Acceptance, Over— and UnderbAchievement, and Related Personality Variables," Journalflgf Educational Psychology, Vol. 50, 1959, p. 93—104. -l6—- Over-achievers were a hard-working, industrious group who sepired to obtain high grades and did although many were found to be of mediocre ability. The self-acceptant over—achiever was well—adjusted, expectant of success, able to withstand pressure and free from anxiety and competitive— ness. The self-rejectant over-achiever was an unhappy, anxious, struggling to achieve and to be worthy, individual. s 1 . . halloy 5, studying over— d under-achievement among female college freshmen, generalized that the over-achiever is a non—conformist more than the average person. He believes that she is a diligent worker, that she aspires high and persists well. The under-achiever, as a high school student, is not concerned about achieving good grades although in many ways she is a conformist. In college she works hard only in the subjects she likes. Striving and persisting are not qualities she values. In their exploration of factors relating to over-achievement and under—achievement among grade and high school pupils, Kurtz and Swensonl6 found personality traits representative of their groups of "plus achievers" and "minus achievers." They find qualities of leadership, of originality, and of self-confidence characteristic of boy and girl plus-achie'ers. Minus-achievers were found to be restless, changeable and unhappy as well as lacking in self-confidence. Barrett17 and non-achievers, found achievers coming closer to meeting the school in his study of gifted secondary school children, achievers 15John Halley, "An Investigation of Scholastic Over— and Under— Achievement Among Female College Freshmen," Journal of Counseling Psychology, Vbl. 1, No. 4, 1954, p. 260-263. 16John J. Kurtz and Esther J. Swenson, "Factors Related to Over-Achievement and Under—Achievement in School," School Review, 59, 1951, pp. 472-80. Harry 0. Barrett, "An Intensive Study of 32 Gifted Children," Personnel and Guidance Journal, Vol. 33, 1957, p. 192—lf4. .--v a- ...: ‘ ‘ 1--.’_‘, ' .J- .. _.‘ J_“VA .' ' 7‘ ‘ _ .~’ _ - ‘ -03 a. 1 u CT none: _ ,ds CQICQ.10L oi the ”ell—1Lte-raied Negacnai1.* :H'h “1” she A U at“ ’3‘ nr‘f‘ " 1": “\‘r ‘r- A” 1.3”}! “. f’fl"1-:"‘ - ~“ . ' ‘ -: 7 ' J . «1 oT-iCIj I .0. soul .eis once led in ee-lu s or north, in a 111;: to ~. . ‘ ‘l‘. ‘ J . - 4- ... ~ -—\- —t-., 5" * I“ v ~ r ‘ v ‘ 'ers1st, and in levotioa LC leisulo t1“: acti.ities. They used a areele — oolvinr' a"roach in vercoiiu~ ”i“°’~”«ties and o be ~ it anl g.) V -9 k”; 1).. (-, O V ya; Lab uA. s chit/L‘A- ..ng S Urv V8 to K.’ adci C k... C worthy. Under—achievers were depressed by feelinys of inadequacy; they tended to withdraw and to refuse to compete. f‘. )— Kirklu described the symptozlatelogy of the chronic college under- achiever as known to clinics and counseling centser The .n er-ac‘-iev er lacks insight about his deficiency, makes unrealistic explanation and gives similar excuses, but is at the same time aware of his measured good potential and good abilities. He deem ibes tension about academic tes ing, but willful failure is a rejected explanation. He is unable to discuss his inadequacies or his feelings about it. Interpretation of co as material reveals pervasive resistance on an unconscious level. Outwardly the under- achiever is hard-working, meticulous, and earnestly dutiful. Depression and self-derogation are characteristic of many under-achievers. Parent—Child Relationships McClelland et a1.19 discuss the relationship between motivation for achievement among vomen and social acceptability. They found that the arousal of motivation for achievement in women was accomplished by reference to social acceptability or unacceptability. The data of their study gave a little evidence that motivation for achievement in women through social acceptability or unacceptability might be related to depende nce on others; i. e., achievement motivation in girls is associated 18Barbara A. Kirk, "Test Versus Academic Performance in Mal- functioning Students," Journal of Consulting_Psychology, Vol. 16,1952, p0 213-216. 19D. McClelland, J. Atkinson, et al., The Achieveaent Motive, Appleton—Century—Crofts, New Yerk, 1953, p. 181. -18- with stress on dependence by their mothers. - 20 Shaw and thuen's study found me y more male than female under- achievers. These investigators sugtest that parents demand a higher level n “\2 of performance from females than they do from males. Calhoun21 studied under—achievers and found similarity between the degree of satisfaction with the level of school achievement felt by under-achievers and their parents. Knrtz and Swenson22 studied factors relating to school achievement. Tenth grade girls were subjects in groups of "plus" and "minus" achievers. A charting of conditions in lives of a representative "plus" girl and a representative "minus" girl describes home conditions of the rirls as follows: Plus Achiever Minus Achiever Mother very proud of this Father has been in mental in— girl; girl looks to mother stitutions; mother works away for advice; there is from home much of the time; evidence of mutual respect. girl has shouldered heavy hone reSponsibilities, now leaves home whenever she can. Further general description relative to "plus" achievers of this study finds pride, Confidence, affection, and interest of parents in their children. Instances in which parents read to their children, play with them, build for them, appear to be in greater evidence. On the part of the children, there is a tendency among plus achievers to reapect their parents, to take them into their confidence, to be concerned about pleasing them, and to return the love their parents show. 20Shaw and McCuen,'Qp, Cit., p. 107. 218. Reed Calhoun, "The Effect of Counseling on a Group of Under-Achievers," The School Review, 64, 1956, p. 316. 22Kurtz and Swenson, QR, Cit., p. 477. -19- Minus achievers awpear to have a comparatively limited Space in the ‘- hone. There does not appear to be so much exchange of affection, or mutual respect, or desir to measure up to echctations. Even expectations appear limited for minus achievers. . 2 . . . , . . halloy's J investigation of oev1ant female achieve ent found: ——-the family of the over-achiever: 1 Fostering attitudes of independence 2 Disciplining less -—-the family of the under—achiever lg Stim sting with special rewards 2 nielding from criticism of the father 3) Disciplinin; more 4) Including less in conversation 2A “I > . r. u... J. ‘ O r ‘1 (n. 1 .‘ I" vs 1‘ p ,“ ‘ ‘ Barrett studying Uifted bogs inc aiils in secondary‘scnool, lCuLG 1 discernible patterns of differences in home backgrounds of over- and under— achievers. Parents of underuachiovers tended to: 1) Exhibit a neutral or disinterested atti ude toward education 2) Be overhanxious, over-solicitous, or inconsistent in their attitudes toward the child 3) Lack cooperative spirit in the family, i.e., conflict was present, the parent was authoritarian or donitated the child 4) Failed to participate in church Fliegler's25 study of under-achievers found similar patterns in the home: I) A neutral or disinterested View by the parents 2) An over-anxious, over—solicitous, too easy-:01n5, or inconsistent parental attitude toward the child 3 Lukewarm indifferent attitude toward the child 4 A lack of coOperative spirit in the family: conflict, authoritarianism, or domination of the child 2pJohn Malloy, "An Investigation of Scholastic Over— and Under- Achievement Among Female College.Ereshmen," Journal of Counseling: _P§ychology, Vol. I, Number 4, 1954, p. 262. 24Barrett, Op. Cit., p. 194. 25Louis A. Fliegler, "Understanding the Underachieving Gifted Child," Psychological Reports, 3, December, 1957, p. 534. -20- Summary A review_of the research pertaining to the personality and family relationships of the deviant female achiever reveals little direct research relative to her characteristics. Some insights have derived as corallaries of stud es of personality characteristics of mal—functioning studen s, of giftedness, and of effects of counseling. For the most part the summary material is comprised of authors' suggestions and impressions descriptive of the female achiever. The female deviant achiever as seen by in— vestigators and speculators about her characteristics may be briefly described. The female under-achiever is not recognized as such until sne reaches puberty, at which time her self-directing tendencies show themselves. A prediSposing factor present at the time she enters school is a postulated cause of the reversal and the directing tendencies. Female underbachievers' responses differ from those of male under~ achievers; their cx;ressions of hostility are made in a different manner. These females are found to be poorly motivated and not concerned about good grades. They are unwilling to exert much effort to do school work and unable to follow through on school tasks. They work only on subjects they like, do not strive or persist. In many ways they are conformists, restless, changeable, unhappy and lacking in self-confidence. Under- achievers are often depressed by feelings of inadequacy and withdrawal. They lack incicht about their deficiencies and make excuses for inadequacies. ")‘L'J In some instances they are outwardly hard-working, dutiful and meticulous. At home the under—achiever experiences less exchange of affection, less respect, and less expectation to accomplish at any level. She is disciplined more and has more need to be protected from criticism. sintorosted in her school achievement and given They tend to Parents are neutral or di to extremes of concern and inconsistency in attitudes. dominate the under—achiever in an authoritarian manner. -21- The female over-achiever is hard-working and industrious. She aspires to and achieves high grades regardless of ability. She feels that she is intelligent and believes that she works hard. She persists well and is considered to be more independent than are underbachievers. She is felt to have a well-integrated personality. She excels in feelings of worth and in devotion to leisure time activities. Her approach to difficulties is a problem-solving one. Parents are proud, affectionate and interested in the over-achiever. They share respect, concern, love and activities together. Attitudes of independence are fostered and discipline is minimal. CHAPTER III DESlGL AHD LETHODOLOGY efinition of the Pepulaticn The instruments of th Fe; qtfluir Hotivstion Study wer slain ste‘rl to a_; roxinately 42 00 eleventh grade hiohi gen ni h so} 001 soul,.'3. l . Farquhar de cribes tile procedure by whic}: the discrepant or over— and , . ~ . ., .n. 2 under—achieveis were finally identiried, and Joseph min; arises the Farquhar process of selection as follows: 1. An initial survey, of the testis; programs presently employed in the 100 most pepulous Cities of the state, was conducted in 1959. 2. From among these, the schools which administered the Differential A“titude Test - berm , were sel acted for the second 3 he). 3. Each of the schools with ninth grade DAT scores was invited to particiuate in this :otivatione 1 resee rch project. 4. Nine 3 hools were chc:3en to cons titute the po;ulation. The sophomore studentsi in these schools, for whom ninth grade QgT_soores were available, were then administered the California Test g£_hental Maturity-Language. 5. Correlations between various sub-tests of the 2&2 and grade-point-averave were computed. The sub—test which provided the best correlation was the Verbal Reasoning. This sub-test, togeth r with the C‘E'il____I_-L, were th e best predictors of GPA. 1William W. Farquhar, "A Comparison of Techniques Used in Selecting Under- and Over—Achievers," Michigan State University, 1961. gflichael P. Joseph, "The Use of Depth Interviewing to Ex;lore the Motivational Factors Underlying Achievement of Eleventh Grade High School Boys," Ph. D. Dissertation, Michi can State Universit tr, 1361. -23- ’ Regression equations and the standard errors of estimates for the prediction of DAT:E§ scores from CTNM1L scores, and the reverse (CTME:L.scores from Qé2:!§ scores) were computed. The average of the intersection i 1.00 standard error lines were used as limits. 7. Only those students whose measure of academic ability, ninth grade 252:!3, and tenth grade mused” showed stability were retained. The stability index included those within.:.1.00 standard error of estimate. 8. 2A23E3,and GPA were correlated. A regression line pre- dicting GPA from 242:!3_scores was computed. A standard error of estimate was determined. Students falling outside + 1.00 standard error were taken as over— achievers. Those outside -l.OO standard error were identified as under—achievers. 9. This procedure was followed for each school in the study, and for males and females within each school. Description of the Sample The above-mentioned work resulted in the identification of a group of over—achieving girls and a group of under—achieving girls for each school participating in the study. The term over-achiever, in this study, is defined empirically. It is a student whose grade point average is higher than the average predicted for him when the regression equation (which predicts GPA from QAT:!§ scores) is used. In like manner, the underbachiever is one whose GPA is lower than the predicted average. Three schools having the same socio—economic level of students and located in two adjacent suburban communities were chosen. A sample of ten étiscrepant achievers, five over—achieving and five under—achieving girls unis adequate for this study. The requirements of the research project 1?1?0m which this dissertation results could be met with a small sample. TTle list of over-achieving females was constructed for each school. For each student the following information was gathered: 1. Her raw score and ninth grade percentile ranking (National Norms) on the Differential Aptitude Test - Form A Verbal Reasoning. 2. -24- Her deviation from the predicted grade point average. This deviation is positive for ever—achievers and negative for under-achievers. The DAT723 percentiles were divided into quintiles in order to obtain students from the full range on academic aptitude. From the group, in each quintile, the one under-achieving girl who deviated most from the predicted Grade Point Average and the one over—achieving girl who deviated most, were chosen to make the total sample of ten. TABLE 3.1 Distribution of the Sample by Ability Level Indicating Achievement Discrepancy Quintile I II III IV V Over— Achiever +.16 +.46 +.75 +-59 +.53 Under- Achiever -043 ‘059 -I53 -072 _o26 Other requirements to be net .5 the sample included: 4. Complete answer sheets for each inventory. A Personal Data Questionnaire which was completely and accurately filled in. Intact families, i.e. mother and father both alive and living together. Each girl in the sample must have indicated: a. One present teacher who knows her best. b. One past teacher who knows her best. The student be presently attending school as a member of the eleventh grade. -25- wed to obtain for the Parents of the students in the sample were intervie needed information. The principal in each school arranged interviews to take place in the homes, and the interviewer completed arrangements at the same time explaining the purpose of the interviews. All parents of the selected group agreed to participate. The Design of the Study Reference has been made to the theory developed pertaining to the motivational situation, personality characteristics of discrepant achievers and parental factors as they relate to academic achievement. Motivation scales were developed based upon hypotheses rooted in review and study of previous investigations. Further exploration of the scales and the hypotheses upon which they were based was now done through individual interviews with selected students. The design of this study employed the semi—structured interview to further explore characteristics and factors influencing the motivational situation. Time limitations placed restrictions on the exploration of some facets of the interviews. New understandings about motivation for '" academic achievement were sought in addition to the afore-mentioned further exploration of the work of the Farquhar researchers. Instrumentation and Collection of Data To accomplish the overhall goal of providing a new source of information about motivation and academic achievement, both inventory data and interviews were used. The student, her parents, and her teachers tiere included in the study. The Student An attempt was made to interview each of the girls in the sample tnmice. The interviews were held on consecutive days and recorded. The Estnadents were asked to come to the interviews directly from classes or Ertlidy halls by request from the school office of the principal or ' ~26- counselor. The only foreknowledge of the interviews was that which might have been inferred from the school and interviewer contacts in arranging interviews with parents. The purpose of the work was explained to students, parents, and teachers: "We are interested in helping students learn. We feel that students, parents, and teachers can give us information so that we ean help students in their school work." Throughout the study the students were never identified as over- or underhachievers. Questions were formulated to ask the girls in the semi-structured * interview sessions. These were similar in content to those Joseph used in the companion study with boys. All girls were asked the same questions, but not necessarily in the same order. Information relevant to any questions of the interview was eXplored in order to obtain adequate resaonses. Most of the questions eXplored factors hypothesized by McClelland3 and Taylor4. Some techniques were used to tap information which might be helpful in studying additional aSpects of achievement motivation. These techniques will be discussed later. The questions designed to explore factors hypothesized by McClelland follow. 1. Long-term involvement a. What are your plans for the future? b. How long have you been thinking about this? c. Who are you? d. What do students do? e. If you could do anything you wanted to, what would it be? Why? 2. Unique accomplishment a. Why do you want this future? b. What do you expect to accomplish? c. What do students do? 3D. McClelland, J. Atkinson, et. al., The Achievement Motive, AEmleton-Century-Crofts, New York, 1953. 4Ronald G. Taylor, "Personality Factors Associated with Scholastic Achievement," Paper presented at the 1961 Convention of the American 13532?sonnel and Guidance ASSociation, Denver. follow. 3. The l. d. What do you feel when you have been successful in something you consider worthwhile? Can you give an instance? 9. If you could do anything you wanted to, what would it be? f. Do you participate in any in—school or out-of—school activity that you like? Competing with standards a. How do you expect to accomplish your plans? b. “lat persons or groups do you eXpect will help you in your plans? Why? How? c. What do students do? d. If school were just the way you wanted it to be, how w uld it be? e. If you could do anything you wanted to, what would it be? f. How do you feel during examination time. Why do you think you feel this way? 3. Why do you participate in activities? h. Why do we have schools? questions designed to explore factors hypothesized by Taylor Free-floating—-Controllcd anxiety a. How did you feel during the time of your semester exams? Why do you think you felt this way? b. How do you feel you are progressing toward your goal? c. How do you feel when you have failed in sonething you consider worthwhile? d. Do you think you will go the help you will need to achieve your goal? 9. How do you feel about these talks? 2. -28— Hostility toward authority Dependence—Independence 8.. b. What do students do? How do you feel teachers feel about you? Who are some of the people who are most important to you? Why? With whom do you talk about problems? What persons or groups do you expect will figure in your plans? How? Why? With whom would you rather live? Why? Is there anyone who inspired you to choose this future? How did he inspire you? What kind of help do you think you need in order to achieve your future goal? Who are the peeple who are important to you? Why? Socially oriented - academically oriented a. b. What do you look forward to when you come to school in the morning? What is the most enjoyable experience you have had in high school? In elementary school? What was your least enjoyable experience in high school? In elementary school? Why do we have schools? What do students do? If school were just the way you wanted it to be, how would it be? Do you participate in any in-school or out-of—school activity? Do you have a boy friend? Do you like boy-girl activities? .29- 5. Inadequate interpersonal relationships —- Adequate interpersonal relationships a. Who are you? b. With whom would you rather talk about problems? Why? 0. Do you have a boy friend? Do you like boy-girl activities? d. What persons do you expect will figure in your plans. e. How do you expect to accomplish your plans? 1‘. What kinds of help do you think you will need to accomplish your plans? Although questions were focused on securing insights relative to the points above, many additional insi_;hts were {gained when students were motivated to talk freely. Additional student motiVations were studied through tasks presented in the interviews. The student was given the assignment Communism $335123; Tod , and asked to tell how she would go about it to complete the task. In this way factors of long term involve— ment, competing with a standard, anxiety and independence could be explored. As a part of the second interview each girl was asked to work seven block design figures, one of the performance tests on the Wechsler Intelligence M303. Children (111C). A demonstration was done and then the student was asked to work out the designs on her own. While she worked the student described how she was reaching; a solution. She was Observed to learn her method of problem solving, her f eelings of impatience, failure or success, and her progress in developing a solution. Sh’: was asked to comment on how she thoujht about the problem, to tell how She progressed toward completing the tasks. Occasionally help was given to aid in solving the problem and her ability to progress on her own could be judged. Thus, the degree of anxiety could be observed in the process of reaching; the problems' solution. Also, dependence-independence factors c3Ould be assessed. -30- In addition, the picture arrangements, a sub-test of the Perfor ance fSCElle of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISQ), were }>Irssented; and at the completion of each arrangeuent, the student was asked 'tc> tell the story'portrayed by the pictures. These interpretations could hue :probed to understand interpersonal relationship factors, degrees of amciety and dependcnce—independence factors. Instruments and Theory Based Questions Several months precc‘ing the interviews,the juniors in the nine zesurticipating schools were administered the batterv of motivation J :iristrurents of the Motivational Study Project. The items, from the :irrventories, which p‘ovided the best discrimination between over- and under- . . . . 6 7 aicfliievers in the pepulation, were isolated by PayneS, Taylor , Thorp , and c>tfliers. From these statements and their corresponding responses, the .Fcillowing were selected as pertinent to this study. 1. The 50 most discriminating items on the Perceived Parental Attitude Inventory (significant at the .10 level using the validation group described by Payne). From the above 50 items, the 20 which remained after being tested for significance (at the .10 level) on Payne's cross-validation group were'compared with corresponding responses made on the same items by the sample itself. 2. Significant items from the Word Rating List were also used. The responses of the girls in the sample were compared with the responses of the teachers. 5David A. Payne, "An Investigation Into the Relationship Between P63I‘Ception of Parental Attitudes and Academic Achievement," Paper PITasented at the 1961 Convention of the American Personnel and Guidance Association, Denver. 6Taylor,‘Qp, Cit. p. 6. 7Marion D. Thorpe, "An Exploration of Factors Accounting for ITbemeIntercorrelation in an Objective Scale of Achievement Motivation," h. D. Dissertation, Michigan State University, 1961. _31_ The Parents The school personnel of the three schools selected for this study vauainted parents of the ten girls with the work being done by the investigator and requested the interview. Fathers and mothers were interviewed together in their homes. Parents were encouraged to talk freely in response to the questions asked; the parents were requested to respond, together, to the 50 significant items selected from the Perceived Parental Attitude Inventogy (225;). Parents were helped to decide on a joint response which seemed satisfactory to them. In the parent interviews questions were related to the factors described by Payne8, (also summarized in Chapter I). Questions pertinent to each factor are: l. Achievement Pressure Factor a. How do you feel your daughter has gotten along in school? b. How important is education to your daughter? 0. Why do you want your daughter to have education? d. Do you feel that high school students work up to their ability? e. In Appendix A, the 50 significant items from the PPAI are duplicated. From this group, items 25, 34, 45, 85, 90, 139 seem pertinent to this factor. 2. Permissiveness Factor a. Should a high school girl take part in decision making concerning her own future, management of the home, types of companions, and types of entertainment? b. What role does your daughter play? c. Many items in the PPAI touch on this factor. Among them 12, 94, 111, 115, 116, 122, 140. E.— 8Payne, 92. Cit. p. 10 The Parents The school personnel of the three schools selected for this study vauainted parents of the ten girls with the work being done by the investigator and requested the interview. Fathers and mothers were interviewed together in their homes. Parents were encouraged to talk freely in reSponse to the questions asked; the parents were req ested to respond, together, to the 50 significant items selected from the Perceived Parental Attitude Inventory (PPAI). Paren s were helped to decide on a joint response which seemed satisfactory to then. In the parent interviews a q o 8 - questions were related to the factors described by Payne , (also summarized in Chapter I). Questions pertinent to each factor are: l. Achievement Pressure Factor a. How do you feel your daughter has gotten along in school? b. How important is education to your daughter? c. Why do you want your daughter to have education? d. Do you feel that high school students work up to their ability? e. In Appendix A, the 50 significant items from the PPAI are duplicated. From this group, itens 25, 34, 45, 85, 90, 139 seem pertinent to this factor. 2. Permissiveness Factor a. Should a high school girl take part in decision making concerning her own future, management of the home, types of companions, and types of entertainment? b. What role does your daughter play? 0. hany items in the PPAI touch on this factor. Among them 12, 94, 111, 115, 116, 122, 140. BPayne, 92. Cit. p. 10 4. 5. 7. Possessiveness Factor a. The question regarding the girl's role in decision making applies here also. b. Others, from the PPAI, include numbers 4, ll, 32, 37, 94, 113, 116, 126. Democratic Guidance Factor a. This factor was eXplored in following up on resyonses given to questions listed above. The questions concerned the parents' attitudes and behavior with regard to their daughter's decisions about planning school programs and future training, companions, and entertainment. b. Questions from the PPAI include numbers 66, 72, 111, 133, 146. Discipline Factor a. What is your idea of disobedience? b. What types of discipline do you use? Is it effective with your daughter? 0. Items from the PPAI include 11, 47, 91, 114. Rejection-Ignoring Factor a. The general remarks of the parents could be assessed to know the strength of this factor. b. Items such as numbers 72, 114, 130, and 140 also measure this factor. Parent-Child Interaction Factor 3. The responses to the previous questions gave Con3 to the parent—child interaction and the role of the child in relation to the parent. b. The PPAI includes such situations as described in itnls 49. 55, 57, 85, 89, 102, 142. Each of these cues gives the parents an opportunity to reveal th- dynamics Operating in their relations with their children. ...- The Teachers On one of the instruments of the study, the Word Rating lééflb each student in the pepulation previously defined was asked to rate herself on certain adjectives as she perceived her teachers would rate her. As a part of ttis study, the teachers who knew the ten discrepant achievers best were asked to rate the students on the same adjectives. Using the items which proved most significant in discriminatin: between overh and under— achievers: 1. Sample responses were compared to teacher reSponses. 2. Teacher responses made concerning overeachievers will be contrasted with replies pertaining to under—achievers. When data on the population were collected in the Fall of 1960, each student was asked to give the name of a present teacher who knew her best. The name of a teacher, who in the past knew her best, was also requested. An effort was made to obtain the name of a teacher if none rere :provided. These teachers were contacted on the same days the students were interviewed. Teachers were encouraged to give any impressions they might liave of the girls. In the cases of four girls educational records were studied. The teacher information plus the records give a picture of the {girl as a student. During the interviews with the teachers of the students, questions were asked as follows: 1. How well do you know this student? 2. How does she get along with her classmates? 3. What are your impressions of her school work? 4. Has she spoken with you about her future plans? 5. How realistic are her plans? 6. Does she want to do better than her classmates? 7. Does she excel in any way? Teachers were encouraged to give general impressions of the Stnl‘ifiarits and leads from questions were explored to obtain further lnfoInnation relative to the questions above. The teachers who knew the The Teachers On one of tte instruments of the study, ti: Word dating List, each Stulcnt in the po;ulation previously L certain adjectives as she perceived her teocTers would rate her. As a t ‘L ‘ . ‘1“ 1' L ‘ rx 1‘3 " *V“ 1” ‘4 ,"‘ ‘ x ‘ . 4 “."3’,‘ Part of all: sticjo the teachers H10 knew the ten diners flit achieveis Lei Q ‘5 ." 4‘ ‘ ‘ '3 r \NJ‘. ‘1 ‘v . 7 ‘. A ‘L . Yf‘x .} ' +1 A) . J. '3“ Je~c asncd o rate tne StouhbS on tge sine 5r :CblVCS. Luldv tic lbihs UV “*U which prQVrd most significant in discriminatinf between over— and under— ackievers: , Sample rosy noes were compared to teecner responses. N H 0 Teacher resyonses made concerning over—achievers will be contrasted with replies pertaining to under-achievers. When data on the pepulation were collected in the Fall of 1360, each StUisnt was ashed to give the name of a present teacher wh knew her ‘ 'best. The nare of a te Cher, who in the past knew her nest, was also :requestcd. An effort was made to obtain the name of a teacncr if none re c+ :provided. These teachers were contacted on the same days :intervicwed. Teachers were encouraged to give any impressions the‘ niuht liave of the gir s. In the cases of four girls educational records were :studied. The teacher information plus the records give a pict‘re of the gjirl as a student. D . ’ - ‘ -" (‘I ’0 ined was ssfcd to rate morseli on yo .1. b I“ ‘ ‘? . v- '0 he students hole During the interviews with the teachers Oi the students, questions there asked as follows: 1. How well do you know this student? 2. How does she get along with her classmates? 3. (hat are your impressions of her school work? 4s 0 Has she spoken with you about her future plans? How realistic are her plans? \1 mm 0 0 U o (D (/2 she want to do better than her classmates? Does she excel in any way? Teachers were encouraged to give general impressions of the c , . . . ‘ “tLLiflnts and leads from questions were eXplored to obtain further 1 y -. _. . , , Itft31ifiat10n relative to the questions above. The teachers wh anew the e .J—i’ The Teacher 0) :1 4.1- ~ .1 . 4.. . 1‘; .Li, v: .n .u‘ .M- ' ., 1i, ‘ On one or LNG lflfilzdmintu oi the s is , ti: wore “a in: List, :icn .— ' ~ .7: is“ ° - - 1-0- -. . 1,- 4- . 4. 1a... - cthlent in the poiilation ”i2VlCdSlJ senined was as ed b0 lflbe a iseil on certain adjectives as she perceived her teaclers would rate her. As a .1. . J... , -1‘ r 1.1 ., ,1- 1- 1.: 1 ‘ 1 1._ ,..L Part of J. is said}: no teachers .n o knew tae ten oiscre‘ant ::.r:t..i'.:vers L‘Gsb . .. , .‘- ". J. " J. .9. ,r J. 1, 1 , r-.:" 3" _. 1. ‘I ‘L . . L ,. J940 as on to rate tne students on tee smne auv.ctives. Luluy ti: it:.s which prQVPd most significant in discriminatirj between over- and under- achievers: 1 \ . - , in r.‘ y y\ R 14 [-4 n ‘.'\ 1 1 r~. ‘ ‘ . Sample rosyoases were cosy led to teacher lessonaes. Teacler responses made coniornin; over—achievers will be contrasted with reglies pertaining to under—achievers. N H 0 When data on the ponulation were collected in the Fall of 1360, f’the factors, Independence-Dependence, was found to be significant at 1Ehe .05 level. The other four factors, Controlled-Free—Floating Anxiety, l?ositive Authority RelationshipséHostility Toward Authority, Adequate- ]Enadequate Personal Relationships, Academic-Social Orientation were not ssignificant. Judges rated underbachievers as showing more controlled ernxiety than do overbachievers; as Showing more positive authority relations sihips than over—achievers; as showing less adequate interhpersonal relations Eihips than the over-achievers; as showing less motivation for academic sruccess. Judges rated overbachievers as showing less controlled anxiety than under-achievers; as having less adequate authority relationships than ‘tunderbachievers; as having more adequate interpersonal relationships than tflhe underbachievers; as showing more motivation toward academic success. . 1 .l]...(ll|1lv¢l!u".t -53- The factors underlying the Perceived Parental Attitudes Inventory did not prove statistically significant. Two of the seven factors, Permissiveness and Discipline, predicted in a direction opposite to that stated by the theory basic to the Inventory. Judges rated over- and under- achievers in the theoretical direction on five of the seven factors: Achievement-Pressure, Parent-Child Interaction, Possessiveness, Democratic Guidance, and Rejection-Acceptance. A study of the 20 significant items from the Perceived Parental 'éjtitudes Inventory revealed that overhaehievers and their parents reply to the items in a similar manner. The chi-square resulting from the ‘ comparisons was significant at the .001 level, and the phi-coefficient was .504. For under—achievers and their parents, the comparisons again were significant at the .001 level with a phi-coefficient of .517. Parents of overhachievers agreed with the direction of the response given the items by the criterion groups, but parents of under-achievers did not (a low correlation of .02019 for these groups). Teachers and their students responded to the 50 items on the‘flgrd Rating List significantly alike. Both chi-squares were significant at the .001 level and had phi-coefficients of .439 (over—achievers and teachers) and .569 for under—achievers and teachers. Teachevs of under— achievers do not agree with the criterion group when ascribing negative characteristics to their students. A summary of the cumulative record data and an analysis of the interviews with the teachers who knew the students in the ample heat, both elementary and high school levels, are also provided. In Chapter V further conclusions and expansion of the data will be given. CHAPTER 7 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, COMPARISON WITH COMPARABLE RESEARCH, AND IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH Four parts are found in the last chapter. In the first, the problem of this research study is reviewed and the position of the study in the total Farquhar Motivation project is defined. The methodology used in the 'work, the hypotheses from which the study derives, and the findings of the research are summarized. Conclusions from the analyses of the data make up the second section. A comparison of the findings with those of Joseph's comparable study with the males follows. In the last part, new relation- ships and implications following from the eXploratory nature of the work are presented. Summary .Thg'Problem Theories about motivation for academic achievement were develOped on the Farquhar Project. They were concerned with the personality characterb istics of students as well as with the motivational situation. Theoretical constructs were also related to parental attitudes and to child-rearing practices pertaining to achievement. Descriptive factors were found for discrepant achievers, i.e., underbachievers and over-achievers, -—factors which became the bases for design of several objective inventories. Further exploration and search for new understandings relating to motivation for academic achievement were done in this study through the use of semi- structured interviews with discrepant achievers, their parents and teachers. -55... Instrumentation Instruments were constructed in the Farguhar Motivation Project to eXplore the motivational aspects of achievement in the students' personal, family, school, and extra—curricular life. The Perceived Parental Attitudes Inventory was designed to assess the attitudes of parents toward their children and their practices in child-rearing. Teachers used a second questionnaire, the werd RatingListJ on which they described students by choosing an adjective on a four degree continuum. Using the same Word Rating List students were asked to check the words descriptive of'how they felt teachers felt about them. The Generalized Situational (Shoice Inventq 1 presented the students with a series of dual situations, 23nd they were asked to check the one they preferred. Students also :responded to the Human Trait Inventory which contains items designed to :study'the personality of the student in some depth. Finally, a Preferred .Iob Characteristics Scale asked each student to choose, from a pair, the one chcracteristic he valued more for his future job, after completing his education. _IE_1ypo theses The first of three directional hypotheses which were formulated related to the fifteen factors postulated in the Farquhar Motivation Project. There is a difference in the predicted direction, between discrepant achievers in the theoretical factors designed in this study. The second hypothesis was stated concerning the reSponses to one of the inventories of the Farquhar Motivation Project, the Perceived Parental :gttitudes Inventory. There is a significant relationship between the direction of the responses of the sample of discrepant achievers and their parents on the items from the PPAI and between the direction of the reSponsxs of the same discrepant achievers and their teachers on the items from the ERL. -55- The student was asked to rate an item as she felt her parents would respond to it. Twenty of the items (See Appendix E) were administered to the parents of the students of this study. A Second interview, the Word Rating List, requested that the student rate herself as she felt her teachers would rate her. Forty-eight of the items (See Appendix F) were administered to the teachers of the ten discrepant achievers in the sample. ‘91 r I The third hypothesis formulated for the purpose of the study was: ; ” There is a positive relationship between the direction of the reSponses made by the parents and the criterion groups and between the direction of the responses made by the teachers and the criterion groups. - * ldithin the confines of this study, an analysis was made of the relationship (of the direction of the parental reSponses to the twenty itens of the IPerceived Parental Attitudes Inventory and the direction of the resgonses given to the items by the criterion groups of discrepant achievers. The . . . . l , criterion groups were the same as the validation groups used to test th significance of the inventory items. The direction of the resyonses to the forty-eight items of the Word Rating List was Eden compared to the direction of the reaponses of the criterion groups. jlhe Sample Eleventh grade students of nine high schools were chosen to participate in the validation of the inventories originated by the members of the Farquhar Motivation Project. Prior to the administration of the inventories each participant had been identified as a normal, or a discrepant achiever. In a two—step regression technique2, the grade—point averages, the scores on the Differential Aptitude Test—Verbal Reasoning and the California Test g£_Mental.Maturity-Language for each member of the sample were used. Farquhar, "A Comprehensive Study of the motivation Factors Iknderlying Achievement of Eleventh Grade High School Students," Op. Cit., p. 10 2Farquhar, pp. Cit. -57.. Eleventh grade girls fron three of the participating schools were chosen for this eXploraton'investigation. Ten students who were identified in each school as discrepant achievers were chosen. To obtain students from the full range of academic aptitude, the 2g2:yg_percentiles were divided into quintiles. In each quintile, an over-achieving girl who deviated most from the predicted GPA and an underachieving girl who deviated most were 3‘ selected to make up the sample of ten. Table 3.1 (Supra p. 3) in 1 i 4 Chapter III presents the distribution of ability levels of the sample of ? ten students. Methodology Questions for depth exploration of motivation for academic achievement ‘were develOped. The questions were then asked of the ten students who were selected for the sample of this study, of their parents, and of the teachers ‘who knew them best. All interviews were tape recorded. Three judges trained in clinical and counseling psychology then listened to the interviews and rated the content on five-point scales 'related to the theory evolved by the members of the Farquhar Motivation Iieject. The scales represented the extremes of the theorizing character- istic of discrepant achievement. Parents responded to significant words from the word Rating List. In addition information about the ten girls of the sample was gathered from the school cumulative records. Findings and Conclusions The results and some conclusions, within the confines of this study, are presented. Theogz Basic 1:3 the Generalized Situational Choice Inventory. Three underlying factors of the achievement situation were pcstulated 'hy the members of the Farquhar Project. Interviews exploring the situation ‘were carried on for this study. Three judges rated the interviews of this Eitudy using scales developed for the purpose. An analysis of the variance 1Kechnique was applied to find the average reliability of all the three a.-. -58- raters on each of the three factors when between rater variance was remOVed. T—tests were used to test the significance of the differences in the means of the judges' ratings for discrepant achievers on each of the fifteen factors. TABLE 5.1 UNDERLYING FACTORS OF THE ACHIEVEMENT SITUATION Over-Achievers Under-Achievers Long-Term Involvement Short—Term Involvement Unique Accomplishment Common Accomplishment Competition with a Maximal Competition with a Minimal Standard of Excellence Standard of Excellence The following conclusions are made: 1. 2. Judges are about equally reliable in rating these three factors. (Range .718 to .885) The differences in the means of the ratings on two of the three factors were significant at the .05 level, and in the direction of the theory. The third factor, Competition with a Standard of Excellence, did not differentiate be- tween the two groups. Both types of achievers were rated as competing with a minimal standard of excellence. How- ever; the mean for the overhachievers was slightly higher in the direction of Maximal Standard than was the mean for the underbachievers. m Basic t_o_ the Human Trait Inventory. Five underlying factors of the personality traits characteristic of discrepant achievers were postulated. These factors were explored in the interviews of this study. 7...,—.-_ q, .i - -... - :- .‘ emfirr. 7‘.” s"- -59- TABLE 5.2 UNDERLYING FACTORS OF THE PERSONALITY TRAITS Over—Achievers Under—Achievers Controlled Anxiety Positive Authority Relationships Independence Academic Orientation Adequate Interpersonal Relationships Free-Floating Anxiety Hostility Toward ' Authority Dependence Social Orientation Inadequate Interpersonal Relationships Edie following conclusions are made: 1. The judges were not consistent in their rating of the five factors. The range of reliabilities extends from —.119 to .697, with the Authority and Interpersonal Relationships Factors receiving the highest reliabilities. One factor (Social-Academic) was a -.119. 2. Only one of the five differences in the means of the ratings of the five factors was significant at the .05 level—~the Dependence- Independence Factorh-and in the direction of the theory. Four of the factors did not discriminate between the two groups. Both groups were rated as having a Social Orientation. However, the mean for the over-achievers was slightly higher in the direction of Academic Orienta- tion (as predicted by the theory) than was the mean for the under—achievers. Both groups were rated as having adequate interpersonal relationships. The mean for the over—achievers was somewhat higher in the direction of Adequate Interpersonal Relations (as predicted by theory) than was the mean for the under-achievers. 3&3! 51211.9. 33.9. the Perceived Parental Attitudes Inventory. Seven factors were develOped upon which the Perceived Parental JEIEEitudes Inventory was based. the other factors. These factors did not hold up as well as —60- TABLE 5.3 UNDERLYING FACTORS OF THE PERCEIVED PARENTAL ATTITUDES INVENTORY Over—Achievers Under-Achievers Achievement Pressure Non-Achievement Pressure Permissiveness Non-Permissiveness Non-Possessiveness Possess veness Undemocratic Guidance Democratic Guidance No Discipline Discipline Rejection Acceptance Poor Parent Interaction Good Parent Interaction Edie following conclusions are made: I. Judges were highly reliable on three of the seven factors, i.e., Achievement Pressure, Possessiveness and Discipline (Range .911 - 1.00). Judges were somewhat less reliable on the Parent—Child Interaction and Democratic Guidance Factors (.773 and .748 respectively). Judges were least reliable on the Permissiveness and Rejection-Acceptance Factors (.438 and .481). 2. Though the means of judges' ratings for five of the factors were in the direction of the theory, none of the ratings were significantly different. Judges gave mean ratings which were reversals of the theory for two factors. TABLE 5.4 JUDGES' RATINGS ON FACTORS UNDERLYING THE PPAI Direction of Theory Reversals of Theory \ Achievement-—Non—Achievement Perniseivencss—-Non— Pressure Permissiveness Non—Possessiveness—- No Discipline-Discipline Possessiveness Undenocratic—Democratic Guidance Rejection-Acceptance Poor-Good Parent Interaction \- -51- Ccnqxuison of the Parent-Student Responses From the Perceived Parental Attitudes Inventor" and .he Word Ratinf: List. Al __ The twenty Sifinificant items from the Perceived Parental Attitudes t“. (N (54"1r11r‘v _Igrventory were administered to the parents of the students of this stu.d. Tflie direction of their resyonses was compared to the direction of the Inesponses given to the same items by their daughters. In addition, the (lirection of parent responses (+ or -) was compared to the direction given 'ttue responses by the criterion group of discrepant achievers. Separate chi-squares were calculated for over— and under-achievers. IULi-coefficients of correlation were also determined for the variables sstudied. Three of t.e four chi—squares were significant at the .001 level zxnd.in the positive direction*. The chi—square for parents of under- eushievers and criterion group of under-achievers was not significant (.02). Ennis latter statistic indicates that parents of under-achievers do not INBSpond to the items in the same direction as the Farquhar Project \talidation groups of under-achievers. TABLE 5.5 COMPARISON OF PARENT-STUDENT RESPONSES ON THE PPAI Significantly Related Not Significantly Related Over-Achievers Under-Achievers Parent—Student Parent—Criterion Parent-Criterion Under-Achievers Parent-Student *If the resyonse to an item was "Strongly Agree" or "Agree" ZLt was given a "+" direction. If the resyonse was "Strongly Disagree" or 'VDisagree" a "-" direction was given. -62- Each of the teachers of the ten students was asked to respond to the forty-eight significant items from the M Rating git, To test the significance of the relationship of the direction of responses given these items by the students and their teachers, as well as by the teacher and the criterion group of discrepant achievers, separate chi—squares were calculated. Each separate reaponse was given a "+" direction if it were answered "usually" or "always" and a "-" direction if it were answered "sometimes" or "never." The chi-squares were all significant for all response groups at the .001 level. TABLE 5.6 COMPARISON OF PARENT-STUDENT RESPONSES ON THE fl Significantly Related Not Significantly Related Over—Achievers , None Teacher-Student Teacher-Criterion Under-AchieVers Teacher—Student Teacher-Criterion The phi-coefficient for teachers of under—achievers and criterion group of under-achievers resulted in a .145. Although under—achievers Perceived teachers as rating them in a certain way, the teachers did not Wholly do so. The latter teachers did not agree in rating their students as possessing personality traits such as different, discontented, flighty, daring, stubborn, impatient and friendly (See Appendix F). ' -63- Comparison with Comparable Study on Boys Two comparable studies, one with boys and one with girls, were carried on simultaneously. Because the samples and interview recordings were obtained in the same manner for both boys and girls, similarity in procedure was a deliberate part of the design of the study. The same schools were used and the works were done on the same dates. In addition many of the same teachers participated in the work. One of the major foci of this research is to eXplore the differences iJl results obtained for boys and those obtained for girls on the factors underlying each of the inventories. On the factors upon which the Generalized Situational Choice Inventory depends, judges were about equally reliable in rating both boys aund girls. The means of the judges' ratings differed significantly on two cxf the three factors, Lonnghort Term Involvement and Unique-Common Jhccomplishment, both in the direction hypothesized by the Parquhar Project. fiatings of judges on the factor of Competition with a Maximal—Minimal EStandard of Excellence were not the same for boys and girls. This factor étiffered significantly at the .01 level for boys, but did not differentiate loetween the overb and under-achieving girls. Among the girls both types of achievers were rated as competing with a minimal standard of excellence allthough the overhachievers were rated slightly more toward the maximal end of the scale. On the factors underlying the Human Trait Inventory, judges ratings iJndicated reliability for the boys and the girls as follows: 9" cr- I 'H—‘-—-" . -54- TABLE 5.7 RELIABILITY OF JUDGES' RATINGS ON THE HTI Factor Male Female Anxiety + .. Authority .. + Independence-Dependence — - Academic-Social + o Interpersonal Relationships — ... + = Most Reliable - = Average Reliable o = Least Reliable (Range .606 - .798) (Range .343 - .531) (Raise .119 - .343) The means of the judges' ratings on these factors for the under- and over-achieving boys and for the under— and over-achieving girls differed widely. Only on the Independence-Dependence Factor did the judges' ratings differ significantly for both boys and girls. The judges' ratings on the other factors underlying the Human Trait Inventory did not differentiate between the two groups of girl achievers. The judges' ratings also differentiate for the boys on the Anxiety, Authority, and Interpersonal Relationships Factors. On one factor for the boys, the Academic—Social Orientation Factor, judges' ratings did not differentiate be‘tween the two groups of achievers. -55- TABLE 5.8 SIGNIFICANCE OF JUDGES' RATINGS ON THE HTI Factor Male Female Anxiety + o ‘1 i Authority + o Independence-Dependence + + Academic-Social o o Interpersonal Relationships + 0 v- ' + = Differentiated Significantly o = No Differentiation On the factors underlying the Perceived Parental Attitudes Inventory grudges' ratings indicated reliability for the boys and the girls as follows: TABLE 5.9 RELIABILITY OF JUDGES' RATINGS ON THE PPAI Factor Male Female Achievement Pressure 0 + Permissiveness - - Parent-Child Interaction + + Possessiveness o + Guidance - + Discipline - + Rejection-Acceptance + - + = Most Reliable — = Average Reliable o = Least Reliable (Range .606 - 1.000) (Range .323 - .773) (Range .138 - .451) -55- The means of the judges’ ratings on these factors for the under— and over-achieving boys and for the under- and over—achieving girls differed but less widely than those of the previous inventory. On three of the factors the judges' ratings differed significantly for the boys, viz., the Parent-Child Interaction, the Discipline and the Rejection-Acceptance ITactors. For the girls, none of the means of the judges' ratings were f“ saignificantly different-none of the factors differentiated between the two .T 5 A groups . of achievers . TABLE 5 . lO SIGNIFICANCE or JUDGES' RATINGS ON THE PPAI i 1 Factor Male Female Achievement Pressure 0 o Permissiveness o o Parent-Child Interaction + o Possessiveness o 0 Guidance o 0 Discipline ~ + c Rejection-Acceptance + o + = Differentiated Significantly o = No Differentiation New Relationships and Implications for Further Research The data gathered for further eXploration of the work of the Farquhar Researchers and the attempt to search out new relationships and additional iIlsights, afford an opportunity to suggest channels of study for future Consideration. l. 2. 4. -57- According to Parquhar3 motivation which pays off in academic success is that which "fits" the school structure. The school is seen as a fairly feminine, middle-class culture oriented toward long-term involvement and delayed rewards. High need achievement includes long term involvement and unique accomplish- ment in competing with a maximal standard of excellence. Within the limits of this study the factor dealing with Competition with a Maximal-Minimal Standard of Excellence did not differenti- ”“ ate between the two groups of girl achievers. Both types were found to be competing with a minimal standard of excellence. Further study would identify factors which are|motivating both groups of girls. Factors underlying two of the inventories, the Human Trait Inventory and the Perceived Parental Attitudes Inventory, did not for the most part differentiate under— from over—achieving girls. On the g2; two of the five factors are reversals of the theory; and two others, while in the direction of the theory, are rated toward the minimal end of the scales. On the PPAI none of the seven factors differentiated under— from over- achieving girls. Five of the factors were rated in the direction of the theory with all but one rated toward the maximal end of the scale. Two of the seven factors are reversals of the theory. What factors do differentiate underb from over- achieving girls? Would repetition of the study using a larger sample reveal underlying factors which do differentiate? The Farquhar Researchers used two Verbal or Linguistic measures to identify the group of under— and over—achieving girls for this study. It is generally felt that girls do better than boys on Verbal tests. If this is so, the Verbal tests may not be identifying a true group of underh and over-achieving girls. Many of the girls were engaged in courses using mathematics, i.e., courses where skills were comparable to those of the boys. Boys with high verbal abilities are usually found to have high general intelligence, but the same situation is not found to prevail with girls. What measures are needed to identify the group of discrepantly achieving girls for the first step in the two—step regression technique? Judges who listened to the interviews and did the ratings were men trained in clinical and counseling psychology. Are their points of View peculiar to men and hence, viewpoints which influenced the ratings? Neuld {omen raters have been more 3 William W. Farquhar, "A Comprehensive Theory of Motivation," 'TEilk:at Meeting of Counselors, Grand Rapids, November, 1961. ,2 9..”— 7. -5a- perceptive in their discriminations and more discerning in their judgments? Would the responses of the girls have different meanings to similarly trained women raters? Further, it is generally recognized that adolescence tends to be a most labile and transitory growth period in American Society. Raters who are older have already lost contact with the influences of high school life relative to achievement. Changing peer life influences diffuse to the home and affect parent feelings, attitudes and discipline practices. Could not the growth and change of this period have become "non sequitur" to those who are called upon to rate? The one-to—one interview situations motivated the girls to think about themselves and their behavior. The under- achieving girls Seemed to be particularly needel of such an Opportunity to discuss tepics pertinent to themselves. Within the limits of the time available, these girls talked about self concerns, their conversations became intense when no recording was done, a situation contrived by the girls. Therapy sessions of a limited nature with the under-achievers who were so needful of counsel would reflect further personality characteristics and reveal other signifi- cant influences in home and school life. A review of the interview material with former teachers of the girls in the study reveals that the teachers remembered underh and over—achieving girls in much the same terms. Under—achievers were not distinguished from overhachievers in teacher recollections and knowledges. None of the girls in the sample were described at the early school level in accord with the personality characteristics and parent- child relationship factors of the research theory related to under-achievers. Similarly three of the five under—achievers were described by present teachers in terms closely allied to the theorized characteristics of over—achievers. This evidence seems to be in accord with the evidence on the factors underlying the inventories—-evidence which tends to show that under— and over-achieving girls in this study are not different. It tends to support the suggestion that the Verbal and Linguistic measures used in the study are not distinguishing under- from OVer-achieving girls. On the Generalized Situational Choice MVentogy, both types of achievers were rated as competing with a minimal standard of e:{0ellence although the over-achievers were rated slightly more toward the maximal end of the scale. According to the fl” WWV‘Q‘"M‘ “a. -59- re 3e narch theory of this study, over-acrievcrs coapeted in activi ic s to :in, wanted ;:cod 3r des to be b(:tter th otners or "arted leadersaip positions to achieve presti e, to. .ard tle maxirlum end of the scale. A replication of this study is needed with a larger sen; 10 to establish if this reversal exists, and if so, why does the female deviant achiever fail to fit the theory? The Faro .ar “es arch Project has provided much informs ion inacidental to the major ta:_-k of the research. Data ‘1 ave su1~ested that LJLJV" :3chools are built for girls, not for boys; that different things create (leviancy in girls, and that the character of the deviancy in girls varies. IDr. Farquhar has stated, "We really fail to comprehend the na ure of :female motivation." He has asked, "What is the nature of the girl who lias difficulty earning or the girl who succeeds in learning?" This :research has raised the question, "How is the truly deviant female 'achiever identified?" Because most of the girls in this anle were living comfortably reith the group and with their teacTers, we might assume tint tl1e ¢irl C‘tud ent51 ientif y well with the goals of the school. A valuable area for iTurther'research mi‘ht lie in .n investitation of the source of tIi~ L) - _,. ' - 1.1.1 ,5, -4- ,1. , u - .. 1-, ILduntlty 1n L30 s.i_:nt and .-e UCL001. 1. In line tith the above suggestion, some research could be carried on which ‘0‘..ld inveeti 1; ate the roles cf the sirls in the transition from family to 300001. Do the close ics of the girls with their mothers promote an earlier trw .ii to the relatively f-minine milieu of the school an’ an cesier transition to the authozity of the school? Are they perritteq less freedom, hence less need to JP j? Ct it than thC boys? DO girls have less anxiety to project in the school settinj? 2. What is authority to Virls? If the chcel is an a“Mticlly fee*nfne institution, and the feminine role is not an authorit;r one, .hat are girls ids: ti :in; with in ‘he schoc1: If the authclity in the so ocl setti nr does not Tether firls, is it a type or kind of cutherit : which is not tr: llerr to ‘irls? C“U" is ”o: ’ulfle e t} t if H‘\ -. ' .,L - l u . -- - -\ a c 11‘. 02.3 I?” Izyt zie :fitifilcci1tr" C" 7 ,_,__ -~ 1. l . .A -- .-. .. -.a' V '. .. . . -1“ outside the school nettin; vith MthL sirls To let altn' necrlw? H _— ‘I - "' 5 ‘ -“' 2. -70- Judges also found that under-achievers show more controlled anxiety than do over—achievers—-contrary to the stated theory of the research. Further research is needed to establish this reversal of theory and its causes. Another reversal occurs on the Authority Relationship Factor. Over— achievers are theorized as having good authority relation— ships; under-achievers as having poor authority relationships. Why does this contradiction occur? It is suggested that schools as an "authority culture" might be investigated. A school oriented to the masculine scale, i.e., dominant, directive, structured, action—prone, rewarding, and a school oriented to the feminine scale, i.e., less harsh, more interpretive, less demanding, stereotype—prone, reward delaying, might be identified. Authority relationships and reaction of deviant achievers could then be assessed in the contrasting atmospheres. The least reliable rating of the judges on the factors under— lying the Human Trait Inventory was in the factor dealing with academic and social orientation (-.119). Overbachievers were those who derived more satisfaction and pleasure from academic success than from social relationships. Under—achievers re— ceived more satisfaction from social situations than from academic learning. Further research is needed to know why judges disagree in this fashion. Is the expression of these traits too illusive for the judges to recognize? Traditionally women have been less able to escape into outward activities. In looking inward to themselves for outlets, what personality traits have developed? Is the female expectation that of being educated so as to have social acceptance and living independence without a compelling drive to earn, to be self—sustaining, which seems to motivate the boys? Should the definition of the traits on which the Human Trait Inventory is based include shades of emphasis peculiar to girls? Could judges with this refinement find the presence or absence of these traits more adequately? From the home interviews, parents of the girls seldom found it necessary to exert pressure or discipline. Does this circumstance foster a balance of feminity traits, interests, and identifications resulting in Openness to experience and more understanding self-awareness which is the feminine role in American culture? Tests of masculinity-feminity in the realm of sexual identification and interests might reveal the kind and quality of the role identifications and inter— actions between parents and girls. ‘A test measuring expressed 5. -71- interests with the known interests of female achievers might further differentiate the elements of feminine motivations. An introversion-extroversion scale might serve to identify the manner in which female motiVation is realized. Shaw and McCuen's4 study found evidence that underhachievement among girls did not appear until puberty. The present study tends to support their findings and to extend the lack of differentiation between under-achievers and their opposites beyond puberty and into adolescence. McClelland et al.,5 cite evidence that motivation for achievement in women is tied up with social acceptability. They suggest the possibility of further investigation of sources of achievement motivation in mothers' attitudes toward independence training. They present Winterbottom's questionnaire dealing with mothers' training demands, an instrument developed from interview scales of whiting and Sears at Harvard University. They also cite Lowell's interview work with mothers on socialization practices which yielded ratings on severity of interference with a child's dependent responses. Further work using such scales and ratings might give clues about personality characteristics and parent-child relationship factors for investigation of the theory related to female deviant achievers. A measure of parent traits such as consistency vs. inconsistency might be taken. One might ask: Is parent consistency a catalyst for academic motivation? Does parent inconsistency inhibit motivation for academic success? 0r which parent does which activity and what are the effects on motivation? If mother is consistent and father is not, or vice-verse, with which parent does the child identify? What identi— fications evolve when one or both parents is consistent or inconsistent or a mixture of consistency and in— consistency? A measure of the traits in the child might then be correlated with findings of the above study. 4Mervine c. Shaw and John T. McCuen, "The Onset of Academic thorierachievement in Bright Children," The Journal.5;§ Educational W Vol. 51, No. 3, 1960, p. 103-108. 5D. McClelland, J. Atkinson, et al., The Achievement Motive, Appleton-Cenuu-y—Crorts, New York, 1953. 7. .72- If the child doesn't identify with either parent, what is his model? Is it a stereotype (movie or TV), a gang member, a brother or sister or a parent substitute? With which sex traits does the child identify? Is it pre— dominantly with one sex or the other? Can a child identify "not satisfactorily" and/or "without satisfaction"? And if so, what are the implications for his motivation for achievement? The under-achieving female eXpects and values in line with the general expectation of the school. Outside the school, these girls seem to be exPeriencing confusions arising out of readjustments in the family pattern. A more isolated family unit due to living in a strange community, may mean that the family is more susceptible to pulling apart, is undergoing more pressure, and these girls may be reflecting the struggle. A changing of roles in the family may be taking place. Particularly the mother role may have become one of pursuit of outside interests, a job, or a career. The under-achiever mey'be losing a consistent parent pattern with which to identify. In using a verbal scale to identify deviant female achievers, great emphasis is placed upon verbal skills. Assessment of the attitudes of the learners t ward what they know and inquiry into what the learners can do with what they know would broaden the base of identification and more adequately focus the emphasis. "Success," as reflected in the responses of teachers on the Word Rating List and of parents in the interviews and on the Perceived Parental Attitudes Inventory, is heavily emphasized in school life and in American family life. Is this a pressure for conformity to which girls yield more readily than do boys? Hence, more success on the part of girls in the verbal skills? Should we then investigate the handling of such pressures by boys and girls? Are they less for boys and more for girls? What is meant by "success"? If all deviant girls appear to identify with the goals of the school, is it the end product which is important? Or is there satisfaction in doing what there is capacity to do? Does female satisfaction and adequate performance in the verbal area mean an inability to tolerate the concrete, hence a "need" for the nebulous? I z- 8. -72- If the child doesn't identify with either parent, what is his model? Is it a stereotype (movie or TV), a gang member, a brother or sister or a parent substitute? With which sex traits does the child identify? Is it pre- dominently with one sex or the other? Can a child identify "not satisfactorily" and/or "without satisfaction"? And if so, what are the implications for his motivation for achievement? The under—achieving female expects and Values in line with the general expectation of the school. Outside the school, these girls seem to be experiencing confusions arising out of readjustments in the family pattern. A more isolated family unit due to living in a strange community, may mean that the family is more susceptible to pulling apart, is undergoing more pressure, and these girls may be reflecting the struggle. A changing of roles in the family may be taking place. Particularly the mother role may have become one of pursuit of outside interests, a job, or a career. The under—achiever may be losing a consistent parent pattern with which to identify. In using a verbal scale to identify deviant female achievers, great emphasis is placed upon verbal skills. Assessment of the attitudes of the learners toward what they know and inquiry into what the learners can do with what they know would broaden the base of identification and more adequately focus the emphasis. "Success," as reflected in the responses of teachers on the word Rating List and of parents in the interviews and on the Perceived Parental Attitudes Inventogy, is heavily ' emphasized in school life and in American family life. Is this a pressure for conformity to which girls yield more readily than do boys? Hence, more success on the part of girls in the verbal skills? Should we then investigate the handling of such pressures by boys and girls? Are they less for boys and more for girls? What is meant by "success"? If all deviant girls appear to identify with the goals of the school, is it the end product which is important? Or is there satisfaction in doing what there is capacity to do? Does female satisfaction and adequate performance in the verbal area mean an inability to tolerate the concrete, hence a "need" for the nebulous? Fr-r—n-ne— .57—_..-..._ . 11 10. —73— Sex differences in learning seem never to have been seriously considered. It is generally known that there are two to three times as many boys who underachievo in school as there are girls. Girls are found to achieve better than boys on verbal tasks. The former suggests that school learning of boys may be less efficient: the latter suggests that it may be different. Is the lack of findings of this study suggesting that girls under— stand, feel and react differently to experience than do boys? If girls are more sensitive and less harsh than boys, more delaying and less action-prone than boys, more interpretive and less structured than boys, what causes these qualities? Are there biological differences which account for the learning differences? Or can social influences account for sex learning differences? Or are elements of both peculiar to each sex and common to each sex? Study of the sex differences in approaches to learning and in the kinds of meanings boys and girls derive from learning tasks might be done by collecting facts in a systematic way. Analyses and study of the products of boys and girls might show how they differ in their views of their world, how they respond and how they participate. Responses to pictures and reactions to stories could reveal sex differences in understandings and feelings. Studies of perception of a more intensive type might also be revealing of sex differences. Biological differb ences such as the faster maturation rate of girls could be studied since they may relate to the learning of verbal skills and may be relevant to the feminine traits, interests and identifications. -74... BIBLIOGRAPHY Barrett, Harry 0., "An Intensive Study of 32 Gifted Children," Personnel and Guidance Journal, Vol. 36, 1957, p. 192—194. Calhoun, S. Reed, "The Effect of Counseling on a Group of UnderhAchievers," The School Review, 64, 1956, p. 554. Farquhar, William W., "A Comparison of Techniques Used in Selecting Under- and Over-Achievers," Michigan State University, 1961. Farquhar, William W., "A Comprehensive Study of the Motivational Factors Underlying Achievement of Eleventh Grade High School Students," Research Project No. 846 (8458) in cooperation with the U. S. Office of Education, November, 1959. Fliegler, Louis A., "Understanding the Underachieving Gifted Child," Psychological Reports, 3, December, 1957. P. 534. Gerberech, 11., "Factors Related to the College Achievement of High Aptitude Students Who Fail Expectation and Low-Aptitude Students Who Exceed Expectation," Journal 9;; Educational Psychology 1941, Vol. 32, p. 253-265. Joseph, Michael P., "The Use of Depth Interviewing to Explore the Motivational Factors Underlying Achievement of Eleventh Grade High School Boys," Ph. D. Dissertation, Michigan State University, 1961. Kirk, Barbara A., "Test Versus Academic Performance in Malfunctioning Students,” Journal _o_f_ Consult:_._ng' szchologz, Vol. 16, 1952, p. 213-216. Kurtz, John J ., and Swenson, Esther J ., "Factors Related to Over- Achievement and Under-Achievement in School," School Review, 59. 1951, p. 472-480. McClelland, D.; Atkinson, J. et al., The Achievement Motive, Appleton- Century—Crofts, New York, 1953. Fm’fifiiTn—‘TT ‘_‘ 1" Ill-{Illil ind-“H .75- Malloy, "An Investigation of Scholastic Over- and Under-Achievement Among Female College Freshmen," Journal 9;.Counseling_Psychology, Vol. 1, No. 4, 1954, p. 260—263. Mitchell, James V., "Goal-Setting Behavior As a Function of Self-Acceptance, Over— and UnderbAchievement, and Related Personality Variables," Journal 2§_Educationa1_Psychology, V01. 50, 1959. p. 93-104. Payne, David A., "An Investigation Into the Relationship Between Perception of Parental Attitudes and Academic Achievement," Paper presented at the 1961 Convention of the American Personnel and Guidance Association, Denver, 1961. Seidman, Jerome M., The Adolescent, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., New York, 1960, p. 362-385. Shaw, Merville G., and Grubb, James, "Hostility and Able High School UnderhAchievers," Journal g£_Counseling Psychology," Vol. 5, No. 4, 1958, p. 263-266. Shaw, Merville C., and McCuen, John T., "The Onset of Academic Under- achievement in Bright Children," The Journal g§_Educational P§YCthogy, V01. 51, N0. 3, 1960, p. 103-108. Taylor, Ronald G., "Personality Factors Associated with Scholastic Achievement," Paper presented at the 1961 Convention of the American Personnel and Guidance Association, Denver. Thorpe, Marion D., "An EXploration of Factors Accounting for Item- Intercorrelation in an Objective Scale of Achievement Motivation," Ph. D. Dissertation, Michigan State University, 1961. wrightstone, J. wayne, Educational Research Bureau, Vbl. 18, April, 1939, p. 117-118. Oscar Euros, The Nineteen-Forty Mental Measurements Yearbook, The Gryphone Press, Arlington, Virginia, 1945, p. 1418. Zubin, Jeseph, "The Measurement of Personality," JOurnal.g£_Counseligg ngchologz, 1 (Fall 1954). p. 159. ‘L._ t .1 APPENDIX A ITEMS FROM THE PERCEIVED PARENTAL ATTITUDES II'WETITOPU ADMINISTERED TO THE PARENTS 12. 13. 26. 32. 34. 37. 40. 41. 43- 45. 46. 47. 49. 55. 57. 66. 69. 71. 72. 73. -77- Mothers should always help their children when they get into trouble. Children should be protected from learning about sex. If a father punishes a child, the mother should stand up for the child's rights. Children should be allowed to go to visit the neighbors at an early age. Mother should be respected more than father. Parents should only reward very outstanding achievement. In the long run it is better for a child to be kept fairly close to his mother. Children will neglect their school work if parents do not keep after them. It is better for children to play at home than to visit at other peOples' houses. Young children should not be allowed to stay out after dark. It is unwise for parents to admit their own mistakes to their own children. Children should be Spanked for temper tantrums. For their own sake, children should be pressed to do well in school. It is not the most important thing to give children all the comforts they want. Spanking children generally does more harm than good. Children should be allowed to sometimes make a real mess of things. When children misbehave, it is their parents who are really at fault. It is not unusual for a child to disagree quite often with his father. Children should not interrupt adult conversation. Parents understand that their child's school work is hard. It is reasonable to eXpect that boys should want to be like their fathers. A child should be seen and not heard. Fathers should place high demands on their children. 77. 79. 81. 82. 85. 890 90. 91. 94. 102. 111. 113. 114. 116. 118. 126. 127. 130. 131. 133. 134. 136. 139. 140. 142. 144. 14(. -78- Babies are more fun for parents than older children are. Special after—school activities are of great character building value. Fathers should always help their children when they get into trouble. It is all right for young children to sleep with their mothers. Fathers and mothers should take pride in their children's school success. Parents should encourage their children to bring their friends home. Parents are always willing to help their children with their homework. A great deal of discipline is necessary to train children preperky. A child should be independent. Children should always be loyal to their parents. A child should be taught to make his own decisions. Some parents do not have control enough over their children. Telling a child that they won't love him anymore if he is bad is a good way to discipline him. After a certain age, it is best for parents and their children not to be emotionally involved. Parents have the best interests of their children at heart. A child should be made to obey his parents. Almost any child who is not plain lazy can do well in school if he tries. Children should like the same things as their parents. Parents should make a real effort to understand their children's problems. If children wish to please their parents, they should obey them. Children should be allowed to keep the money that they earn. A child's family is the most important part of his life. Children should be encouraged to read good books. Fathers do not have to insist that their children mind them. Parents should do lots of things with their children. Children are most lovable when they are small and helpless. Children should do as their parents sgy,:not as their parents do. APPENDIXB RATINGS or JUDGES ON THE FACTORS mmrmc ms w WW T N CHJLCE m3! -80— 0m.m u mwsflpmm me new: mm.m u mmmflpsm mo cam: wdefin NHNHgNHaHaHHHNL TwamfiN N_N,tha_lafla fiN .N—nanN_N:mqn~w_HJW mm.N n mmaapam do new: mm.m n manages mo cam: *nuw unla‘ a N N a a 1w‘ b N _- N _ o . N m n N N mam] a we a _ N4H,Nt_mmass *7 N _‘ m i m1, N m7 _i at aw wt _ N A m.4 < om.N u massage mo cam: oo.m u manages we saw: N we mu] a N a“ we we N new 0 N am a N N m, a Xe N am m.omose N a m7 N N 7m, a a N a a oN.n Ns.u mm.- mm.u m¢.- mm.+ om.+ ms.+ be.+ oa.+ amo empoaemhm - rr- LL scam noapua>ma r W7 .Jq 1wW _ N i H _«NW 4. _ m7 _ N i H i mflflficfifld mmm>ofl£odlhovc5 mpo>¢HSQ¢Ium>o Nmopsm>sH ooaono AMdOHpsSpwm vowfiaspmsoo map mafihapm©CD mpcpowm age so mmmuzn mo mwmwpmm m Kfidaommd o Upswcmpm Hmfiflxmz m Qpfl3 mnflpQQEOQ... lb m mwvzh vhswcmpm HMEflzflz m npwz mafiummEoo ma 05.ng0 o o psoanmfladsoood sossoo Shea weed... psoEo>Ho>cH sums phosm momssw an wen: madam .31- APPENDIX C RAmlNGS OF JUDGES ON THE FACTORS UNDERLYING THE HUMAN TRAIT_INVENTORY J1 i a a N N w a] ~ 4 N N o Banged:..maEmcofiflem 1‘ a a N N a1 a L a N N m smash. Ngomhmfimpfi Basemeafi 1» N «1 N a a a a a n N a mfi.N u mmnwpam we use: om.N n mmmwpsm mo use: N m N m N N N _ W a d o N a N m N N a H a m m amass bfioaemeaoa:6mpcmfio 3338 . N m N i IN! . N _. N 71¢ 1H7 N N N _ < RN u «Nahum No :82 3a u manage .8 :82 N H a m A N N a p d a N N _ o N .H‘ ¢ H h N N w _ 7d d N N — m mmvdh mommucommccH...oocovcomma N _ N a _ m a a a a m N N Z. 3a u «NEE No :32 8a n mmfipé No :82 , aIJW a a H a N a m a N N L o mmEmaofifimm 88... e a a w H N N m a a N N u m mass suanofisa 333 bflfimom 1N a m _ m m a m m a N N ~ 4 8A ... mmachm N0 5% 8N u Nashua .8 8mm: 1W a a N N W N a N N 0 830380 . . . e w m N N n a a N N m amass 3mg $388-0th .N N d N N N N M 1N H a. N... Na..- 3... out 9.- mm; mm... fl: 3... 3:. $8 83395 Beam cowpmfl>oa . I“ d m N _ H _ 7“ . ldw _ NI N _ H QHHPNHHEJ m ..N m N H mum>ofi£oo mmwvdh ha son: mHsom .1 .... 1;. ..n .. u hmwfi. :2 :\ . ! .... H .....l ...; a. win“ ta... . ’ .1 éhsst . . handed sea. 35: Eisea. m. r A... . one. ”Kindness: myopowh on» Go news“; we mwcflwam i. a 1.. . ., o Ransommd y: s APPENDIX D RATINGS 0F JUDGES 0N GEE FAC'IORS UNDERLYING THE PERCEIVED .P'ABENTAL ACETITUDES INVENTORY - om.N "macapam No new: ms.N u mNchNm No new: - H N a Nina N N N b As N a N m‘ M o oNpNNooamo... H. N a H m. N N m7 _ a N a N N AH m omens moaaeaso oNpaaooeoes: v N _ he _ AN i N N __ m m e _ m _ N m a N - ON.m n mmaNNNm No new: mm.N "-mmnapam No use: . TN d NHN m JHNHN alga o mliw‘ H 7w] H. dd G H Id 7H N ha m1 «N h N m omssw obfimmommom...m>fimmmmmomlaoz .NmN_ee_nmN.J N_Na 0N.m n macapmm No cam: om.N u mchpmm mo cum: rt a a a N N, N a H N in .XNrHo e2&.: . mm Xe N N N N wa_ N a. a] m awn amaze cohaoahmth eaaaoupcmuam NOON , N 1N a N n N an N am Mme .s mm.N umchpam me see: ms.N u mmaapmm N0 «do: - a a NHN a N N a N Naedo a we _ we N N N a N N AH he NH m amaze o>NmmNsth...o>NmmNsnmmucoz 4 Nam a N N a N Ni nae mm.m u escapam No cam: ms.N u mmsapnm «0 new: N a. IN N a7 a N M. a an o £82522... N we mi N 7a he N N his 7a, m amass onsmmonm pamam>manomo .q NV m N H in NV _ fl. N H. mHHPflg m a m N N mhm>mgodlhmfldb mkm>mfl£o¢lhm>o momwmh 59 com: onom Nwopsm>mH mmpdpflpp< Hdpcmhdm cm>wmonmm one wswhHuocsD whopomm map so mmwvsh mo mmafipmm a flange: r H! Il ya .IMIFNHFVE .m u mNchNN No cam: , :N.n u manages «0 cam: y» 4.1VWHH1NEN N_WH¢H.Nflo m H m _ N _ N I N V _ N _ d A 1N _momu3. oo:3mm8<...:o$om.nmm m A m _ n _ m hm N V 1H‘ m \h m a q r 4 o m omufin eswfimfiomwa...m:HHmfiomfin 02 N «mo souoaeogm 80.5 ”3.3.3.53 oNanasa Aconcapcoov a xaanoaae — oq.m u mchme No new: sN.m u mchpam No saw: I. a J 1N m e. N a. W q aw 1” o N! m m7 N N N 11a N he he . m omega occupaoooa...c0Npomflmm m _ m m m _ m N i nu . m i m _ JV , N mm.N u mmsapam No news 0N.m n mNcNNNN No new: N N N a a a N a4 a N o N N N a a a my Xe .a. N m amass «caaahomNa...chNaNomNa oz N W N a m .N N 1N .N N N . 0N; Nb; Mm... mm: Md... ”5+ mm; mNi+ 3; OH? «mo vopoflcopm 50.5 sausages _ N, _ he _ m. N N _ m1 NW _ m1 _ N a mNNqusa Aemschcoov a Naeaoaaa APPENDIX E FAREWT AND STUDENT RESPONSES TO THE FOURTEEN DISCRIMINATING ITEMS FROM __TI_1_E_ flCEIV‘ED PARENTAL ATTITUDES INVEN'NRY r- I .. . I5 3.-.,II.|II.IIL )5? I1! \\. V . .. I I + + I + + I I + I + + + + + + + + I I + .........xuozoson hash» spa: coyoawno aflosp 9H0: op wcwHsz mmozHo who mpcoham .00 + + + + + + + + + + I + + + + + I + + + + + ................mson mocowpw gamma mcflhn op sopcaflno paws» omNHSooco oHdosm mucoumm .mm I I + + + + + + I + I + + + I + + + + + + + .............ded> mnfioafisn popompomo pawnm mo who mowpfl>fipoo HooSothopmm Hwfioomm .05 + I I I I I I I + + + I + + I I I + I I I I .......ohao: no: use zoom on cH50nm oHflso < .Nb + + I I + + + I + + + I I + + I I + I + + I ................uonpmm man spa: cwpmo mafidv oohMNNNN op cHfizo a you Hammad: no: ma pH .bm IIIIIII I + + I I + I I I I I I + I + ............ua5wm no hHHth who 0:: managed passe ma pd .o>m£onmws noucHNAO can: .mm + I + + + + + + + I I + + I + + + + + I + + ........usm3 hemp mphOMSOO on» HHd copcaflno 0>Hm op andsp pamphodew pmoa can #0: ma pH .@¢ + I I I I I + I I I + I I I + I I I + I I I .........novafl£o n30 kaoSp on mwxapmfis s30 Hwonp awavo ou mesohom pom amaze: ma pH .HQ + I + + I I + + I + + + I + IIIII + + I .....Eo:p hoemm moox won 06 mpcmhwm ma xhoz . Hooaom 5.8% Newman NH: 618320 1% 7¥ + I + + + + I + + I + + + + + + + + + + + ........mmm hHhoo no as muonSMHo: ox» pwmwb a 0» om 0» voonHm on UHSOQN :oAUHHno .NH + + I I I + I I + I + I I I + IIIIII I .....mpsmwh m.oHfino on» now an ocean anosm .358 as. .320 N 8:33 “maps.“ N NH AH IIIII III++ + II--I'I+II .l ...-aooooonuoooonoo-o-oo NOW p.300.“ qugHUQH scum oopoopoua on vH503m cohoHflno .o SvdSrdSvdSvdSvd a SdSJSdeSd Namaqnmman mu 222;; mm 33?ng 2 3333? ...N Unfuguqugug .1. Uququququq non... 1. 1' n? a... 0.. RT: ...? n... 1. a... n4. OI. 00 m0 Nu ...... SJ AT... A o a o 8... Jr“ muo>mfinoo s “Hopso>:a mouspHp¢¢ Hopconwm oo>aoaumm on» scam maopH msflpcsflawhomfin annexe on» ow noncommmm paedopm one pconwm m anaconda .\ .1. ,k\ . III. I I.“ K I. . . {iii\i .\ ‘4 I 00.4 n ado: om.¢ u now: myopnwdmv was annoyed mmozpon omsommop m H q o b b b H m e mo sofipomhflo cw moosmaommwo mo 903552 ++++++++++ I ++++++++++ + ......................123320 .393. 5...? mmawnp mo wpoH ow oHdosm mucohmm .NQH I + l I I + I I I I + I + I I I IIIII I oooooooooooowooooooemflp UCHE CGHUHflQO HHGSP page pmflmcw 0» o>mn 902 oo mhmnpmm .CQH + + + + + + + + + + I + I + + + + + + + + + .................................mxoon coom anon on ommmndoono on oHsonm sohoafino .mmH Vi + + + + + + + + + + I + I + + + + + + + + + oooooFoooooooooooooo.uoooo.mMflH mflg MO PHQQ pgpoafi pace 2: NN sage 9320 ... .03 + + + + + + + + + + I + + + + + + + + + + + .......mSmHnohm m.nohvaflno “Hosp womanhoscs op puommm Hoes o oxds oHdosm mesonom .HmH MW I + + + + I I I + + I + + + I I I + I + I .................oo>Ho>:w hHHm:0flpoEo on on go: :oHoHfino gammy use masohom pom poop ma pa News cadence w nopm< .oHH + + + + + + I + I + I + + + + + + + + + I + ........................:oNoHflno swamp um>o nwdoco Hoppcoo ohm: 90: oo mpaohdm meow .MHH + + I I I + I + + + .+ I I I + I I I I + + .I .................»Hnomonm sonoHfigo aflopp ow uncommoos mfi mcwHQfiomHU mo Home poohm N .Hm NNNNNNNNNN mm NNNNNNNNNN mm D. e mmmememmmm am mummmemmma am e u e u e u e u s u J o e u e u e u e u e u _ o "u4u1u1u1u1..n+ u4u4u1u1un+ 21 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. e I. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. o I. o 0 m.0 m... .... 8 . Am. NM. 9 1 a J J 8 II 9 mamboflnodIhousD mao>ofigoo Avmsuwesoov a xwocodm< F I. II .. I I... I I thVIIMWHLrl EVEPL .:w>wm mm: CONNOopav = = d zoohmomfin= no =owhmsmfln hHMGONpm= no: oncommoh oz» ma .cowpoohfiv =+= a qm>wm mm: pH =oohm<= no =omhm¢ AHMGONpmz mmz Bopw so 09 oncommoh exp MH -89- oo.¢H u upsoospm you now: 0%. m n mpaoosum you sow: oo.qH u upsmpom you sow: om. 4n upsoudm new mom: m150hm nowhmpwho cap 59 Eopfi on» HH NH 0H bfi 0H NH «w #H NH ma m N o b H N m ¢ ¢ b co>wm cofipoopwo exp scam monopommwn IIIIIAuInfi. I .IlldflnWIll S .d as .d as .a as .u cuaucugiooga aid 1. e 1 e n+ n+ e n+ e 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 n+2 mamammmama NNNNNNNNNN NNNNNNNNNN Nuaumuawmw 1. n+ 1. 1. 1. 1.1.1.1.1.1.1. 1. mno>ownoowmoo Qaafiaoov m sneaks: .-M'M "' APPENDIX F RESPONSES 0F TEACHERS AND STUDENT TO ‘IHE SIGNIFICANT ITEMS OF THE WORD RATING LIST F- $.77 «...-mg. Responses of Teachers and Student to the Significant Talented........ Practical....... Average......... Logical......... Smart...... ..... Successful...... Thorough........ 0rderly......... Purposeful...... Procrastinator.. Studious........ Different....... Discontented.... Flighty......... Responsible..... Consistent...... Intelligent..... Distractible.... Nervous......... Systematic...... Daring.......... A person who postpones....... Exacting........ Stubborn........ Perfectionist... Accepting....... Carefree........ Competitive..... Intellectual.... Alert... ..... ... Above average... Productive...... item by criterion groups. Direction given the I + I + + + + + + + + + + + I + I I + I + + + + I I + + + + + I -91- Appendix F Items of the Word Rating List Number of teacher responses which are in same direction as the student responses. the AJFJ A)\J N N\O NNNNNNNN HWbbJWNbJO to 4_\ IONA.) mm M HwI—‘Otomwm HM \Iw 22 21 21 18 18 23 17 22 Number of responses % s (13(1) .23.: +>+> CU) ~H13 (DC: :40 as-H +-> .2 o QC» .513... r-q‘H 3'6 (\JNNI—JI—‘NI—JKI—JI—I |—'I—J bI—walouoq \1\1\O\OO\ NPQI-‘HNN OPCDQNN FJFJ 0\c> NI—JN Nun» $3 FJF‘AJFJFJFJFJ muwooum ‘ es. student respons iven the item by criterion groups. Direction g r 3 I + + + I + I +|+I Number of teacher resnonses which are in L the same direction as criterion groups. KKES l2 Number of teacher reSponses which are in the same direction as the responses made by their students. 22 J IL. ) -92- .pp ndix F (Continued) \ ‘0 E a o :5 :1 - .0 I: O -Hmm G) .,—1 -H a) g a o E . m (D 0.) U) (0’53 (DU) Q: J: 9:: 09m . SQ. LC? p s H m o o m m .p 5 h m o - p O 05' ‘HQ—I CCOJQJ 0 CD -HU') C) :-a .:.c p w 0.: z m s h .:.c u c. L cos-I 000(1) 0.9+): 0:0 000: 0 >0 mamh 0') O > 33-1-1030 (C 'H-9 0.: h o c m c. -H : c.1 k h o hmH p 3~H p H.H x m coo a 3.H a: 9 £4 'CC. 1: -H 1: co 94m c: Mmch :54 we) C. CH 0 00(1)": OS—IO OCL‘ OQQ‘QJO O Ht»: 015:! stu-4+3 ~H+J mE-H u.2 p n m p p u : p.a h c m p u 0 (some: (11,200 0;. come (I) c E .o c. .c o o m c o D :1 p L La) Emma E-H’H: L :3!) 1‘-H 7: -a p a c g : 5.2-H a ~H p. B 1.: p 5 Q-H z u p p z 3«u m Q.o z pep o z Persuadeable...... + 15 16 - 17 A thinker......... + 19 18 - 22 Ambitious......... + 19 21 — 16 Contented......... + 19 19 - 15 Concerned......... + 0l 21 — 19 in achiever....... + 22 18 — 2! A planner......... + 13 21 - 19 Competent......... + 20 14 — 5 Teachable......... + 2, 21 - ll Reasonable........ + 24 24 — 13 Impatient......... - 23 23 + 1 Friendly.......... + 22 22 - 5 Efficient......... + 20 2o - 16 Easily Distracted. - 23 23 + 14 Reliable.......... + 23 20 - 15 u '( Serious........... + 24 lb — 14 Mean.............. 20.35 19.73 15.02 n "+” direction indicates a response of ”usually" or ”always”. A ”—" direction indicates a response of "sometimes" or ”never" responses which are in the same direction as the responses made by their students. NI—J #‘NO\ .. r .I 4 1 .1; I . .1. YO.,..IIIIQI.I..|.I I. I..|I 30M USE URL! RES-N1 USE. GNU I811 1964 m 53% mam" [a *W Db} Its/WE , JAN 6 $965+; We