LIBRARY Michigan State University This is to certify that the dissertation entitled A STUDY COMPARING ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AND GRADUATION RATE OF TRANSFER STUDENTS WITH NATIVE STUDENTS IN THE BACCALAUREATE MARKETING CURRICULA IN THE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AT FERRIS STATE COLLEGE presented by ROLAND RAPHAEL REAM has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY degree in TEACHER EDUCATION QM «OM Major professor Date November 3, 1987 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771 MSU RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to remove this checkout from LIBRARIES .—:-_. your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. «a. 1 I of???) vw-C;}‘ A STUDY COMPARING ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AND GRADUATION RATE OF TRANSFER STUDENTS WITH NATIVE STUDENTS IN THE BACCALAUREATE MARKETING CURRICULA IN THE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AT FERRIS STATE COLLEGE By Roland Raphael Ream A DISSERTATION Submitted To Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education Department of Teacher Education 1987 Copyright by ROLAND RAPHAEL REAM 1987 ABSTRACT A STUDY COMPARING ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AND GRADUATION RATE OF TRANSFER STUDENTS WITH NATIVE STUDENTS IN THE BACCALAUREATE MARKETING CURRICULA IN THE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AT FERRIS STATE COLLEGE By Roland Raphael Ream The problem of this study was to investigate the success of transfer students compared with native students to determine the effectiveness of two-plus-two marketing programs at Ferris State College (FSC). The population was two junior groups: (1) transfer students who entered a two-year program as freshmen, com- pleted an associate degree, and transferred to a marketing curriculum at FSC, and (2) native marketing students who entered FSC as freshmen. A Eleven hypotheses were tested using the following variables: cumulative freshman-sophomore grade point aver- ages (GPA); GPA in lower-level marketing courses; cumulative Junior-senior GPA; cumulative freshman-sophomore GPA com- pared with GPA of first quarter of junior year; GPA in upper-level marketing courses; GPA in upper-level marketing courses of students who took lower-level marketing courses at other colleges compared with that of students who took lower-level marketing courses at FSC; reasons for attrition; percentages of attrition, course withdrawals, probation, and graduation. Variables were also studied by gender. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance and Chi Square tests with a .05 significance level. Transfer students’ GPA for the first quarter of the Junior year decreased significantly_ more from their cumulative freshman-sophomore GPA than did that of native students. Significant differences, by gender, found female native students earned higher cumulative freshman-sophomore GPA’s, as well as junior-senior GPA’s, than did female transfers; male transfer students earned higher cumulative freshman-sophomore GPA’s, as well as junior-senior GPA’s, than did male natives; and female transfer students had higher attrition percentages then did female natives. Conclusions are (1) transfer and native students have similar ability, motivation, satisfaction, preparation, perseverance, interests, personal accomplishments, and prob- lems; (2) two-year college and FSC course requirements and grading standards are similar; (3) two-year college and FSC faculty, as well as students, are similar in preparation and quality; (4) transfer students choose appropriate curricula; (5) transfer students have difficulty adjusting to FSC requirements, grading, and class sizes but eventually adjust adequately; (6) two-year colleges fulfill course pre- requisites, or prerequisites are unimportant; (7) two- year colleges and FSC provide similar backgrounds in general education and in marketing, and (8) transfer and native students apply principles to upper-level courses similarly. DEDICATION Special thanks is given to my wife, Shirley, whose under- standing, patience, cooperation, and encouragement have been unceasing throughout this project. Her assistance in word processing and proofreading, and her complete support have been major factors in bringing this study to a lconclusion. It is to her that I dedicate this dissertation. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many people have aided in the initiation, development, and completion of this research project. The writer acknowledges with appreciation those who encouraged, counseled, and advised through the various stages of this study. I am thankful to the members of my supervisory committee: Dr. Robert Poland, chairman, Dr. Paul Slocum, Dr. Ben Bohnhorst, and Dr. Eldon Nonnamaker, for their wis- dom, advice, and patience extended to me in the classroom and through the completion of this project. The writer is indebted to colleagues at Ferris State College for both their moral support as well as their specific assistance. Dr. Keith E. Lucas, faculty member, provided strong motivation to complete a doctoral program as well as helpful encouragement and counsel in reaching this goal. Otis Dickens, Assistant Dean in the School of Bus- iness, made available needed student enrollment data. I am also grateful for his expertise, knowledge, and helpful suggestions offered to me at various steps in the develop- ment of this study. vi I appreciate the wise advice given me by the Coordinator of Testing, Dr. Fred Swartz, in solving many special problems associated with this research. The library staff was very efficient in helping secure related literature for use in Chapter Two. Librar- ian Sara E. Krumins aided in the initial procedures for gathering this information. Librarian Keitha Breault capa- bly conducted the ERIC search for related literature. Librarian Richard E. Perrin and assistants, Kathy Peacock and Linda Podehl, were effective in securing information through inter-library loans. I am deeply grateful to Paul G. Schnepf, Regis- trar, and his staff for their cooperation and patience in making student records available as well as providing physical working space during the data gathering phase. Mr. Schnepf’s knowledge of student records was especially helpful in securing crucial information needed for analy- zation. Statistical assistance was capably given by faculty members Dr. James Maas and Michael Cooper. I am thankful to Dr. Maas for his recommendations for the overall statis- tical design. I am deeply indebted to Mr. Cooper, who so thoroughly, efficiently, and patiently structured the sta- tistical procedures. With great respect I thank Mr. Cooper for his kindness as he gave of himself so unselfishly in processing the data through the use of the SAS computer software package. vii Linda Travis, Director of the School of Business Computer Laboratory, and Clyde Hardman, faculty member, provided instructional help in word processing. I appre- ciate the high degree of interest, care, and patience pro- vided by Mrs. Travis throughout the processing of this document on data processing equipment. Student laboratory assistants Alan Bott and Mark Redder provided unusual skill in solving problems involving the word processing of this project. Bonita K. Golder, faculty member, was especially helpful in providing editorial review. Mary Jane Cook, faculty member, ably aided in effective word usage. I am grateful to my parents, brother, and sister-in- law. I owe a special degree of gratitude to my parents for their support and guidance throughout my educational career. It has been their concern, their lives, their wisdom, and their spiritual leadership that have guided me from my first day of kindergarten to the achievement of this goal. I am deeply grateful to my brother and his wife for their con- tinued interest, concern, and encouragement to me for the successful completion of this study. viii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES ......................................... xii Chapter I. THE PROBLEM .................................... 1 Introduction .............................. 1 Statement of the Problem .................. 3 Need for the Study ........................ 4 Purpose of the Study ...................... 6 Assumptions ............................... 9 Delimitations ............................. 10 Limitations ............................... 10 Definition of Terms ....................... 12 Research Questions ........................ 15 Hypotheses ................................ 17 Summary ................................... 19 Chapter Notes ............................. 20 II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ................... 21 Introduction .............................. 21 History of Ferris State College ........... 22 Related Studies ........................... 30 Growth of Two-Year Institutions ........ 30 Articulation Concerns .................. 33 Classification of Transfer Students.... 41 Characteristics of Transfer Students... 42 Transfer Student Satisfaction with Two-Year College Experience .......... 43 Aspirations of Transfer Students ....... 44 Academic Performance of Transfer Students .................... 45 Academic Performance of Students Transferring to Four-Year Schools of Business .................. 59 Transfer Policies and Standards ........ 64 Summary ................................... 85 Chapter Notes ............................. 8? ix TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Page III. METHODS AND PROCEDURES ......................... 93 Introduction .............................. 93 Design ...................... ' .............. 93 Population ................................ 94 Collection of Data ........................ 95 Procedures ................................ 97 Research Questions ........................ 101 Hypotheses ................................ 103 Analysis of Data .......................... 105 Descriptive Procedures ................. 107 Inferential Techniques ................. 111 Chapter Notes ............................. 114 IV. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS ............................ 115 Introduction .............................. 115 Tests of Hypotheses and Answers to Research Questions ..................... 115 Null Hypothesis One .................... 115 Research Question One .................. 117 Null Hypothesis Two .................... 118 Research Question Two .................. 120 Null Hypothesis Three .................. 121 Research Question Three ................ 123 Null Hypothesis Four ................... 123 Research Question Four ................. 126 Null Hypothesis Five ................... 126 Research Question Five ................. 128 Null Hypothesis Six .................... 129 Research Question Six .................. 132 Null Hypothesis Seven .................. 133 Research Question Seven ................ 134 Null Hypothesis Eight .................. 135 Research Question Eight ................ 136 Null Hypothesis Nine ................... 137 Research Question Nine ................. 139 Null Hypothesis Ten .................... 140 Research Question Ten .................. 141 Null Hypothesis Eleven ................. 142 Research Question Eleven ............... 143 Null Hypothesis Twelve and Research Question Twelve ..................... 144 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..... Findings ............. Research Question Research Question Research Question Research Question Research Question Research Question Research Question Research Question Research Question Research Question Research Question Research Question OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO One .................. Two .................. Three ................ Four ................. Five ................. Six .................. Seven ................ Eight ................ Nine ................. Ten .................. Eleven ............... Twelve ............... Summary of Findings .................... Conclusions .......... Recommendations ...... Suggestions for Additional Research ....... Reflections .......... APPENDICES ........................ Appendix Appendix Appendix and? Ferris State College ......... Transfer Curricula ....... , ..... The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 as Appendix Appendix Appendix Q’IJFJU Appendix Amended .............. Ferris State College Approval ..................... Michigan State University Approval ..................... Risk Benefit Ratio Analysis ..................... School of Business Student Withdrawal Interview .................... Appendix Appendix H53 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...................... xi Withdrawal Clearance Form.... Statistical Data ............. Page 170 170 170 171 171 172 172 173 174 174 175 176 176 177 181 189 192 194 195 196 196 207 224 227 228 229 233 234 235 254 LIST OF TABLES Table 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Ferris State College Enrollment Fall 1985, and Degrees Granted in 1984-85 ........................ Educational Programs Offered at Ferris State College, 1985-86 .................................. Characteristics of Michigan Two-Year Colleges from Which Students Transfer to Ferris State College... Growth of Two-Year Institutions in the United States, 1963-1983 ................................. Grade Point Averages of Students Two Years After Transfer from Various Types of Institutions ....... Percentages of Colleges Who Evaluated Business Core and Accounting Courses as Being Transferable, Nontransferable, or Transferable by Examination... Research Population of Students Enrolled in a Baccalaureate Marketing Curriculum at Ferris State College ........................................... Academic Probation Policy at Ferris State College Based on Quarter Hours Earned and Grade Point Average Range for Placement on Probation .......... Alphabetical Grade and Honor Points Allowed Per Credit Hour at Ferris State College ............... Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Statistics ........................................ Analysis of Variance Test of Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Averages ................ Grade Point Statistics for Four Selected Lower- Level Marketing Courses ........................... Analysis of Variance Test of Grade Point Averages for Four Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses... Cumulative Junior and Senior Grade Point Statistics ........................................ xii Page 23 25 27 32 58 75 95 100 108 116 117 119 119 121 Table 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. LIST OF TABLES (Continued) Analysis of Variance Test of Cumulative Junior and Senior Grade Point Averages .................. Differences in Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Statistics and Grade Point Statistics for First Quarter of Junior Year ................. Analysis of Variance Test of Differences in Cumu- lative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Aver- ages and Grade Point Averages for First Quarter of Junior Year ................................... Grade Point Statistics of Juniors and Seniors for Five Selected Upper-Level Marketing Courses ...... Analysis of Variance Test of Grade Point Averages of Juniors and Seniors for Five Selected Upper- Level Marketing Courses .......................... Grade Point Statistics of Juniors and Seniors for Five Selected Upper-Level Marketing Courses of Transfer Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower- Level Marketing Courses at Colleges Other Than Ferris State College and of Native Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses at Ferris State College .......................... (Analysis of Variance Test of Grade Point Averages of Juniors and Seniors for Five Selected Upper- Level Marketing Courses of Transfer Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses at Colleges Other Than Ferris State College and of Native Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower- Level Marketing Courses at Ferris State College.. Course Withdrawals of Juniors and Seniors ........ Chi Square Test of Course Withdrawals of Juniors and Seniors ...................................... Attrition of Juniors and Seniors ................. Chi Square Test of Attrition of Juniors and Seniors .......................................... Reasons for Attrition of Juniors and Seniors ..... xiii Page 122 124 125 127 127 130 131 133 134 135 136 138 Table 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. LIST OF TABLES (Continued) Chi Square Test of Reasons for Attrition by Grades Compared to Other Reasons for Attrition of Juniors and Seniors... .............. Juniors and Seniors on Academic Probation for Any One Quarter ...................................... Chi Square Test of Juniors and Seniors on Academic Probation for Any One Quarter ........... Seniors Who Graduated by Spring 1986 ............. Chi Square Test of Seniors Who Graduated by Spring 1986 ...................................... Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Statistics by Gender ............................. Analysis of Variance Test of Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Averages by Gender ..... Grade Point Statistics by Gender for Four Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses ........... Analysis of Variance Test of Grade Point Averages by Gender for Four Selected Lower- Level Marketing Courses .......................................... Cumulative Junior and Senior Grade Point Statistics by Gender ............................. Analysis of Variance Test of Cumulative Junior and Senior Grade Point Averages by Gender ........ Differences in Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Statistics and Grade Point Statistics for First Quarter of Junior Year by Gender ....... Analysis of Variance Test of Differences in Cumu- lative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Aver- ages and Grade Point Averages for First Quarter of Junior Year by Gender ......................... Grade Point Statistics of Juniors and Seniors by Gender for Five Selected Upper-Level Marketing Courses .......................................... Analysis of Variance Test of Grade Point Averages of Juniors and Seniors by Gender for Five Selected Upper-Level Marketing Courses ...... xiv Page 139 140 141 142 143 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 Table 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. LIST OF TABLES (Continued) Grade Point Statistics of Juniors and Seniors by Gender for Five Selected Upper-Level Marketing Courses of Transfer Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses at Col- leges Other Than Ferris State College and of Native Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower- Level Marketing Courses at Ferris State College.. Analysis of Variance Test of Grade Point Aver- ages of Juniors and Seniors by Gender for Five Selected Upper-Level Marketing Courses of Trans- fer Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses at Colleges Other Than Ferris State College and of Native Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses at Ferris State College ............................. Course Withdrawals of Juniors and Seniors by Gender ........................................... Chi Square Test of Course Withdrawals of Juniors and Seniors by Gender ............................ Attrition of Juniors and Seniors by Gender ....... Chi Square Test of Attrition of Juniors and Seniors by Gender ................................ Reasons for Attrition of Juniors and Seniors by Gender ........................................... Juniors and Seniors by Gender on Academic Probation for Any One Quarter .................... Chi Square Test of Male Juniors and Seniors on Academic Probation for Any One Quarter ........... Seniors by Gender Who Graduated by Spring 1986.. Chi Square Test of Seniors by Gender Who Graduated by Spring 1986 ......................... Summary of Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Statistics ........................... Summary of Analysis of Variance Test of Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Averages ................................... XV Page 156 157 159 160 161 162 164 165 166 168 168 235 236 Table 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. LIST OF TABLES (Continued) Summary of Grade Point Statistics for Four Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses ........... Summary of Analysis of Variance TeSt of Grade Point Averages for Four Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses ................................ Summary of Cumulative Junior and Senior Grade Point Statistics ................................. Summary of Analysis of Variance Test of Cumu- lative Junior and Senior Grade Point Averages.... Summary of Differences in Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Statistics and Grade Point Statistics for First Quarter of Junior Year ...... Summary of Analysis of Variance Test of Differ- ences in Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Averages and Grade Point Averages for First Quarter of Junior Year ........................... Summary of Grade Point Statistics of Juniors and Seniors for Five Selected Upper-Level Marketing Courses .......................................... Summary of Analysis of Variance Test of Grade *Point Averages of Juniors and Seniors for Five Selected Upper-Level Marketing Courses ........... Summary of Grade Point Statistics of Juniors and Seniors for Five Selected Upper-Level Marketing Courses of Transfer Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses at Col- leges Other Than Ferris State College and of Native Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower- Level Marketing Courses at Ferris State College.. Summary of Analysis of Variance Test of Grade Point Averages of Juniors and Seniors for Five Selected Upper-Level Marketing Courses of Trans- fer Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses at Colleges Other Than Ferris State College and of Native Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses at Ferris State College ............................. Summary of Course Withdrawals of Juniors and Seniors .......................................... xvi Page 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 Table 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. LIST OF TABLES (Continued) Page Summary of Chi Square Test of Course Withdrawals of Juniors and Seniors ........................... 248 Summary of Attrition of Juniors and Seniors ...... 249 Summary of Chi Square Test of Attrition of Juniors and Seniors .............................. 249 Summary of Reasons for Attrition of Juniors and Seniors .......................................... 250 Summary of Chi Square Test of Reasons for Attrition by Grades Compared to Other Reasons for Attrition of Juniors and Seniors ..... 251 Summary of Juniors and Seniors on Academic Probation for Any One Quarter .................... 251 Summary of Chi Square Test of Juniors and Seniors on Academic Probation for Any One Quarter ........ 252 Summary of Seniors Who Graduated by Spring 1986... 252 Summary of Chi Square Test of Seniors Who Graduated by Spring 1986 ......................... 253 xvii Cl! hp, V.“ M \ CA “4 gm CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Introduction College students, colleges, and curricula have furnished unique circumstances for higher business edu- cation in the United States. Students in the college age category and educational level have been the most mobile segment of our population. The economic and demographic as well as social implications of student mobility have been of particular importance to college and university planning and administration. Colleges have been unique by including a variety of curricula which have given students many educational choices. Students could prepare for business careers not only through structured business curricula in two- and four- year undergraduate schools, but also through many other college and university majors as well as in graduate school. The establishment of various types of two-year col- leges, in particular, broadened opportunities for higher education. These opportunities have been provided, not only for recent high school graduates but for older adults as well, through general courses and community service pro- grams. In a time period when many public colleges and 2 universities were raising their admission standards, Knoell and Medsker1 found students with lesser academic ability enrolling in various types of two-year colleges. To many students, two-year institutions were thought of as being economical, having an open door admission policy, and being ideally suited for commuters. The diversity of institution types presented a wide range of quality and standards. Problems thus existed in program philosophy, curriculum, and transferability between institutions. In 1972 Ferris State College was an original partic- ipant in the Michigan Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers agreement. This action provided for uniform requirements in the State of Michigan regarding general education courses. The acceptance of transfer credit from (other institutions was among the early philosophies of Ferris State College. The School of Business at Ferris was, and continues to be, a leader in developing unique curricula for the expressed purpose of assisting transfer students. These programs were called "two-plus-two" curricula since they were intended to enable students to complete the first two years of college in a two-year program, transfer to a bacca- laureate program at Ferris State College with full accep- tance of their prior work, and complete a baccalaureate degree in an additional two years. The Marketing Department is 6V A} lei 4" 6M acace Eire: pm '9‘ 3 in the School of Business developed two-plus-two curricula for several specialty areas. While Ferris State College in general, and the School of Business and its Marketing Department in particular, have been actively involved in the acceptance of transfer credit, there has been a lack of research studying the success of transfer students. This study addresses the neglected area of research involving the academic success of transfer students in the marketing department by comparing the academic accomplish- ments of transfer students with those of native students over a selected period of time. Wise The Marketing Department in the School of Business at Ferris State College includes, among its many curricula, special programs designed for transfer students. They are referred to as "two-plus-two programs" and allow students to take two years of study in a two-year program and then automatically transfer to a baccalaureate program at Ferris State College for an additional two years to earn a bacca- laureate degree in business-marketing. Very little research has been done to determine the academic performance and graduation percentage of students enrolled in the two-plus-two programs in marketing. The problem of this study was to investigate the success of 4 transfer marketing students in comparison with native (For definition of "native" see page 14) marketing students to determine the effectiveness of the two-plus-two programs. W While on the surface it appeared that articulation between two-year programs and baccalaureate programs presented no problem at Ferris State College, Dickens2 stated that Ferris has experienced a greater percentage of attrition among transfer students than among native stu- dents. This occurrence may have been indicative of several of the seventeen problems (in addition to possibly others not accounted for) associated with transferring discussed in Chapter II of this study. While each of these problems was not apparent at Ferris, eight may have been related to the high attrition rate of transfer students at Ferris State College. These eight problems included the following: (1) academic advising; (2) new student programs; (3) recog- nition and awards; (4) research; (5) student activities, studied by Sandeen and Goodale;3 (6) communication, analyzed by Slark and Bateman;4 (7) predictors of success, researched by Knoell and Medsker;5 and (8) time requirements, reported 6 by Downey. The possible application of these studies to the attrition concerns at Ferris is summarized as follows: LAWN There may be a need to provide for transfer students academic advisors who have a strong interest in guiding 5 these students in their degree requirements and in selecting elective courses. KW There may be a need to provide special orientation programs for transfer students. 3W There may be a need to revise the policy of rewarding outstanding transfer students’ achievements by recognizing student accomplishments at previous insti- tutions. 4-Besaarch There may be a need for the School of Business at Ferris State College continually to study students trans- ferring into the baccalaureate marketing programs. This would include researching their prior academic accomplish- ments and work at Ferris State College as well as their career success. 5W There may be a need to study the involvement of transfer students in campus activities including social, political and recreational areas. 6W There may be a need to assist two-year colleges in their transfer function by providing greater information on prerequisites, transferability of credits, and course descriptions. 6 7. W There may be a need to evaluate the measurements available to determine the most valid predictors of academic success for students transferring to the School of Business at. Ferris State College. 8. Want: There may be a need to explore the length of time transfer students persist in their studies at Ferris State College. It is obvious that for students to receive full benefit from the educational opportunites offered by the combined system of two- and four-year institutions, articu- lation problems must be minimized. The diminishing number 0f icollege-age students and increasing pressures on educa- tional resources also emphasizes the importance of solving Problems relating to transfer students. Since there is little evidence of research comparing performance and graduation percentages of students enrolled :111 ‘the two-plus-two marketing programs with those who were ha"l'oive marketing students, the need for this study was £I1915>£arent. The results of this research may provide answers 13(3' the possible problems cited and to answer the twelve research questions listed later in this chapter. Bummajiudr The purpose of this study was to compare transfer with native students in marketing curricula in the School of Business at Ferris State College. This comparison was done 7 to determine their similarity or dissimilarity of academic performance, graduation percentage, course withdrawal, aca- demic probation percentage, and attrition percentage. The results of this study and the correction of the problems cited should benefit Ferris State College, two-year colleges, and future transfer students. Ferris State Col- lege should receive the following benefits: 1. Be provided an increased pool of potential stu- dents via the transfer route from two-year colleges 2. Be the recipient of a strenghtened emphasis for the curricula in two-year colleges designed especially for transfer students 3. Be provided more open communication with two- Year colleges, aiding academic program construction as well 33 the mechanics of the transfer process f 4. Be provided greater evidence showing the necessity to evaluate the transfer orientation program 5. Be provided greater evidence showing the necessity to evaluate the transcript evaluation conference 6. Be provided greater evidence showing the neeessity to evaluate, on a continuous basis, the effective- ness of the special curricula for transfer students The two-year college should receive the following benefits: 1. Be provided the possibility of attracting a 3heater number of freshman students who would ordinarily 8 have enrolled at Ferris State College or some other four- year institution 2. Be the recipient of greater recognition and status by its relationship with Ferris State College 3. Be provided greater motivation to evaluate academic course work to assure adequate student preparation for upper-level study 4. Be the recipient of greater program enrichment through faculty interaction of the two-year institution with Ferris State College by correspondence, visitations, and seminars 5. Be provided the possibility whereby curriculum requirements of the two types of institutions could serve as input influencing the program structures of both Ferris and the two-year colleges The future transfer student should receive the following benefits: 1. Be provided greater motivation during the two- year program for more adequate preparation for upper-level course work 2. Be provided greater possibilities for transfer- ability to a four-year college without loss of academic credit 3. Be provided greater possibilities for a smooth transfer to a four-year college with a minimum of obstacles and complexities 9 4. Be provided greater motivation during the two- year program for pursuing a baccalaureate degree for those who had little or no intention of continuing their education beyond an associate degree 5. Be provided greater possibilities for obtaining higher education more economically by enabling students to complete two years of college in their own community and then easily transfer to a four-year college 6. Be provided greater motivation for non- traditional students to transfer easily to a four-year college after completing an associate degree more con- veniently and economically at a two-year institution Aasumaiicna In this study the following five assumptions were made: , 1. Researcher would have complete access to stu- dents’ academic and exit records. 2. Grade point averages of lower-level courses were accurate predictors of academic success in the upper level. 3. Grade point averages, graduation percentages, course withdrawals, attrition percentages, and time spent on academic probation were indicators of academic success in junior and senior years of college. 4. Students had given truthful responses during exit interviews. 10 5. Academic and professional motivation, and the preparation and quality of faculty and students at two-year institutions were similar to that of Ferris State College in like course levels. These factors would be sufficiently equal to permit transfer acceptance of credits, degrees, and students without extensive analysis of each course con- tained in the curriculum of study. Delimitations The following boundaries were established for this study: 1. Native students in baccalaureate marketing curricula at Ferris State College 2. Transfer students with associate degrees from regionally accredited institutions 3. Basic time period of seven years from Fall 1979- Spring 1986 4. Consideration of demographic variables including age and gender Limitations The following restraints were encountered in this study: 1. No consideration given to change from bacca- laureate marketing curricula to other majors because of limited numbers 2. Age groupings, as demographic variables, were deleted because of limited numbers 11 3. Statistical tests could not be performed for certain hypotheses because of limited numbers 4. Total population not included in calculating cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point statistics because of missing data 5. Total population not included in calculating grade point statistics for four selected lower-level mar- keting courses because of lack of comparative data 6. Total population not included in calculating cumulative junior and senior grade point statistics because of lack of comparative data 7. Total population not included in calculating differences in cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point statistics, and grade point statistics for first quarter of junior year, because of lack of comparative data 8. Total population not included in 'calculating grade point statistics for five selected upper-level mar- keting courses because of lack of comparative data 9. Total population not included in calculating grade point statistics for five selected upper-level mar- keting courses of transfer students who had taken four selected lower-level marketing courses at colleges other than Ferris State College, and of native students who had taken four selected lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College, because of lack of comparative data 12 We Academic Performance--The rate of a student’s success in college as measured by grade point averages, course withdrawals, probation, attrition, and graduation. Academic Probation--(A policy to ensure) an orderly proce- dure for giving careful consideration to the needs of each student enrolled in the upper division of a baccalaureate marketing curriculum at Ferris State College who was experiencing difficulty in academic work. Articulation--(An effort to establish) cooperative working relationships, communication, and agreements between colleges so that students could make a satisfactory transfer from one institution to another. Attrition--A condition that existed when a student attended at least one full quarter in the upper division of a baccalaureate marketing curriculum at Ferris State College and did not return for subsequent quarters. Associate Degree--A degree granted by regionally accredited colleges upon the successful completion of a pre- scribed two-year curriculum. Baccalaureate Marketing Curricula--Four-year programs in the School of Business at Ferris State College leading to a Bachelor of Science in Business degree with specialties‘ in Advertising, General Marketing, Retailing, or Sales. 13 College Level Examination Program (CLEP)--Tests offered by the College Board which, upon their successful completion, colleges grant credit for advanced standing to students with college equivalent experi- ences. Grade Point Average-~The average grades earned while enrolled in another regionally accredited college and/or in a baccalaureate marketing curriculum at Ferris State College. Graduation--The awarding of the Bachelor of Science degree in Business upon the completion of a baccalaureate marketing curriculum in the School of Business at Ferris State College. Junior-~A student with an associate degree from a regionally accredited college and enrolled in a baccalaureate marketing curriculum at Ferris State COllege in the Fall of 1981, 1982 or 1983, or a Ferris State Col- lege student enrolled in a baccalaureate marketing curriculum who acquired 90 quarter hours of credit by the beginning of Fall 1981, 1982 or 1983. Lower - Level Marketing Courses--Introductory marketing courses consisting of Principles of Advertising, Principles of Marketing, Principles of Retailing, and Principles of Salesmanship taught at Ferris State College as well as at many two-year insti- tutions. 14 Native Student--A student who enrolled at Ferris State College as a freshman in a baccalaureate marketing program. Regionally Accredited Institution--A college accredited by the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools or by the Michigan Commission on College Accreditation. Selected Reasons for Attrition--Those involving grades, financial problems, illness, live at home, curric- ulum change, and unknown. Senior--A student who was a junior in the Fall of 1981, 1982 or 1983 in a baccalaureate marketing curriculum at Ferris State College and continued to the point of acquiring a total of 125 quarter hours of credit. Status--A classification of students as being either trans- fer or native. Transfer Shock--A condition which results in transfer stu- dents’ grade point averages decreasing during their first quarter at a four-year college in comparison to their cumulative grade point average for their first two years in a two-year program. Transfer Student-~A student transferring into a baccalaure- ate marketing curriculum at Ferris State College who received an associate degree at a regionally accredited college. 15 Two-plus-Two Program--A program allowing students to take two years of study at a regionally accredited col- lege and then automatically transfer to a four-year college for an additional two years to earn a bacca- laureate degree. Upper-Level Marketing Courses—-Advanced marketing courses consisting of Analytical Marketing Techniques, Marketing Cases and Problems, Marketing Policy, Marketing Research, and Transportation and Physi- cal Distribution taken by marketing students during their last two years at Ferris State College. W The primary question answered by this study was how do transfer marketing students compare academically with native marketing students at Ferris State College. Answers to the following secondary questions were considered in reaching conclusions to this primary concern: 1. Do grade point averages of college freshman and sophomore transfer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students? 2. Do grade point averages of transfer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students for selected lower-level marketing courses? 3. Do grade point averages of college junior and senior transfer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students? 16 4. Do students experience transfer shock after transferring to a baccalaureate marketing curriculum at Ferris State College? 5. Do grade point averages of 'transfer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students for selected upper-level marketing courses? 6. Do grade point averages of students for selected upper-level marketing courses, who took selected lower-level marketing courses at other regionally accredited colleges, differ from those of students who took selected lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College? 7. Do course withdrawal percentages of transfer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students? 8. Do percentages of attrition of transfer mar- keting students differ from those of native marketing students? 9. Do percentages of attrition, for selected rea- sons, of transfer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students? 10. Do academic probation percentages of transfer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students? 11. Do graduation percentages of transfer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students? 17 12. Do academic accomplishments of male and female transfer marketing students differ from those of male and female native marketing students? Hznothasas The twelve null hypotheses to be tested are the following: 1. There are no significant differences in cumu- lative grade point averages between those of transfer mar- keting students and those of native marketing students during their college freshman and sophomore years. 2. There are no significant differences in grade point averages between those of transfer marketing students and those of native marketing students in four selected lower-level marketing courses. 3. There are no significant differences in cumula- tive grade point averages between those of transfer mar- keting students and those of native marketing students during their junior and senior years at Ferris State College. 4. There are no significant differences in cumula- tive freshman and sophomore grade point averages and their grade point averages for the first quarter of their junior year between those of transfer marketing students and those of native marketing students. 5. There are no significant differences in grade point averages between those of transfer marketing students 18 and those of native marketing students in five selected upper-level marketing courses. 6. There are no significant differences in grade point averages of students for five selected upper-level marketing courses, between those of transfer marketing stu- dents who had taken four selected lower-level marketing courses at other regionally accredited colleges and those of native marketing students who had taken four selected lower- level marketing courses at Ferris State College. 7. There are no significant differences in percent- ages of course withdrawals between those of transfer marketing students and those of native marketing students during their junior and senior years at Ferris State College. 8. There are no significant differences in percent- agesr of attrition between those of transfer marketing stu- dents and those of native marketing students during their junior and senior years at Ferris State College. 9. There are no significant differences in percent- ages of attrition for selected reasons between those of transfer marketing students and those of native marketing students during their junior and senior years at Ferris State College. 10. There are no significant differences in percent- ages of students ion academic probation between those of transfer marketing students and those of native marketing 19 students during their junior and senior years at Ferris State College. 11. There are no significant differences in percent- ages of graduation from a baccalaureate marketing curriculum between those of transfer marketing students and those of native marketing students at Ferris State College. 12. There are no significant differences in academic accomplishments between those of male and female transfer marketing students and those of male and female native mar- keting students at Ferris State College. Summers This chapter has defined the problem under study as well as discussed the need and purpose for studying the problem. Assumptions, delimitations, and limitations impor- tant to the research were noted. A listing of definitions of the terms used throughout this document also appeared. Twelve research questions to be answered were cited. Finally a null hypothesis to test was included to accompany each research question. 20 C o as 1Dorothy M. Knoell and Leland L. Medsker, £19m --!' -.'.: ikfto°!-.l- 0 0 !- 2!." Stgdent (Washington: American Council on Education, 1965), p. 2Interview with Otis Dickens, Ferris State College, Big Rapids, Michigan, 6 September 1985. 3Arthur Sandeen and Thomas Goodale, Ihe_Irans; WW (Gainesville, FL.: University of Florida, 1976), pp. 6-10. 4Julie Slark and Harold Bateman, Irans1§r_§tufi§nt§; I,-o:u ':,‘oau- c: at ,; n : s_ 9f C l or _: .1- 9: - J v- t - :n- . - . . 1 {-_ =_:q lgfgzmgtigg (Santa Ana: Santa Ana COllege, [1983]), p. 4. 5Knoe11 and Medsker, pp. 91, 93. 6Carolyn R. Downey. w- -U 7 -7 :. _ - ‘ §ou ! : We, -Qd ‘ T;t;n ; - fio‘fl o v n s 0 ° t Art Sci nces De r Co _ a . T -1 7 -r :o o no - - :- . Uni_§rsitx (Logan, UT.: By the Author, Utah State University, 1980), p. 17. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE Introduction A survey of the literature reveals that many stud- ies have been conducted in the broad general area of trans- fer students. Only a limited amount of current research, however, has been done with marketing students enrolled in two-plus-two programs at four-year colleges. The first part of this chapter contains a brief history of Ferris State College, summarizing many of the unique characteristics of its founder, goals and curricula. The college was unique in being an early developer of two- plus-two curricula. One of the long-standing goals of the institution was to provide an opportunity for graduates of various types of two-year institutions to continue their education at Ferris. Chapter II also discusses (1) growth of two-year institutions, (2) articulation concerns, (3) classification of transfer students, (4) characteristics of transfer stu- dents, (5) transfer student satisfaction with two-year col- lege experience, (6) aspirations of transfer students, (7) academic performance of transfer students, (8) academic 21 22 performance of students transferring to four-year schools of business, and (9) transfer policies and standards. Woes This section is a summary of a more complete history of Ferris State College found in Appendix A, “Ferris State College," of this study. Ferris State College was founded in 1884 by Woodbridge N. Ferris in Big Rapids, Michigan. It was, and continues to be, unique by endeavoring to prepare students for positions requiring career-oriented or professional education while, at the same time, stressing the personal development of each student. The primary aim of the founder was to prepare students for the everyday duties of life so they could make a living. Ferris thus kept his school in close contact with the needs of society. He_ formed the curriculum accordingly by adding and expanding courses as the market increased, and dropping courses when it decreased. The college operated as a private institution until 1949, when Public Act 114-49 of the Michigan Public Acts of 1949 provided that Ferris become a state institution. The school experienced exceptional growth from the original fifteen students to the current enrollment in excess of 10,000. Table 1 shows the Fall 1985 enrollment statistics and degrees granted in 1984-85. 23 Table 1. Ferris State College Enrollment Fall 1985, and Degrees Granted in 1984-85 ENROL NT NUMBER School EolLlQiBilotal Allied Health 1,102 Arts and Sciences 2,508 Business 4,235 Education 436 College of Optometry 197 Pharmacy 362 Technology _2LQ§Q Total 10,909 GonoraLBroakdoEn Michigan residents (96.8%) 10,562 Out-of-state residents (2.3%) 248 Foreign students (.9%) 99 Men (59.2%) 6,461 Women (40.8%) 4,448 Transfer students (11.4%) 1,243 Veterans (1.0%) 107 Bachelor degree students (52.9%) 5,773 W W]. Baccalaureate 1,516 Associate 1,273 Certificate 15 Master 1 Professional 39 Total 2,835 Source: Ferris State College, 19§§;§§_Ihg_E§gt§* Egzrig_$t§tg_ggllgge (Big Rapids, MI.: Ferris State Col- lege, 1986), p. 4. 24 Ferris offers over one hundred and thirty educa- tional programs through its seven divisions: (1) School of Allied Health, (2) School of Arts and Sciences, (3) School of Business, (4) School of Education, (5) School of Pharmacy, (6) School of Technology, and (7) College of Optometry. These programs lead to associate, bachelor, and master degrees as well as the Doctor of Optometry degree. Table 2 lists the educational programs. The School of Business at Ferris State College was one of the original departments of the institution. In concert with the Ferris philosophy, the School of Business plans its programs to prepare students for employment in the business world. Students can choose from among more than forty programs and options listed in Table 2 requiring two, four, or five years of study. _ Ferris State College makes diligent efforts to meet its goal in providing an opportunity for all graduates of regionally accredited two-year colleges to continue their education toward a baccalaureate degree. The attainment of this goal is strengthened by the development of a vast number of such colleges within the State of Michigan. Table 3 lists and characterizes Mich- igan’s two-year colleges whose graduates frequently continue their education at Ferris State College. 4‘: ”QT. n.0‘hhcu .Q‘Um .‘Lk‘u‘ 0‘ :t‘\° ..'.\g.\a‘ ~‘§‘~.U\-‘H a“ .N“L 255 =o_uaa=um uu=a_um coaaouaem Reina-agent =a_uucum_=_-u¢ >Lmaauom Lm__u_uoam Lem-ouooaau so; Lm_~aau=um m=s_saa - Luisa=a _.=_._La =o_«.u=eu _oa=um >._==.-au =e_sau=em mmo=_m=a camaauaem =L_.a= ma__¢ .uaeo> .. onaaoeaa soon-a .a.. coauauaem _a=a_saa=uuo auto.— engage: couueuaum +0 "Docum seesaw .uax ti : its... scents .=_.i.=.guc.= =a_=m.a __.La. «Luann ~ao¢ auusocuom _.oo4 Lemam_mm¢ ~ao~n Leo-aoaaa: uua>aom coca >aasuau~m u>LL=uuaw mmu=_m=m guacamou>L= a=_aaoaa= uses—ouam use Lasso Lea _._uLo-ou Beaumammc a>_ «Lau_=_uu¢ .a...» a. aaoaaaaa autumn oua.uo-.¢ .ocammuuaoa use 9:. season“. > a_a==umb uu_.*= caaaaasa_c_-nc _._L~Lucuom Leo-mouse: au_.*= u>LL~LLmL=L-e¢ aeoLLae - noCL>Lum aaaaaasmaaanec Lea-Loaama coma—Lamaaa-ac uu_.aa aa_.m __.La¢ “cacao—ca: a_ac _.=o_mmoaeaa canny La: Lea-as.=.= >._..S_ as: sewage nausea—ac u__aaaao=_mmnam>u¢ oeam.LL~>e¢ Languages: acme-Lon: Lam-ounce: umu=_m=a __a-m mmm=Lm=m usaauu_ocaaa Lao-maaenz coauuauaaa accounts: _aaasm=e=~\~=u-uoaau= .macomaua Lam-mamas: mmo=_m=m .aeo_uacauua~ uuaumu ~nu¢uaa=ac=m=_ ouaacam=~ mu=a=_m mu_-o=auw mmuaamaa =e_uaaam_=L-=¢ amu=_m=a Lem-Loans: Lao-mouaaz .moaoau .aaa. o=LLLLLaz -m-mum>waco_La-Loa=_ Laaaacoo .ama u .uae. Leo-mouse: -m-uum> anion-Lo :— omega-no .uuc e ~a=ec gaucaouuc -m-oumom coLLm-Loec_ omega-co m-uumam =SLLm-Loa=_ Loose-co Lam-Lcaamm mauum>m =o_uaocomc_ Lassa-cu .mua mu .aau. uu=~=_m- cauaaouuc ocqocsouuc Leo-Lounge oucaucaouuc .m...» o. unease.» cacao: .m.a u caucaouuc .aauuu a. one... acouaog mnmcemsm we noocum moaeaum aquacmm mu=m_um >La=LLuLm>-oca >aae=ouam aauauaa_m maaauaeaa=_=uamh-aaa au=m_um-mea >ua-Laua.~aa .522 one: oncomum ocaaaaox-.aa memumnmz-.oa nam.oaa aa_cou=mo=muuaa >c~m_uaoaioaa mute..ca namesake ..=o_mma*oaaioaa =a.ao_...a .__gu-maa_>cam _.ausm a .ocguop scan—=CLLLax .ascacaaaa -m__.=.=ae >oe_o=guu— >LL.L-o=o _a_asm=ue_ «unease; Romano .na..» a. anaaaeaa cocoon a.._uaa.¢ ea_uauaaacaou _uu_==oup geese uuauumaam ecu =L_.~: .mscuz as c >a=.=.=__.a as. Essa» .=~.e__=a acumen: . moo—>Lam _._uom eas_a.¢ .au_m~.a=..= uo__aa¢ too—oLm .nauu» a. contact; on»... .m.. ulucemum use auLc to sacrum aaucugh >L¢L~LLamu¢ .o.¢.x. as...so_..¢ queacgump .acamaaz ace—oeguoh u=_uaea= Lau_u=z =~_uagguu— muoaumz ..u_=u: =.Lu_==uub soon—Luann ~.u_saz 822.52 .225 sauna»: .aucua Leann—mma ~au=oa .uaa.» a. contact; cocoon uaa_uoa.¢ _a=a_mmm.aoa .a=_mL=z >oo_o==uo» u=_umuo= nuance: aa_o=gump _uu_eu= caguaaunn=.-uc mucosa» .auaeug Leo-mange: women m ga—aoz Sauces—ea: genus: -u=~¢=¢a.>=m cm _._L nae:— .:2;.:s_.:.. .e. guano: noises +0 sacrum mrammomi Ts: £58 :5 at: s IE... is... ssszé .N :3 2(5 .. .__ .32.. .528 3% st: 2.. :35. as. o as... 3.3 at: so: . _ 3A.... .353 as... at: .333 sass! ass... as... as .5 2.5.... Est: >.o_a=;un— nu_uma_a >ea_aeguu~ o=LLoa=Leam .auaeaguoz >ua_o=:uu_ Loop u=_uu~= $22.33 3359 Eta-=2 .3: So Lao-uaaaua _a_ouuaee_ asses: Essa 2.ng “cyanogen: mute Cagauaw .~._Lu.=e=_. namesaaum.m .Losoa .auaasu~_m. oomceasum_m .uu_¢a_>¢. .u_=a.uuo_u Lea-uaaaoa uu_=oaauo_m yea _au_aaua_m >ao_o==um— o=_>.a.=m >9¢.o:gu¢~ o=_=o_uau=oo LL: we. a=_aaau .=a_~aamoa..u¢ one assume a=_aam=_ aw =SLLU=LLu=oo oo_o==uu» access. mean oe_=~_=m oooaocnua— steam: _._Loc ooa_oaguu~ .aaauuoa_suac Lao-Lounge comausaumaao uu_>aum L=a-a_=au a>au= aoo~o=guup canoe“ ass: >>~u= mua>cmm u>LLoaoL=¢ u=_uu.= u>_Lo-SL=¢ E“ .5832 Lem-LL. an a>_Looo.=c is: a. 8.8.— 3:83: >aa_o==uop a=_aaae_o=~ o=_u_ma =_>a>a=m “amusement oe_u=_aa >oc_o= um» o=_cua=.o=m manumu.a owe—uaguop ciao—=Lacm o:_aauu. ass: Lam-aoaeax > Loam >oa_u==uu~ a=LLuu=_.=u uu_=eauam~m\~au_oouo_u “cosmonaut geese-Lameou aonnoeguuh..=onamaem no: a. u>_La-e.=¢ .uL-a» .. account; coco-a .a.. >oo~ocru0h wo goozum :3: L 8 a .22» . gxuuunoaaun. auto-e mm.- >UIELIrm $0 ~oocum >oe~o= ooh u_LL.-o.ae seamen m_a u_-_.=u=ae .aauoa u. unanooaa can ya. coo-c .uau-aoaaeioaa Loews on». o. Sass s ass a... >Lu0EOuao we nouugou 8:252 .uamsgui the» a. 8.8: a... 328.! =o_uu=eaaa =a_ma>o_op «cu-nausea .a. .Lgucoeaan aoasaaauax antennae” _-u_=guah.oeaah ..u.=¢u. .n a...» 2'7 is..." so... 8.. o. a3 :3 .33 s: 8:33. 5.38“. . »u__-> ae--_-x 8. sets 08.: 3.. as as: as E... a: ass. 3% . . ~33 533.8 s. 5.83 as s 3.. as N as _. ass a: t... 3...... r... 2.3:: 5:5 98.... 3.. as sea as as: a: sans Est-8 I: E... as... as... s. is! 8...: s. as $6.: as is :2 :5 as... :5 .auom 2. 1.. as... s. s E is . ass a: sis: 55.5 21.3 sass so. a... is .33 3: 2:52.: sass-s as ea can a._aa¢ unu=_.=a ca 2. at... 8...: .8: s is es :2: as. :5 :58 Essa . . ass 2. Essa so a 8.. as . so... is s: Eris is s. 58.3.. is. 3.. as... as a: E: 52.13 s... 3...... 2:5 .33 Essa 2. sets 8...: s. s E; as _. as” 2: secs 3.. a E 2. at... as; as as: as 32:... :2 2:... is... an a..__ou as: a... 2: £85 3.3 s. s as as is as. 2...: 3.5:: as: .552... 553 .33 assets: as... as... as ass”. .35.: 8:3... .223 5.18 :5: Es: .5225 Less .2» .328 5.3 at: s 52.5 sass as. .2. 32:3 sets are... 3 assesses .a :5 28 . E... Essa sass a. a. a. a as .33 a... 35.8.. 2...... .3... sat... a. at... .8... a. 2. a... sa . as. a... E. sass Essa... . . _33 5:3... sass as a a. s a. . sa . as... 3... Es... as... at. . .3... a. 8...: a. a. a... sa . as. a: 8...... Essa 8...... a. 2. st... 2...... .as a a... as as... a... 58...... ass... 8...... s. is... as... a. a a. as .33 a... has E...sa 23...... a. 7... 8.... a. a 2.. as .33 a: as... Essa :58 8.8.. .33 3.538 8. 5s... .2... a. s a. sa . as... a... ass... 1.32.... 5...... .85. a. s... «a... as .33 s: as... .5... Essa is... s. at... a»... a. E a... sa .3... 5... Es: 3%“... a. is... .8... a. s a...» as .33 a... at... .3... are... .3 8. 5...... 8...... a. a 8.... rs . a... sis... Essa sat... . . .33 buss-8 a. sass 8. a a. s. 2.. . ta . as. a... .sa 5... as... sass... 5...... as. assets. as... as... .3. as... s2... 83:... .228 sssa .5... Es: sszea as... L... .6383 .n .32. 29 .T.us .2, .3 :8: 638 822.35 3335 moo—.8 £8» 3:. 3am: .833: ufl..& a: {.38 3.....“36 03:8 31:... 3.3.8. .nfiufin . g 3. .32. run. .23 3.2! . > .3332... .3333... 33.... 33.-8 8. 3.3.8 8...... «9. a .2 38 .33 3... 3:338 3.2.38 3.8 .3. .33-8 8...... 8.. 3. 3c... 38 33a 3... 33.8 3.338 32.8 33.. 8. .33-8 98.2 8: on. .83 38 .33 3... .33 .3 3.5.38 32.33.. . . =3. 3:5: 8. 3.33m 8.. 3. «a. a. 3n . 38 .. 33m 3... 3.33. 3333....» .33 8. .333... 8...... 8: n... .8... 38 a 33m .8. 33.... 3.3.83... 8. .33-8 98.3 8: no. .3.» 38 3.38 nu... 3.... 3.... 3.338 338 3.... .3 83.3.... .33—8 3.8 333.333 33.... 33.... 38 .238 33...: 3:33 33.8 .33-8 33.... 3.3... 23:33 .335 .3» 7.5-8. .n .23 30 The majority of the two-year colleges listed in Table 3 have the following similarities: 1. They are co-educational. 2. They are either controlled locally, or by state and local cooperation. . 3. They have been in existence for at least twenty- five years. 4. They operate on a semester calendar. 5. They are regionally accredited. 6. They serve primarily commuting students. There are, however, the following dissimilarities: 1. They have enrollment numbers ranging from a low of 410 to a high of 31,452 students. 2. They have recorded library book numbers ranging from a low of 9,000 to a high of 139,800 volumes. 3. They have recorded faculty numbers ranging from a low of twenty-two to a high of 700 members. Wis: W Early studies cited the increase in both the number of two-year institutions as well as in the enrollment of these colleges. Burnett1 noted the number of such colleges increased from 663 in 1959 to more than 1,100 in 1975. During the same period enrollment in two-year colleges increased from 660,527 to over 3,800,000. Maxweu2 estimated that by 1979, two-fifths of the students enrolled for the first time in higher education 31 would be enrolled in two-year colleges. Table 4 illustrates the growth pattern of two-year colleges both in number as well as in student enrollment. Early descriptions of two-year colleges noted their roles as being essentially those of (1) preparation for occupations or a terminal function, and (2) preparation for student transfer to four-year colleges. An Associate in Applied Science (AAS) degree was typically conferred upon completion of a career-oriented program, while an Associate in Science (AS) degree was awarded at the conclusion of a transfer-oriented study. Eell’53 1941 writings were largely devoted to the terminal function of two-year colleges. The 1947 President’s Commission4 urged that two-year colleges design programs emphasizing occupational training. Again, in 1963, the Educational Policies Commissions emphasized a similar function. Medsker,6 however, in 1960 noted the emphasis by two-year colleges on the transfer function. He found that two-thirds of entering two-year students planned to transfer to four-year institutions. Clark’s7 1960 study of San Jose City College found it was originally established primarily to offer vocational- technical training. It too, however, soon became transfer- oriented. This new orientation came about because two-year 32 Table 0. tenth of Ind-Year institutions in the United States, 1963-1903 Matter of institutions Enroilnent by Control 6y Control and 0ender Year total Public Private Iotai Public Private lien Ionen 1963 630 375 259 000,512 735,029 109,003 532,023 311,609 1960 650 006 200 900,926 070,779 110,107 610,600 370,270 1965 679 020 259 1,172,952 1,001,260 131,600 733,639 039,313 1966 752 077 275 1,325,970 1,109,169 136,001 009,020 576,950 1967 793 510 275 1,512,762 1,372,053 100,709 910,036 597,926 1960 065 590 271 1,792,296 1,606,070 105,022 1,090,351 701,905 1969 000 636 252 1,976,650 1,006,720 129,930 1,190,711 705,907 1970 092 650 230 2,223,200 2,101,972 121,236 1,317,250 905,950 1971 930 697 237 2,005,911 2,365,067 120,000 1,009,150 1,036,753 1972 1,100 066 230 2,756,106 2,600,939 115,207 1,503,695 1,212,091 1973 1,100 091 209 3,010,009 2,009,621 120,020 1,650,551 1,359,090 1970 1,139 097 202 3,003,990 3,205,002 110,512 1,031,002 1,527,192 1975 1,120 097 231 3,970,119 3,036,366 133,753 2,165,300 1,000,775 1976 1,131 900 227 3,003,321 3,751,706 131,535 1,900,100 1,903,177 1977 1,155 920 235 0,002,902 3,901,769 101,173 1,960,701 2,070,161 1970 1,190 922 260 0,020,100 3,073,690 150,051 1,005,101 2,102,960 1979 1,193 925 260 0,216,666 0,056,010 159,056 1,922,005 2,290,661 1900 1,269 901 320 0,526,207 0,320,702 197,505 2,007,033 2,079,250 1901 1,270 900 330 0,716,211 0,000,700 235,503 2,120,065 2,591,706 1902 1,296 933 363 0,772,000 0,520,000 252,000 2,170,000 2,602,000 1903 1,271 916 355 0,723,000 0,059,000 260,000 2,131,000 2,592,000 fiercest lationai Enter for Edecatiu Statistics, W Mai; and I 1 sti at s of h cati annual, as quoted in 11.5. 0eurtnent of Bon- nerce, Iareao oi the Census, a r - ti str W 106th ed. Washington, 0.0.: 11.0. Bovernaent Printing Office, 19051, p. 153. Iatimai Center for Education Statistics, Wu”, 1901, as noted in I. Vance 0rant and theses 0. 0nyder, WM (lastington, 0.0.: 11.0. lovernnent Printing Mice, [190311, a. 102. 33 colleges were faced with students who became "a large market of free buyers." These students shaped the colleges of their choice, and they chose the transfer function. Roueche’s8 1967 writings indicated that two-year colleges claimed to be multi-purpose and comprehensive, yet typical research focused on only one segment of the institution’s students, those who transfer to four-year institutions. W The transfer function, in particular, of two-year colleges became the subject of increased concern and contro- versy. Seventeen problems were among the concerns associated with transferring from a two-year to a four-year college. These were presented by various researchers as follows: l-Afimififiignfi The admissions criteria at some senior institutions discriminated against transfer students. Some colleges required different grade point averages for admission from different two-year institutions. Repetitive aptitude and/or achievement testing were also required. Extensive placement testing was demanded even after admission. Admissions offi- cers did not always have the expertise for credit evalu- ation. As a result some transfer students did not receive an evaluation of previously earned credits until after the initial academic planning session. (Sandeen and Goodale)9 34 KW Very few four-year colleges had specific staff members especially skilled in academic and/or student affairs to meet the needs of transfer students through developing policies and programs for them. (Sandeen and Goodale)10 0W Unfavorable attitudes toward transfer students at the four-year college were exhibited by faculty, adminis- tration, and native students. It was difficult to establish an effective climate for transfer at institutions where transfer students were viewed as "second class citizens." (Sandeen and Goodale)11 LWM Many transferees were not certain of which academic major to pursue. Career exploration opportunities for tranSferees may have been either lacking or nonexistent. Recruiters have not been aware of the diversity of back- grounds and attitudes of transfer students. (Sandeen and Goodale)12 5m Many senior colleges gave first priority in their on-campus housing to incoming freshman students. As a result, transfer students received the least attractive housing or none at all. Again, because they enrolled at times in the academic year other than in the fall, they may not have had an equal chance to live on campus and become an 35 active part of student life. For those who did live in campus housing, student assistants and resident hall advisory staff may not have been aware of the background and ' special needs of transferees, many of whom never lived in on-campus housing before. Although many transfer students did not desire to live on campus, those who did may have felt that they were given the lowest priority the institution had. For those desiring to live off-campus, sufficient information about these facilities may not have been provided. Thus, the perception of transfer students that they were not the "preferred" new students at the senior institution may have been reinforced. (Sandeen and Goodale)13 6W Many institutions once again gave freshman students first priority in structuring college orientation programs. While students transferring to a senior institution for the first time had many of the same needs in orientation as did freshmen, they may have felt insulted by being identified with beginning freshmen in the same orientation classes. Institutions failed to recognize such a realistic factor and to develop special orientation programs for their transfer students. Nontraditional academic experience, social expec- tations, age, family responsibilities, commuting, and work schedules prevented or made unwilling some transfer stu- dents’ participation in "regular" new student programs. Particularly important was the fact that these orientation 36 programs failed to address particular questions transferees had, such as course selection, evaluation of academic credit, housing, and financial aid opportunities. (Sandeen and Goodale)14 7.131112119342113 Most college catalogs, student handbooks, financial aid brochures, and descriptions of individual academic programs did not address the problems of transfer students. The publications did not reflect their problems even though there may have been a large number of transfer students on the campus. (Sandeen and Goodale)15 aw Institutions usually presented awards to certain graduates and other outstanding students for various aca- demic and extra activity achievements. Many senior insti- tutions did not recognize the merit of transfer student accomplishments at their previous institutions as part of their overall personal records. (Sandeen and Goodale)16 9W Transfer students traditionally enrolled at the senior institution at times of the academic year other than just in the fall. Some institutions considered these enrollments as "late" and imposed serious penalties. Many courses as well as entire programs were "closed." Transfer students needed this type of information prior to their arrival on the campus of the senior college. (Sandeen and Goodale)17 37 10. Research Institutions have not usually studied their own transfer students. Evidence indicated significant differ- ences in socio-economic background, academic performance, and professional aspirations between transfer students and native students. Senior institutions could have benefited significantly by paying close attention to this data. (Sandeen and Goodale)18 11. Wine: The out-of-class life of a campus may have been viewed very differently by transfer students. Again, they were treated as freshmen by the institution and given no special consideration in various student activities. Since they planned to attend the senior institution for only two years, they may have been reluctant to get involved in campus activities, fraternities and sororities, student publications, and student cultural productions. Moreover, they believed themselves to be placed in a disadvantageous position by native students who controlled access to student activities and had spent two years working their way up to leadership positions. Thus, some transfer students com- plained that they did not feel actively involved in the social, political, and recreational life of the institution. It was not surprising to learn that transfer students who had been student leaders at their previous institutions became almost totally inactive after transfer. The trans- ferees also tended to have much less identity with the 38 senior college than did their native student peer group. (Sandeen and Goodale)19 12. W Discriminatory practices were also found in student financial aid programs. Some assistance was not available on an equal basis to transfer students because of the priority given to incoming freshmen. Scholarships were sometimes available only to new freshmen students, even though transfer students comprised a large percentage of the student enrollment. Transfer students may have been ineligible for financial aid because their date of acceptance at the four-year college did not coincide with the traditional financial aid deadlines. Once again communications may have been poor in providing transfer students sufficient information about financial aid programs prior to their transfer. Confusion may also have existed regarding the possibility of con- tinuing loan and grant programs from one institution to another. (Sandeen and Goodale)20 13. Willis Academic advising was a crucial problem for the transfer student. The neglect of proper advising existed at the two-year institution as well as at the senior college. There were instances when transfer students heeded the advice of their advisor at the two-year college in selecting courses but were later required to take additional lower- level courses or repeat parallel course work if the contents 39 were considered inadequate or inappropriate by the senior institution. (Sandeen and Goodale,21 Downeyzz) 14. communication It was found that transfer student progress reports, issued by four-year colleges to two-year institutions, lacked quality information and proper timing. Rather than causing problems, this information should have been used to assist in counseling potential transfer students and describing existing conditions of two-year colleges’ trans- fer programs. (Slark and Bateman)23 15. Wm If transfer students’ previous academic work had not been assessed prior to their enrollment at the senior insti- tution, and if there had been inadequate communication regarding the students’ programs between the two insti- tutions, the transferee was likely to encounter serious academic problems, and loss of time in reaching a graduation goal. Some transfer students actually spent much of their junior year taking lower-level courses which they had not taken at the two-year college or had taken but were denied transfer credit. Transfer students fared better at certain types of four-year colleges than at others. Colleges that actively recruited transfer and other nontraditional students were more liberal in granting transfer credits. Small colleges, private colleges, and nonmembers of the American Association 40 of Collegiate Schools of Business were more liberal in granting credit. Also, colleges that were highly selective in admissions were slightly less liberal in granting trans- fer credit than were colleges with lower admissions stan- dards. Most transfer students did not complete their bache- lor degrees in the traditional eight semesters. Seventy- nine percent took longer. In fact, 4 percent took over thirty semesters from their initial registration to degree completion. Forty percent had periods of lapsed regis- tration. Students transferring to schools of business administration, however, spent about one-half a quarter less time than did native students in upper-division studies. 24 25 26 27) (Sandeen and Goodale, Downey. Altman, Fleishan 16. Woman: There was a lack of reliable valid predictors of success of transfer students. A grade of "C“ issued by some two-year colleges was found to be meaningless as a success indicator at four-year institutions. Test scores also did not provide efficient distinguishing predictors between success and failure. (Knoell and Medsker)28 17. MW Many transfer students became the victims of the lack of cooperation between and among various institutions. Only 34 percent of the colleges had some type of written articulation agreement between two- and four-year schools. 41 In the absence of specific written agreements among institutions, transfer students often were subjected to arbitrary decisions made by admissions officers, faculty, and other officials. (Krzystofik and Bridgman)29 These seventeen problems may be summarized into three major concerns: (1) lack of sufficient information being provided by the two types of colleges to each other and to students, (2) lack of understanding on the part of students, faculty, and administrators about the programs and requirements of the colleges, and (3) lack of strong efforts of cooperation by each college involved. n an e St nt Willingham classified transfer students into the following seven groupings: 1. The Articulated Vertical Transfer Students who transferred from a two-year college to a four-year college or uni- versity. This represented the largest group of transfers. 2. Students who transferred from one four- year college to another four-year col- lege. At one time, this form of trans- fer accounted for essentially all move- ment of undergraduate students among institutions. It still represented one- fourth of the total. 3. Students who transferred from innovative programs to other colleges and people who had been out of college for a long time. kw Students who transfered from a four-year college to a two-year college. 42 5W Students who transferred from a two-year college to another two-year college. 6. Students who transferred from a four- year college to a two-year college and then back to a four-year college. 7. Students who transferred from some type of vocational scgaol or program to a four-year college. WW It has been found that student characteristics of the freshman class at two-year colleges tended to be almost indistinguishable from the high school graduating class, and the two-year college transfer group to be very similar to the native student pOpulation found in four-year colleges. Researchers reported, however, several characteristics of the typical two-year college student to be somewhat differ- ent in comparison to many native students »at four-year institutions. Many two-year colleges attracted older, non- traditional students, while the universities attracted younger, more traditional students. Knoell and Medsker reported that two-year college students were the following: 1. High school underachievers and were taking advantage of one more chance to demonstrate an ability to do satisfactory college work 2. Late deciders about college and had high school deficiencies 3. Immature, emotionally and intellectually unready to enter a four-year college 4. Insufficiently motivated and uncertain 43 5. Capable students who lacked financial backing for college attendance away from home or who desired to attend a smaller, less formal college for the first two years31 The same researchers found most transfer students to be white, Protestant, of native-born parentage, and under twenty-one years of age when they entered the senior insti- tution. There were more men than women in the transfer group, with the women’s high school record being better than the men’s. A majority took a general or college preparatory program in high school and graduated in the upper half of their class. ra f S d t ati o W The transfer students tended to give somewhat nega- tive reasons for choosing a two-year college, but gave high ratings as to the quality of the education they received. They praised both their two-year college instructors and the scope of the curricular offerings. Two-year college coun- seling and advising received higher ratings than did similar services offered by four-year institutions, but the ratings were less favorable than those given to the various facets of instruction. On the whole, transfer students were very well satisfied with their experience in the two-year colleges and experienced few serious difficulties in the four-year institutions. 44 Allred and Wingfieldaz also found a very high rate of satisfaction among two-year college students. Only 7.5 percent were dissatisfied with their educational experience. Fifty-six percent of all respondents and 70.6 percent of the graduate respondents were in jobs related to their field of training. Eighty percent felt they met their objectives and 15.5 percent were enrolled in an educational program at the time of the study. Reasons given for not meeting their objectives were conflicting job hours, financial problems, change in educational goals, or obtaining a job. None appeared to be institutionally related. WNW Some studies have examined and found differences between transfer and occupational students. For example, Munday33 found that transfer students scored higher on academic aspirations than did occupational students. Stud- ies of female students often showed no academic differences at all. Undergraduate students often have had a difficult time selecting their major academic field of study. Many four-year colleges and universities reported that over 50 percent of their undergraduates changed their academic majors at least once during the four-year period. Knoell and Medsker34 found that 25 percent of students transferring to four-year colleges had not committed themselves to an academic major at the time they completed their work at the 45 previous institution. Another 25 percent had already changed majors before transferring, and almost one out of five changed majors after transferring to a four-year college. Cross35 reported that occupational aspirations of transfer students were significantly different from those of native students. While only 64 percent of students enrolled in two-year colleges aspired to managerial and professional occupations, 89 percent of students at four-year insti- tutions did so. 36 found that educational Astin, Panos and Crenger aspirations of tranfer students varied from those of native students. Generally speaking, students who transferred to four-year institutions from two-year colleges had lower educational aspirations than did native students. Thirty percent of the two-year college students aspired to edu- cation beyond the bachelor’s degree, while 55 percent of the four-year college students aspired to that level. The academic ability of students has been one of the most thoroughly researched areas of higher education. The academic success of transfer students at the senior insti- tution has also been the subject of several studies. Among the various measurements of academic achievement were grade point averages, changes of academic major, course with- drawals, and percentage of students on academic probation. 46 Researchers failed to find, however, any one accu- rate indicator for predicting success for all students, in all majors, and across all institutions and states. The success patterns of transfer students have also presented a complicated problem since the student’s academic per- formance at a senior college was an outcome of a subtle accommodation between their attributes and the senior insti- tution’s characteristics or of those of the department in which they concentrated their studies. The transfer stu- dent’s success was thus a function of (1) the student’s characteristics, (2) the range of open alternatives when choosing the upper-level institution, (3) the academic standards, (4) the total climate of the senior college, and (5) the interaction between student characteristics and the institution. Many transfer students from two-year colleges 37 gave to the "new" stu- exemplified the description Cross dents in higher education. This new clientele consisted of students who simply had not been part of higher education before, and presented a real challenge to many colleges. Since many of those students had not been high academic achievers, some colleges may have feared they would have to "lower their academic standards" to accommodate them. Those students, for the most part, were not in college to become academic scholars but to gain a better job and a better life. 47 Many of the "new" students may have had rather low opinions of themselves as academic learners, and if they perceived that the institution viewed them somehow as "second-class citizens" it was unlikely that they would realize much success. The “disadvantaged" label given to many of these students was an insult and a "predisposition" to failure for some of them. It was usual for institutions to require and receive test results relating to the student’s academic aptitude, and national norms have been available on these tests for many years. There have been a large number of studies in this area, with practically all indicating that mean scores for students attending four-year colleges exceeded those of students in two-year colleges, and that two-year college students scored higher as a group than did high school graduates who did not go on to college. In Cooley and Becker’s38 study involving fourteen measures of ability--ranging from reading comprehension, mathematics ability, and biology to vocabulary information, creativity, and abstract reasoning--the two-year college group fell between four-year college and noncollege groups. Knoell and Medskerag also examined the mean scores earned by native and transfer students on various academic and achievement tests at a number of institutions as pos- sible factors relating to the differences in upper-division grades earned by the two groups. The several statistical analyses led to the general conclusion that graduates who 48 began their degree work in the universities as freshmen had somewhat greater academic aptitude and ability than did those who began their work in a two-year college. Differences in transfer students’ ability or readi- ness for college work appeared to be useful as explanatory factors in the analysis of differences in grades earned at the upper-division level in the various institutions. Native students who were judged to have greater academic ability earned higher grades in the upper division although the lower-division grades of the two-year college students were often higher than those of the native students. Knoell and Medsker40 reported the higher academic ability of native graduates from four-year colleges made it appear unreasonable to expect transfer students to compete at the same level. It was also noted that transferees had to make personal as well as academic adjustments at the senior college. The value of “C" grades earned in a two-year college as an indication of a student’s ability to do satisfactory work at the upper division or in the major field has been viewed with skepticism. A "C" grade obviously could have had different meanings when given by different instructors to different students for different reasons. The same researchers believed this was probably as it should have been, but it would have been a mistake to evaluate “C" grades out of context. 49 Knoell and Medsker’s41 study also showed the two- year college student most likely to succeed in a four-year institution to be one who performed well both in high school and in the lower-level college. Two-year college grades were more highly related to performance after transfer than was high school performance. Academic performance of the transfer student was also viewed as being consistent with the evaluation of the instructional quality received in the two-year college. The best overall academic record was made by young students who enrolled in a two-year college immediately after high school, stayed in the lower-level college for two full years and transferred, without a break, to a four-year institution. On the other hand, the poorest performance record was' made by what were often regarded as "late bloomers," i.e., males with poor high school records who earned "C" grades in two-year institutions (which were high enough to transfer but were poor indicators of ability to do further college work). Another group which experienced difficulty after transfer were students who worked at full-time jobs while attending two-year institutions, often taking three or four years to complete the lower-division program. Goodarznia42 found that transfer students performed better than native students in their college freshman year. When transfer was made in the sophomore year, transfer shock si in cc be 1.1.: 1111 0f ienc inst 50 was evident as native students performed better than trans- fer students when comparing grade point averages of the first quarter of the sophomore to the freshman year. Native students also performed academically better than did the transfer students in the entire sophomore year. Knoell and Medsker’s43 analysis showed that the grades of most transfer students improved over the period they spent in the two-year college, declined in the first quarter after transfer, and then improved in successive quarters, at least for those who persisted to graduation. The same researchers believed that transfer students should have expected and accepted grade point differences immediately after transfer since transfer shock was so very commonplace for first-quarter transferees. However, they believed the decrease in grade point average experienced by two-year college students after transfer may. have placed them at a disadvantage in the senior institution. At many senior colleges native students also earned higher grade point averages in the upper division than did their classmates who were transfer students. The grades of the native student group were found to improve steadily as they progressed through their baccalaureate degree programs. The transfer graduates did not show the same steady pattern of improvement in grades because of the drop they exper- ienced when they began their studies at the four-year institution. 51 The same data show about 30 percent of the transfer students who graduated with a baccalaureate degree earned grade point averages below "C" for at least one semester in the upper division compared with only 20 percent of the native graduates. I The average semester grades for the total group increased from 2.27 for the first semester after transfer to 2.42 for the second, 2.54 for the third, and 2.68 for the fourth, for a gain of 0.04. The mean grade point average of the graduates was 2.57 for the first period after transfer and 2.84 for the last. The analysis also indicated that transfer students with very high ability, i.e., in the upper quintile, did not experience a serious handicap in competing with native stu- dents for grades which would qualify them for admission to graduate school. A few high ability transfer students suffered a considerable drop in grades after transfer, but most earned grades which were about as high as those of the native students with similar ability. 44 emphasized the fact that mea- Sandeen and Goodale sures of academic aptitude and achievement, in most cases, were based on traditional methods. In the growing diversity of higher education, there were many institutions, most notably the two-year colleges, that engaged in new and non- traditional methods of academic evaluation. Thus, he believed some transfer students who may have appeared to be less capable or to have lower mean scores on achievement 52 tests may have been shortchanged by the process, since they were matriculating in a nontraditional system. Moreover, many of the students who entered the lower-level insti- tutions were older than their four-year colleagues and were much more likely to be engaged only part time in their studies. Traditional academic measures did not fit those students very well. Bulkley,45 in his studies of students transferring to Michigan State University (MSU), found a similar pattern of academic performance. His study showed that students performed less well at MSU than prior to their transfer from a two-year college. Students who transferred from four-year colleges, however, earned higher grade point averages at MSU than did students who transferred from two-year col- leges. Transfer students did not graduate at a rate equal to native MSU students, but those from two-year colleges graduated at rates comparable to those who transferred from four-year colleges. Differences in percentages of degree completion were noted among different student types as well as college 46 found withdrawal from colleges by trans- types. Dragon ferees to be actually lower than among the native group. The reasons for withdrawal, dropping out, and stopping out were also not what they seemed to be. Cope and Hannah disputed the belief that attrition was high after transfer. They found the percentage of transfer students dropping out was not as large as was once 53 estimated, especially among the talented. Their study noted the following five additional characteristics of transfer student withdrawals: 1. Pre college admissions tests were of little value in detecting dropout potentials. 2. A large percentage of withdrawals either returned or transferred after a short time of withdrawing. 3. A large percentage re-entered to earn their intended degree. 4. Lifetime earnings of those not earning a degree were almost as high as those who graduated. 5. Dropping out seemed to have little nega- tive effect on their sense of self- worth, career choice or marriage suc- cess.47 48 found that only about 10 percent Trent and Ruyle of those who began their college careers in two-year col- leges had obtained their bachelor’s degrees four years later, compared with 27 percent for state college entrants, 36 percent for those entering the universities, and 49 percent for those entering private colleges and universities. Knoell and Medsker’s49 studies showed that 62 per- cent of the two-year college transfer students received their baccalaureate degrees within three years after trans- fer, and 9 percent were still enrolled at the beginning of the fourth year. It was estimated that at least 75 percent of the transfer students would receive their baccalaureate degrees eventually, including some who dropped out and 54 transferred to other institutions and others who planned to re-enter the same institution. While the eventual gradu- ation rate of transfer students would apparently be good, fewer than one-half of the students graduated on time, i.e., at the end of two-plus-two or one-plussthree year programs. The percentages of women found by Knoell and Medsker50 who graduated two and three years after transfer- ring from two-year institutions were somewhat higher than those obtained by the men. The percentage of women who graduated on time was fifty-five compared with only 42 percent of the men. However, attrition among the women by the end of the third year was a little higher than that among the men, with a net result that the eventual grad- uation record of the men was probably slightly better than that of the women. The most distinguishing difference. Knoell and Medsker51 found between men and women was in the percent- ages of voluntary and forced withdrawals. The women tended to withdraw voluntarily (largely for personal reasons) with good grades, while a large percentage of the men were dis- missed from the four-year colleges with poor grades. More than 40 percent of the men who dropped out were dismissed, compared with only 25 percent of the women. The superior high school and two-year college performances of the women were seen to be, in part at least, responsible for their lower rate of academic dismissal after transfer. Wit tut attx Perc leve; decre those 2.70 for t "011;: , 55 Gender differences in outcomes at various points in the study appeared to be related to differences in choice of major, as well as to academic and personal factors. Women in teacher education programs, for example, had a high prob- ability of graduating on time from most colleges. Men who enrolled in engineering programs, however, had a rather low probability of graduating two years after transfer. 52 both In the same study by Knoell and Medsker, grade-point achievement and amount of credit earned in two- year colleges were important factors in the success of the students after transfer. About two-thirds of the transfer students earned two-year college averages below 2.60, and approximately one-third below 2.40. About 6 percent of the transfer students had cumulative averages below 2.00 for their first two years of college. Nearly one-half of the students with averages below 2.00 dropped out a short time later, most of them with poor or failing grades. Students with averages between 2.00 and 2.30 from two-year insti- tutions were somewhat more successful, with a total attrition rate of slightly more than one-third, including 27 percent who withdrew with poor or failing grades. As lower- level college averages increased over 2.30, attrition decreased accordingly. Attrition was only 28 percent for those with lower-level college averages between 2.40 and 2.70, 21 percent for those between 2.80 and 3.10, 18 percent for those between 3.20 and 3.50, and 12 percent for the group above 3.50. Percentages of students who graduated on in Sal aie were "as Stud, 56 time also rose, with increases in two-year college averages. Only 31 percent of those with averages between 2.00 and 2.30 graduated two years after transfer, compared with nearly 60 percent of those with averages of 3.20 and higher. While only one-third of the idropouts studied by Knoell and Medsker53 were dismissed for poor scholarship, another third were earning grade point averages below "C" when they withdrew. Some students in this latter group of dropouts would probably have been subject to dismissal if they had persisted longer. In some instances students with grade point averages less than "C" would find it almost impossible, both mathematically and academically, to achieve a "C" overall average during the remainder of their degree programs. Thus, about 20 percent of the total transfer group dropped out after failing to perform at the minimally acceptable level required by the degree-granting insti- tutions. The group which was dismissed earned an average of only 1.33 for the first quarter after transfer and about 1.45 for each succeeding quarter, as the number of students in this category diminished with each wave of new dismis- sals. The record of the group which withdrew voluntarily was slightly better, with a cumulative upper-division aver- age of 1.99. The assertion that students who dropped out were just as capable as those who persisted and graduated was found in this study to be false, although many capable students did withdraw for various reasons. 57 The record of students who transferred with junior 54 research was much better standing in Knoell and Medsker’s than that of students who transferred with lower class standing, in terms of both persistence and on-time com- pletion of the program. Students transferring below the junior level experienced an attrition rate of 45 percent, compared with only 26 percent in the group of junior level transfers. Furthermore, only 35 percent of the sophomores graduated within three years after transfer. Since only 20 percent of the group was still enrolled and expected to graduate during the fourth year after transfer, the total percentage of graduates was probably no more than fifty- five, compared with at least 75 percent of the students who completed two years at the two-year college. Thus, the percentage of students who earned degrees after one-plus- three years was considerably less than the percentage who earned degrees after two-plus-two years of college. The data presented showed very clearly the superiority of the performance of the group which transferred as juniors, whether as a result of better preparation in the two-year college, more adequate screening before transfer, or enroll- ment in courses in their major field after transfer at the junior level. Table 5 summarizes the results of the study of transfer students’ grade point averages at various types of four-year institutions two years after transfer. 58 Table 5. Grade Point Averages of Students Two Years After Transfer from Various Types of Institutions* Type of All Semester Status at Eour-Xear Institution++ Col- After End of leges Transfer+ Study 1 2 '3 4 5 Total First Graduated 2. 56 2. 57 2. 58 2.53 2.70 2.57 Still enrolled 2. 24 2. 23 2 28 2.39 2.36 2.27 Withdrawn 1. 97 2 26 2.11 2.20 1.57 2.05 Dismissed 1,27 1. 48 1. 38 1.36 1,31 1,33 Total 2.20 2.36 2.30 2.31 2.20 2.27 Second Graduated 2. 69 2. 67 2. 67 2.65 2.90 2.68 Still enrolled 2. 41 2. 28 2. 36 2.37 2.47 2.37 Withdrawn 2.16 2. 22 2 20 2.37 2.08 2.20 Dismissed 1,45 1. 43 1. 49 1.57 1.87 1.47 Total 2.41 2.45 2.42 2.42 2.54 2.42 Third Graduated 2.75 2. 78 2. 72 2.73 2.89 2.75 Still enrolled 2.42 2. 33 2 37 2.36 2.47 2.39 Withdrawn 1.96 2. 30 2. 04 2.15 1.63 2.04 Dismissed 1.42 1,49 1. 50 1,39 1,34 1,45 Total 2.55 2.59 2.52 2.49 2.53 2.54 Fourth Graduated 2 85 2.86 2.82 2.80 2.74 2.84 Still enrolled 2. 54 2.48 2.47 2.41 2.21 2.49 Dismissed 1,66 1.35 1.21 1.58 1.33 1,43 Total 2.71 2.70 2.66 2.59 2.42 2.68 Cumula- Graduated 2.71 2.73 2.70 2. 68 2.81 2.71 tive Still Enrolled 2.37 2.31 2.37 2 38 2.41 2.36 Grade Withdrawn 1.87 2.20 2.06 2. 22 1.49 1.99 Point Dismissed 1423 1433 1432 1.41 1,49 1132 Average Total 2.28 2.43 2.36 2.36 2.24 2.34 Source: Dorothy M. Knoell and Lelandu L. Medsker, 0 e Co W (Washington: cation, 1965), p.28. t on 1 American Council on Edu- * Average for first two years after transfer (or until with- drawal, if occurred before end of second year). + Third quarter was equated to second semester, fourth quar- ter to third semester, and sixth quarter to fourth semester ++Type 1 Major state univ. Type 4 Type 2 Teachers colleges Type 5 Other state inst. Private univ. Technical univ. Am; tum‘ V9 311‘ in PEr 8du 59 Knoell and Medsker’s55 study also revealed that economic factors played a very major role in the attrition of two-year college transfer students. Many transferred without a satisfactory plan for meeting their expenses at the four-year institutions, while others had personal fac- tors such as family illness or other unanticipated expenses which drained their income or savings. Economic and moti- vational factors were interwoven for still another group of dropouts: those who found opportunity for general employ- ment, or employment related to their degree programs. Knoell and Medsker’s56 research further showed that a large proportion of students who withdrew voluntarily did so for financial reasons, while those who were dismissed tended to do so as a result of motivational problems. Some of these motivational problems were probably present when the students graduated from high school, including a lack of clearly defined interests, values, career plans and, perhaps most important of all, a realistic self-image. We 39 Eggr-Xgar Sghgols 91 Business Various areas of business were popular majors to which two-year college students transferred. A Hawaii Uni- versity57 study of graduates with two-year college back- grounds indicated that 14 percent were business adminis- tration majors, 40 percent arts and sciences majors, 14 percent tropical agriculture and human resources, 14 percent education, and 18 percent in other curricula. 60 Several researchers have investigated the success of such students transferring from two-year institutions to four-year colleges of business. In accordance with research on transfer students as a general group, it has been reported that business students also experienced transfer shock. Sutherland58 attempted to determine the academic quality of transfer students entering a college of business administration. Transfer shock was here evidenced by sig- nificant differences between the means of the entering transfer students’ grade point average and the means of the grade point average earned at the end of the first semester in the college of business administration. But again, in accordance with research on transfer students as a group, business transfer students’ grade point averages increased after the transfer shock was over. 59 in a 1981 project, studied the Slark and Bateman, academic performance of students transferring to univer- sities with majors, for the most part, in business adminis- tration, accounting, finance, management, and marketing. They found the mean grade point average earned at the two- year college to be 2.85 but at the state university 2.72. 60 the same researchers In a later study completed in 1983 found the mean grade point average at the lower-level college to be 2.89 in 1980-81 and 2.81 in 1981-82. Stu- dents who transferred, however, had a mean grade point 61 average at the senior institution of 2.67 in 1980-81 and 2.69 in 1981-82. Fleishans61 also studied the success of two-year college transfer students in a four-year school of business. He found the grade point averages for native and transfer students were almost equal at the beginning of the junior year. Native students, however, outperformed the transfer students for their final six quarters of academic study, concluding with higher grade point averages at the end of their degree programs. He also noted that native students outperformed transfer students in eight business adminis- tration core courses. An unusual finding was that nonbusi- ness transfer students earned higher grades in those eight business administration core courses than did transfer stu- dents who were business majors. The time transfer students required to complete their baccalaureate degrees in business was different from that required by transfer students as a group. The same study showed that students transferring to business majors actually spent about one-half quarter less time than did the native students in the upper division. Transfer students were, however, on academic probation twice as many quarters as were the native students. Sargent62 was another researcher who studied the academic achievement of students who transferred to Michigan State University. He found the academic achievement of students transferring from Michigan community colleges to be better for those entering certain curricula. Among the 62 curricula in which transfer students excelled were business, natural science, and education. Desmond,63 in examining the effectiveness of lower- division preparation for majors in business administration and engineering, found good transfer preparation provided by two-year colleges. 64 also investigated the success of lower- Dragon level college transfer students at four-year colleges of business. His study used the final overall grade point average, final grade earned in the capstone course require- ment and grades earned in specialized fields of accounting, finance, marketing, management, and organization behavior. In addition, comparisons were made between native resident- native commuters and transfer resident-transfer commuters. The findings indicated no significant differences in accom- plishment of native and transfer students in the areas of accounting, finance, management, organizational behavior, and final grades earned in the capstone course. Transfer students, however, performed with a significantly higher degree of academic success than did the native student, as measured by final cumulative grade point average and grade point average in the area of marketing. Suspension rates for transfer students were the same as for native students, but voluntary withdrawal rates of transfer students were less than for those of the native group. 63 Groft65 did research on the success of transfer and native students in accounting studies. He found no sig- nificant differences between native and transfer students’ final grades in Intermediate Accounting I classes. Like- wise, there appeared to be no significant difference between native and transfer students’ achievement based on the students’ age, gender, or the size and type of four-year institution. Differences did occur, however, in elementary accounting achievement, persistence in completing interme- diate accounting, and in "A" and “B" grades earned. Elemen- tary accounting achievement of native students in the junior class was significantly higher than that of the two-year college transfer students. Native students were more per- sistent than transfer students in completing Intermediate Accounting I. Native students also earned a larger percent- age of "A’s" and "B’s" than did transfer students in inter- mediate accounting. Pion66 assessed any problems encountered by manage- ment and marketing transfer students who had completed the introductory course in their major at a public two-year college. He found that the introductory course in their major did not handicap their future academic success at the four-year institution. The grade point averages of transfer students were not significantly different from those of native students. Transfer students’ grade point averages in their majors were virtually identical to those of native 64 students, while native students outperformed transfer stu- dents in overall grade point average. WWW Colleges made efforts toward more effective articu- lation in attempts to overcome many of the problems asso- ciated with transferring from two-year to four-year col- leges. Evidence indicated that many articulation problems between two- and four-year institutions in business edu- 67 found over 90 percent of the cation were resolved. Altman courses presented for transfer were accepted. Problem courses for transfer were mathematics and accounting. According to senior college officials, these courses did not parallel senior college courses. He found that, while most colleges had a policy for giving credit for various forms of non-traditional learning, few actually did it. While some four-year colleges admitted transfer students indiscriminately on the basis that they must be given an opportunity to attempt programs of their own choosing, articulation problems were still prevalent. Mohr and Sears68 saw the articulation process traditionally inhibited and characterized by policies based on excessive bureaucratization, antiquated premises, and general lack of interest. Much of the inhibition centered around faculty and administrator reluctance. They found faculties who attempted to protect themselves by raising questions on the following thirteen issues: 65 Equality of credits Institutional image Exactness of course content Grading practices Gender Race Institutional methodologies Course prerequisites CDQQOJU'lobCDNH Residency requirements 9" 0 Faculty preparation 0-0 H Grade point averages 9" [0 Academic calendars 13. Validity of nontraditional credits 69 further believed that administra- Mohr and Sears tors’ lack of solid support of articulation and transfer of credits were evident by their following actions: 1. Failure to fund offices for articulation 2. Neglect to staff special counseling positions 3. Resistance to developing and publishing transfer information understandable to students 4. Failure to encourage personal interaction between professionals from the sending institutions 5. Placement of little emphasis on establishing clearly defined standards for recognizing nontraditional studies 6. Failure to support or establish articulation conferences 66 Whitmore recognized the problem by saying: "It was necessary to forget about protecting our territory. We had to act in close harmony with others...to get the job done."70 One of the major developments aiding the articu- lation process was the development of two-plus-two programs. This equation stated that two years of study at a two-year college plus two additional years of study at a four-year college equaled a bachelor’s degree. Allan71 was a strong promoter of the two-plus-two concept. She advocated the recognition of associate degrees by all senior institutions of higher education and suggested that policies should be developed to reflect a commitment to provide two-year col- lege graduates who have earned an associate degree the opportunity to pursue a baccalaureate degree program. A rapid increase was predicted in the acceptance of the associate degree for admission by four-year colleges and universities throughout the country to a point where it eventually would be commonplace. Maxwell listed the following recommendations rela- ting to four-year colleges’ acceptance of business courses taught by two-year institutions: 1. Community college business courses iden- tical or parallel to a lower-division university course required for a bacca- laureate degree in business should be accepted by the university in lieu of a university course for as many units as the university grants for that course. 67 Community college business courses iden- tified by the community college as transferable but not identical or paral- lel to a lower-division university course required for a baccalaureate degree in business should be accepted by the university for a lower-division elective credit in business. Where a community college identified a business course as nontransferable, the university should consider it for trans- fer as a lower-division elective course in business and reject it only if it contained portions of sub-collegiate content or material. The university should ordinarily be willing to determine if a community college business course parallels one of its own business courses by examination of the community college catalog, or by studying copies of examinations and holding discussions with community col- lege instructor(s). The university should have authority to prescribe requirements for baccalaureate degrees in business including lower- division requirements. This includes specifying required business courses, numbers of business credits required, and numbers of elective business and nonbusiness credits permitted for trans- fer and native students alike. Students transferring from community colleges to universities should be per- mitted to: a. Transfer community college business courses in which they received a "D" grade in the same manner with which the university handles "D’s“ earned by its native students b. Take advanced placement examinations or otherwise challenge for credit any business course in the same manner as the university permits its natives 68 c. Return to the community college to take lower-division business courses for fulfillment of a major course even though they had, at the time of transfer, already completed the total number of transfer credits which the university permits to count toward a baccalaureate degree 7. Both transfer and native students should have identical grade point average requirements for entry into the univer- sity business program and for granting the baccalaureate degree in business. 8. Have the same rights and be considered in the same spirit as the native stu- dent once he/she is accepted by the university.72 73 thought the two-plus-two concept in edu- Forman cation sounded simple enough but rarely was it as unencum- bered as the equation appeared. Problems again centered around the "plus" and the articulation or lack of it between the two-year and four-year institutions. He believed that mistrust of others’ motives, empire building, head counting, financial pressures, and "it wasn’t invented here therefore it cannot be good" syndrome to have been among the more prevalent reasons for a faulty two-plus-two equaled a bach- elor’s degree equation. In order for this type of articulation to develop, it was necessary for two- and four-year institutions to become completely aware of each other’s programs, plans, and problems. To assure this open communication, periodic meetings should have been held and visits should have been made to each other’s colleges, as well as continued informal contacts. 69 Again, the necessity of sound articulation pro- cedures developing through voluntary agreements became evident. Mohr and Sears74 saw that carefully written articulation agreements between colleges should have resulted in an educational partnership with the following advantages: (1) expand student mobility between two- and four-year colleges, (2) aid in student recruitment and admissions, (3) reduce attrition, (4) encourage faculty and staff exchanges, and (5) discourage unnecessary program duplication. Gething75 described three possible articulation models. One approach would have placed all decision making power with the senior institution, giving it complete dis- cretion as to whether to accept credits from two-year institutions, how many credits to accept, and what senior college requirements would be satisfied by credits earned at the two-year college. The second model used quite the opposite approach. Here the two-year college would have certified certain of its courses as being of transfer quality, and that these courses fulfilled specific general education requirements at the four-year college. If the general education require- ments were certified, the senior institution could not have required additional general education course work. The third model involved a compromise agreement by which both two- and four-year institutions made a joint 70 evaluation of lower-level courses and/or programs. A vari- ation of this approach provided for the senior college to make the initial evaluation decision, which could have been appealed to a joint committee for a final decision. Early articulation agreements between two-year institutions and four-year colleges were developed. The California Executive Order #167 has been in effect since 1974. It states that: Courses (from) a regionally accred- ited college or university . . . desig- nated . . . for baccalaureate credit by the institution shall be accepted by any campus of the California State University and Col- leges for credit toward its baccalaureate degrees. Appropriate campus authorities shall determine degree program. Credit not otherwise applied shall be accepted as elec- tive credit . . . courses presented by transfer applicants which were completed at unaccepted institutions or (non transfer) courses . . . shall be evaluated and their acceptability and applicability shall be determined by appropriate campus author- ities.76 Mohr and Sears77 described a successful model for articulation and the development of two-plus-two program agreements between Norfolk State University and Tidewater Community College. This 1978 Tidewater Duplication Study charged the two institutions to develop two-plus-two trans- fer programs in Office Administration/Secretarial Science, Accounting, and Business Education. Outcomes of the first meeting, in 1979, led to eight articulation agreements on curricula and an atmosphere characterized by friendly and respectful deliberations. 71 These agreements included the evaluation of non- traditional credits, desires to comply with state and insti- tutional policies, and an agreement on admission and financial aid procedures. They incorporated the idea that two-plus-two efforts should not lead to the lowering of academic standards or modifying curriculum goals for either institution, but that new and different ways for treating credits, degrees, students, records, and an assortment of other concerns needed to be considered as the way of thinking. It was decided that the chief concern would be that students receive college-level preparation in their particular field of study and be able to compete success- fully if transfer occurred between the two types of insti- tutions. Allan78 described a series of articulation workshops held in the State of Washington under the auspices of the Washington Council of Local Administrators. These meetings identified curriculum articulation as a high priority need. This need indicated that systematic and comparable infor- mation regarding courses and programs should have been available to students in programs requiring transfer. A need was also identified to develop methods whereby insti- tutions and administrators, representing the several insti- tutions within a region, could develop unified approaches to problems of articulation. Canup79 recommended formal letters between the educational systems involved. These letters of agreement 72 should have been based upon formal meetings between faculty members of complementary curricula. 80 found that the American Krzystofik and Bridgman Association of Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) also influenced transfer policies. The AACSB established stan- dards with suggested curriculum guidelines for the first two years (lower level) as well as for the last two years (upper level) of college. A broad educational background was recom- mended in the first two years of college. Examples of business courses suggested to be offered at the lower level were principles of accounting, principles of economics, business law, statistics, and introduction to business. Courses recommended to be offered at the upper level included principles of finance, principles of management, principles of marketing, and accounting courses above the principles course. It was noted that a number of accounting and mar- keting courses suggested as upper-level subjects were offered at two-year schools. While these courses were offered for terminal programs at the two-year schools, and acceptable at many four-year schools, the differences repre- sented areas of friction between the two-year institutions and four-year AACSB schools. In the critical areas of transferability of credit and curriculum, the statement on standards relating to junior and community colleges concluded as follows: 1. A professional curriculum in business administration must be based upon a 73 solid foundation in the liberal arts and sciences disciplines, with professional courses concentrated largely at the upper level. 2. Validation procedures are necessary and in the best interest of all students. 3. Both four-year and two-year institutions are encouraged to enter regional articu- lation agreements, and to engage in other cooperative activities which will facilitate the transferring students’ progress toward the attainment of a baccalaureate degree. 4. All possible means should be sought to achieve and maintain full and open com- munication between two-year and four- year institutions on this and all other matters of mutual concern. Students in both vocational-technical track and baccalaureate track programs in junior and community colleges should be pro- vided with careful, individualized academic and career advisement so as to help assure that their particular educational objectives may be best achieved.81 The standards required extraordinary validation procedures in cases where transfer of credit was being sought for a lower-division course to meet an upper-division requirement. In those instances, the standards suggested the use of College Level Examination Program (CLEP) tests, written examinations prepared by the institution, or suc- cessful completion of advanced courses in the subject field for which the course was a foundation. Among post-secondary educational institutions the latter procedure was the most commonly accepted evidence of the quality of the course being transferred. 74 In granting credit to transfer students, the bacca- laureate degree-granting institution maintained policies to assure that the overall educational experience of the trans- ferring student was comparable to that of the student taking all of his or her work at an accredited school. 82 study also reported that Krzystofik and Bridgman’s four-year accredited colleges followed AACSB standards closely so that business core courses and accounting courses above the principles level were either not transferable or were transferable by examination only. However, a number of four-year AACSB members (although not accredited by AACSB) accepted business core or accounting courses above the principles level. Furthermore, a large number of the nonaccredited schools were willing to grant transfer credit for the upper-level courses by examination or validation. Two-year schools indicated a number of business core and accounting courses as transferable. Advanced accounting and auditing were two courses that the respondents reported as nontransferable. The same research found 80 percent of the schools included in the study indicated that it was unnecessary to earn an associate degree for eligibility to transfer. The specific transferability of selected business core and accounting courses showed no definite pattern. Table 6 identifies the courses found to be transferable, nontrans- ferable, or transferable by examination. 75 Table 6. Percentages of Colleges Who Evaluated Business Core and Accounting Courses as Being Transferable, Nontransferable, or Transferable by Examination Percent of Four-Year 09112395 Percent of Two-Year AACSB Non AACSB lelsses .Ascrsdited .Assrsdited COURSE T NT TE NR T NT TE NR T NT TE NR Assguntins Actg. Principles 94%.. .. 6% 90%.. 10%.. 95%.. 5% Intermediate Actg. 21 51 21 31 5 33 57 5 35 30 35 Management Actg. 11 36 17 36 29 19 42 10 65 10 25 Cost Actg. 11 32 21 36 .. 52 38 10 35 25 40 Advanced Actg. .. 26 11 63 . 61 29 10 15 55 30 Auditing .. 43 5 52 61 29 10 15 55 30 Taxation 22 43 5 32 . 61 34 5 20 45 35 Business_991s Business Law 52 11 11 26 33 23 29 15 85 .. 15 .. Principles of Mgt. 36 21 11 32 .. 57 28 15 45 35 20 .. Principles of Mktg. 26 26 12 36 . 57 28 15 45 35 20 .. Finance 17 21 11 51 52 33 15 35 40 25 .. Source: Anthony T. Krzystofik and Spencer C. Bridgman, "A Need for Closer Integration of Two- and Four- Year Business Programs.“ Qallssiata_flaus_&_lisus 34 (Spring 1981): T = Transferable NT = Nontransferable TE = NR = No response Transferable by examination 76 An attempt was also made to determine the extent of the general and liberal education requirements for the asso- ciate degree to transfer as a unit. Krzystofik and Bridgman83 found that two-year schools believed the general and liberal education required for the associate degree fulfilled the broad base suggested by the AACSB standards. Four-year schools indicated a strong negative response. The number of general education credits required at the two-year level indicated that the minimum hours varied considerably but clustered around the thirty-hour level. A formalized articulation contract found strong support in the State of Michigan. In 1972 the Michigan Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (MACRAO) agreement was signed. All but seven of the thirty- six, two-year, and seventeen of the forty-six, four-year, Michigan colleges listed in Ihe_§gllege_flandhggk84 were eventual signatory institutions. The following were sig- natory institutions: Two-Year Colleges--1. Alpena Community College Bay de Noc Community College Delta College Glen Oaks Community College Gogebic Community College Grand Rapids Junior College Highland Park Community College Jackson Community College (O‘DQOOMOFODN Jordan College 10. ll. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. Four-Year Colleges-1. 2 3 4. 5 6 7 77 Kellogg Community College Kirtland Community College Lake Michigan College Lansing Community College Michigan Christian College Mid-Michigan Community College Monroe County Community College Montcalm Community College C. S. Mott Community College Muskegon Community College North Central Michigan College Northwestern Michigan College Oakland Community College St. Clair County Community College Schoolcraft College Southwestern MichiganCollege Suomi College Washtenaw Community College Wayne County Community College West Shore Community College Adrian College Albion College Alma College Aquinas College Calvin College Central Michigan University Cleary College 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 78 Detroit College of Business Eastern Michigan University Ferris State College General Motors Institute Grand Valley State College Hope College Kalamazoo College Lake Superior State College Lawrence Institute of Technology Madonna College Michigan State University Michigan Technological University Nazareth College Northern Michigan University Northwood Institute Oakland University Olivet College Saginaw Valley State College Shaw College Siena Heights College Spring Arbor College Western Michigan University85 The following were nonsignatory institutions: Two-Year Colleges--1. 2. 3. 4. Baker Junior College of Business Davenport College of Business Henry Ford Community College Kalamazoo Valley Community College 79 5. Lewis College of Business 6. Macomb Community College 7. Muskegon Business College Four-Year Colleges-1. Andrews University 2. Center for Creative Studies: College of Art & Design 3. Concordia College 4. Grace Bible College 5. Grand Rapids Baptist College & Seminary 6. Great Lakes Bible College 7. Hillsdale College 8. Kendall School of Design 9. Marygrove College 10. Mercy College of Detroit 11. Reformed Bible College 12. Sacred Heart Seminary College 13. Saint Mary’s College 14. University of Detroit 15. University of Michigan 16. Wayne State University 17. William Tyndale College Essentially the agreement ensured that a student who completed an Associate of Arts (A.A.) or Associate of Science (A.S.) degree at a signatory public community col- lege would have satisfied the general education or core two- year requirements of the signatory four-year colleges. Thus, from a required to pursue further general education requirements at 80 signatory Michigan community college would not be any signatory four-year college or university. The Michigan Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (MACRAO) agreement included the following ten specific provisions: 1. Basic two-year requirements which were to be included in the Associate of Arts and Associate of Science degree were as follows: a. English Composition (six semester hours or nine quarter hours). b. Natural Science (eight semester hours or twelve quarter hours). At least one of the natural sciences was to be a laboratory course. Mathematics could be included in the natural science category. Courses were to be taken in more than one academic discipline. c. Social Science (eight semester hours or twelve quarter hours). Courses were to be taken in more than one academic discipline. d. Humanities (eight semester hours or twelve quarter hours). Courses were to be taken in more than one aca- demic discipline. The inclusion of specific courses within a given category were to have been determined by the community colleges. Courses which were not transferable such as those of a technical, vocational, or developmental nature were not to be included in the basic requirements at the community colleges. The four-year colleges were not to have required additional basic two-year a student who received an A.A. or A.S. degree 81 requirements regardless of their indi- vidual course evaluations if the trans- fer student had received the A.A. or A.S. degree. 5. A student who had completed the basic two-year requirements but not the A.A. or A.S. degree requirements of the com- munity college would not be required to pursue basic two-year requirement courses at the four-year college. 6. Each four-year college would determine the equivalence and applicability of basic two-year courses in meeting other graduation requirements. 7. Transfer students who did not complete the basic two-year requirements of the community college would meet the requirements of the four-year college as determined by an individual evaluation of his/her previous work. 8. Foreign language requirements for the individual baccalaureate degree programs would be the prerogative of the four- year colleges. 9. Any limitations, provisos, or exceptions listed on the signed agreement would be honored. ' 10. A community college student must have been admissible to a participating four- year college in order to benefit from the MACRAO agreement.86 Ferris State College is a charter member of the MACRAO agreement, and it has provided each transfer student an opportunity to work toward a baccalaureate degree with no or little loss of credit, regardless of the prior area of concentration. To accomplish this purpose, provision is made in the Ferris Sgh991_3311§31n for full acceptance of the following associate degrees: 1. Any associate degree from a regionally accredited two-year institution toward 82 specified baccalaureate degrees in the School of Business 2. Most associate degrees in vocational, technical, and health-related areas toward a degree in teacher education 3. An associate degree in~ any one of several other areas toward a baccalau- reate degree in the same or in a related area87 Special two-year transfer options (two-plus-two programs) were developed in the School of Business to allow transfer credit for two-year associate degree programs com- pleted at other colleges or within other divisions of Ferris State College. The Sch991_Bg11§tin88 shows these options available to those students desiring to major in accounting, computer information systems, management (business administration, business economics, finance, international business, quanti- tative business, management, personnel management/industrial relations, production management, small business management, insurance) advertising, marketing, marketing-retail option, marketing-sales option, and office administration. (See Appendix B, “Transfer Curricula") The course requirements for the third and fourth years are determined individually for each student in con- ference with his/her advisor and consultation with the department head. The figh991_3311§11n89 also provides that students having completed such associate degree programs are normally able to complete the requirements for the Bachelor of 83 Science degree in Business in another two academic years of study, with the exception of majors leading to a Bachelor of Science degree in Accounting or Public Relations. A maximum of one hundred quarter hours of credit for academic work completed at two-year colleges is allowed to apply toward a baccalaureate degree at Ferris. If the associate degree fails, however, to include School of Business baccalaureate requirements in English, mathematics, economics, psychology, sociology, and speech, the transfer student is required to complete additional course work. Program requirements are met with consideration being given to academic work trans- ferred with the following sequence being observed as guide- lines: (1) program major and related requirements, (2) bus- iness core requirements, (3) general studies requirements, and (4) electives. The Sghggl_Bulletingo further notes that, for stu- dents who have not yet completed an associate degree, credits earned at a regionally accredited college are eval- uated on a course-by-course basis. Grades transferred from another college or colleges are not included in the compu- tation of the Ferris cumulative grade point average. Credits applicable toward the curriculum for which the student is applying, which were earned at such an accredited institution, are fully accepted at the time of admission. Students with a cumulative grade point average of 2.00 or higher from regionally accredited institutions receive credit for all subjects passed, although grades 84 of less than "C" earned in business courses are not accepted for transfer credit. Transfer students whose cumulative averages are less than 2.00 from regionally accredited institutions receive credit for only those passing grades of less than "C" that can be averaged with grades of higher than "C" to equal a 2.00 average. A maximum of one-half of the total quarter hours required for completion of a baccalaureate degree are accepted from a regionally accredited two-year college. Credits applicable to the curriculum for which the student is applying, which were earned at institutions not regionally accredited, are conditionally accepted at the time of admission. Final acceptance of such credit is granted when the student earns a minimum of forty-five quarter hours of credit at Ferris with a grade point average of at least 2.00. Students who transfer from nonaccredited colleges must complete a minimum of one hundred quarter hours of credit at Ferris or at another regionally accredited four- year college (or colleges) with a grade point average of at least a 2.00 in order to be considered for the awarding of a bachelor’s degree by Ferris State College. The final forty- five quarter hours preceding graduation must be earned from courses offered by Ferris with the following exceptions: 1. Six percent of the total applicable credits necessary for graduation may be earned at another college(s) following a student’s last attendance at Ferris provided all other requirements have been completed. a. re as Dr: 85 2. The final work to be completed elsewhere must be completed at an accredited institution and shall be approved in advance by the Dean of the School granting the degree or certificate. 3. Variations of the requirements stated in this section, consonant with the spirit of the policy, may be recommended by the Dean of the School granting the degree or certificate.91 While it appeared that articulation between two-year colleges and the School of Business at Ferris State College presented no problem, certainly further research is recom- mended to contrast the attrition and progress ratios of transfer and native students. 3mm This chapter noted the unique background of Ferris State College and its early establishing of two-plus-two programs. Several of the related studies were cited that researched the two-year colleges as well as studies dealing specifically with transfer students. Knoell and Medsker’s study showed many two-year col- lege students to have been underachievers, late deciders about college, immature, unmotivated, and financially dis- tressed. Studies by Cross, and Astin, Panos and Crenger reported differences in both occupational and educational aspirations between native and transfer students. A greater proportion of native students aspired to managerial and 86 professional occupations and education beyond the bachelor degree than did transfer students. Many studies of academic performance were cited. No single accurate indicator, however, was found for predicting student success. The various writers did conclude, though, that generally the academic ability of native students was somewhat greater than that of transfer students. The analyses of Goodarznia, Knoell and Medsker, and Bulkley found that transfer students performed better at the two-year institution than they did immediately after trans- fer. Many times, however, their grades improved as they continued at the four-year college. Slark and Bateman as well as Sutherland found students transferring to Schools of Business also experienced transfer shock. Krzystofik and Bridgman’s study involving the influ- ence of the American Association of Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) was cited. Courses recommended by the AACSB to be offered at the lower level and upper level were listed, and the statement on standards relating to junior and community colleges was included. The Michigan Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officiers (MACRAO) agreement was reviewed, including its provisions as well as a listing of the signa- tory and nonsignatory institutions. The chapter concluded by describing policies and Options of the two-plus-two curricula available in the School of Business at Ferris State College. 87 W 1Collins W. Burnett, Ihe Qommuniry and Junior lelege, cited by Carolyn R. Downey, p. 8. 2Gerald W. Maxwell, "Coordinating the Two-year Postsecondary School and Four-year Colleges and University Business Programs,“ BEA Xegrbook, 15 (1977): pp. 135-154, as quoted in Downey, p. 8. ' 3W. C. Eells, Present Status of Junior Collgge Igrminal Educat1on, cited by Eldon J. Brue, Harold B. Engen, and E. James Maxey, C Research Re ort: How Do u CoLlege Transfer and chupational Studegts D1ffgr? No. 41 (Iowa City: The American College Testing Program, [1971]), p. 1. 4Brue, Engen, and Maxey, p. 1. 51bid. 6L. L. Medsker, J nior Co e: Pro e nd Prospect, cited by Brue, Engen, and Maxey, p. l. 7B. R. Clark, The Open Door College: A Case 83231, cited by Brue, Engen, and Maxey, p. 1. 8J. E. Roueche, "Gaps and Overlaps in Institutional Research," Junior Cgllege Journal, p. 21, as quoted in Brue, Engen, and Maxey, pp. 1-2. 9Sandeen and Goodale, p. 5. 101bid., pp. 8-9 11Ibid., p. 121bid., 131bid., 14Ibid., 151bid., 161bid., 17 OJCDCDOJQO'JCJ‘ Ibid., advances? 181bid., 191bid., pp. 7-8. 201bid., p. 7. 88 211bid., p. 6. 22Downey, p. 17. 23Slark and Bateman, p. 4. 24Sandeen and Goodale, p. 6. 25Downey, p. 17. 26Gene Altman, "An Analysis of Transfer Credits Accepted and Length of Time Taken to Complete Bachelor’s Degrees by Selected Transfer Business Management Students," ' ati n Abs ts e n ' al, ed. Patricia M. Colling (Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International, 1981), 42: p. 2518A. 27John Thomas Fleishans III, Jupiorzgommunitz Col1ege n fer Students’ Success in a Co e iate So 001 of Bus- 1pess Administratiep (Tempe, AZ.: By the Author, Arizona State University, 1973), p. 61. 28Knoell and Medsker, pp. 91, 93. 29Anthony T. Krzystofik and Spencer C. Bridgman, "A Need for Closer Integration of Two- and Four-Year Bus- iness Programs," Qelleg1ete News & V1epe 34 (Spring 1981): 4. 30Warren W. Willingham, "Transfer Students and the Public Interest,“ o1lege Transfer, as quoted in Sandeen and Goodale, pp. 3-4. 31Knoell and Medsker, p. 3. 32Marcus Allred and Julian C. Wingfield Jr., w-U Stud f 1979-80 Students: North 01 o - mpp112_9911ege_§z§pem (Raleigh: North Carolina State Department of Community Colleges, [1982]), pp. Resume, 2. 33L. A. Munday, "A Comparison of Junior College Students in Transfer and Terminal Curricula," Jppr_e1 .2f_Csllsse_§fudent_£ers2nnel. as quoted in Brue. Ensen. and Maxey, p. 2. 34Knoell and Medsker, as quoted in Sandeen and Goodale, p. 21. 35Patricia K. Cross, The Jpnior Qo11e ege grueept: A Beeearch Description, cited by Sandeen and Goodale, p. 20. 89 36A. W. Astin, R. J. Panos and J. A. Crenger, "National Norms for Entering College Freshmen, Fall, 1966," A33 Reeeerch Beporte, cited by Sandeen and Goodale, p. 19. 37Cross, cited by Sandeen and Goodale, pp. 27-28. 38W. W. Cooley and S. J. Becker, "The Junior Col- lege Student," Personnel and Guidance Journal, cited by Sandeen and Goodale, p. 16. 39Knoell and Medsker, pp. 29, 34. 4°Ib1d., pp. 34, 92. 411bid., pp. 20-21, 41, 98. 42Homayoun Goodarznia, "A Comparative Study of Academic Performance Between Northern Virginia Community College Transfer Students and Native Students at the George Mason University," in Dissertation Abstrects lppernetiopal, ed. Patricia M. Colling (Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International, 1983), 43: p. 3519A. 43Knoell and Medsker, pp. 27, 34. 44Sandeen and Goodale, p. 18. 45Kent Vernon Bulkley, “A Study of the Academic Achievement and Graduation Rate of Transfer Students to Michigan State University from Two-Year and Four-Year Institutions," in D’ssertat'on Abstacts International, ed. Patricia M. Colling (Ann Arbor: University Micro- films International, 1975), 35: p. 5711A. 46Albert Leon Dragon, "An Investigation of the Academic Success of Community and Junior College Transfers Entering a Four-Year College of Business," in Dieeertet1ep Abetrecte 1pternat1onal, ed. Patricia M. Colling (Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International, 1980), 41: p. 511A. 47Robert Cope and William Hannah, Bevelving Doere: en es n Conse uences of Dro in Out Sto ' Out epd Iransferripg (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1975), pp. viii, 59. 48 J. W. Trent and J. H. Ruyle, "Variations, Flow, and Patterns of College Attendance: The High School Grad- uate Study," Qe11ege eng Up1zere1ty, cited by Sandeen and Goodale, p. 19. 49 Knoell and Medsker, p. 19. 90 501bid., pp. 34-35. Sllbid. 521bid., p. 38. 531bid., pp. 25-28. 54Ibid., pp. 37-33. 551bid., p. 21. 561bid. 57Hawaii University, n v rs o w u s w'th Commu it Colle e B ck ro d Co unit Qelleges, Aceeemic Xear 1323-39 (Honolulu: Office of Institutional Research and Analysis, 1981), p. 1. 58Lee William Sutherland, The Differepee Betgeen Irepefer Studente’ Entering GPA and Their GPA After One est r the Colle of usin d ’ ° tr t’ t Suffelk University (Boston: By the Author, Suffolk University, 1978), p. i. 59 Julie Slark and Harold Bateman, Trenefer Stu- nts’ cade ic P o ress at e Univ 51 ' orn'a e1! 1- e e 2.- t: e 2 V: _' s :21 -_,=::_ (Santa Ana: Santa Ana College, [1981]), p. i. 60 Slark and Bateman, [1983], p. i. 61Fleishans, pp. iii-iv. 62Duncan MacGregor Sargent, "A Comparative Study of the Pre-Grade-Flation, Post-Grade-Flation Academic Suc- cess of Michigan Community College Transfer Students to Michigan State University in 1965- 1967 and 1971-1973, " in e I on , ed. Patricia M. Colling (Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International, 1978), 38: pp. 5872A-5873A. 63Mary Ann Desmond, ”Assessment of a Community College’s Transfer Preparation for Selected Majors, Con- sidering Factors of Student Eligibility, Opinion, and Grade Point DifferentiaIS." in BMW pepippel, ed. Patricia M. Colling (Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International, 1984), 44: p. 3584A. 64Dragon, p. 511A. 91 65William L. Groft, "Elementary and Intermediate Accounting Achievement of Native and Transfer Students in Selected Colleges and Universities in Pennsylvania," Alphe Eps1lon Research 20 (Spring 1980): 1-3. 66Nelson Everett Pion, "An Evaluation of the Performance of Marketing and Management Transfer Students at the University of Massachusetts,“ in Dissertation Abstrecte Ipternational, ed. Patricia M. Colling (Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International, 1983), 44: pp. 1002A-1003A. 67Altman, p. 2518A. 68Paul B. Mohr Sr. and James C. Sears, A Suceeeeful Model for Articulation and the Development of Two-Plue-Two Program Agreements Between Norfolk State University. A Pre; eominantly Black Four-Yeer Public Institution, and Tidewater Community College. A Predominantly White Multi-Campus Two- Year Public Community College (Durham, ND.: North Carolina Central University, [1979]), p. 6. 691bid. 7oRichard Whitmore, Remarks regarding Kellogg Community College’s Articulation Effort, as quoted in David S. Bushnell, "Closing the Gap and Eliminating the Overlap," Americap Vocational Journel (April 1978): as quoted in Downey, p. 13. 71Beverly Allan, Two-Year F Y ar '0 Articuletion w1th Comments on State Level Articulat1on Errorte 1n Virgin1a, as quoted in Downey, p. 10. 72Maxwell, as quoted in Downey, pp. 15, 18. 73James D. Forman, "2 + 2 = ? Articulation in Technical Education," Technical Education Y arbook, p. 10, as quoted in Downey, pp. 10, 13. 74Mohr and Sears, p. 2. 75Judith R. Gething, Arpiepletion at the Univer- §1ry of Hewaii 1n Academic Dilemma, cited by Downey, p. 11. 76Office of the Chancellor, California State University and Colleges, Transfer of Credit, Execut1ve O der #167, as quoted in Downey, p. 12. 77Mohr and Sears, pp. 1, 8-9. 78Allan, cited by Downey, p. 12. 92 79Claude R. Canup, Jr., Articulation with §econdary Schools, cited by Downey, p. 11. 80Krzystofik and Bridgman, pp. 1, 4. 81Ibid., p. 2. 82Ibid., p. 4. aslbid. 84 College Entrance Examination Board, pp. 721-7. 85Michigan Association of College Registrars and Admissions Officers, The MACRAO Articulation Agreement (Dowagiac: Michigan Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers, 1982), p. 6. 861bid., p. 3. 87Ferris State College, School Bulletin (Big Rapids, MI.: Ferris State College, 1984), 57: p. 27. 881bid., pp. 91, 95. 89Ibid., pp. 94, 95. 901bid., pp. 27-29, 94. 911bid., p. 91. CHAPTER III METHODS AND PROCEDURES Introduction The primary question answered by this study was how transfer marketing students compared academically with native marketing students at Ferris State College from 1979- 1986. The many aspects of this question have been defined and reviewed in Chapters I and II. This chapter will dis- cuss the design of the study, population, sources of data, as well as the methods used to collect, process and pro- tect the data. The research questions are listed, fol- lowed by each accompanying null hypothesis. Finally, a detailed description is made of the methods used in ana- lyzing the data. Design The academic accomplishments of transfer and native students were the dependent variables. These dependent variables were graduation percentages, academic probation percentages, grade point averages, course withdrawals, and attrition percentages. The independent variable was stu- dent status, which was either transfer or native. Data for this study were gathered from events which had already occurred. Thus the researcher started with 93 94 observations derived from historical data. The independent variables were then studied for their possible relation to, and effect on, the dependent variables. Romanticism The population for this study included the following two groups of students who were classified as juniors in a baccalaureate marketing curriculum in the School of Business at Ferris State College at the beginning of the Fall Quar- ters of 1981, 1982, or 1983: 1. Transfer students who entered a regionally accredited college as freshmen, completed an associate degree, and transferred as juniors into a two-plus-two mar- keting program in the School of Business at Ferris State College in the Fall Quarters of 1981, 1982, or 1983. 2. Native students who entered Ferris State College as freshmen and were juniors in a baccalaureate marketing curriculum in the School of Business at the beginning of the Fall Quarters of 1981, 1982, or 1983. An analysis of the population by numbers, status, and gender appears in Table 7. 95 Table 7. Research Population of Students Enrolled in a Baccalaureate Marketing Curriculum at Ferris State College Status Date of Transfer I Naiixo Junior Classification Male Female Male Female Total Fall 1981 15 12 23 14 64 Fall 1982 17 10 10 14 51 Fall 1983 _e _e 13 1Q 49 Total 41 28 48 38 155 Colloooion_of_nata Data used in this study were obtained from the following four major sources: 1. Fall 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, and 1983 enroll- ment lists of baccalaureate marketing students at Ferris State College. (Fall 1979 and 1980 for native students-- Fall 1981, 1982, and 1983 for both native and transfer students) 2. Transcripts from two-year colleges for students who transferred into a baccalaureate marketing curriculum at Ferris State College in Fall 1981, 1982, and 1983 3. Academic records of baccalaureate marketing stu- dents for the time period of their enrollment at Ferris State College 96 4. Withdrawal records of baccalaureate marketing students at Ferris State College for time period Fall 1981- Spring 1986 All data were collected in strict compliance with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, 1974. (See Appendix C, "The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 as Amended") The Ferris State College Registrar gave official permission to use data found in Ferris State College student records. (See Appendix D, "Ferris State College Approval") The University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects at Michigan State University gave the researcher permission to conduct the study in accordance with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. (See Appendix E, “Michigan State University Approval") The potential risks and benefits inherent in the study to the subjects, the two-year college involved, and to Ferris State College were recognized. Preventive mea- sures were taken to assure that all information used in this study was gathered, recorded, analyzed, and summarized in such a manner that the subjects and/or the matching of two- year colleges or Ferris State College with each subject was not identified directly or through identifiers linked to the subjects or college. (See Appendix F, "Risk Benefit Ratio Analysis“) 97 Erooodaroo The students to be included in the study were determined from Fall Quarter 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, and 1983 enrollment lists available at the Office of the Dean in the School of Business. From these enrollment data a list of subjects was produced, showing the names and student numbers of those enrolled in a baccalaureate marketing cur- riculum. The subject lists were carried by the researcher to the Office of the Registrar. Academic records of all students included on the subject lists were furnished for the study by employees in the Office of the Registrar. Students were classified as transfer, native, and by gender. Codes indicating these classifications were assigned to each student with all prior identification removed, including names and Ferris State College student numbers. The population was then studied by investigating the following: (1) all transfer marketing students who, at the time of their transfer into the upper division were classified as juniors, and (2) all native marketing stu- dents classified as juniors. These two groupings were fur- ther studied according to the following four segments: 1. Male transfer marketing students 2. Female transfer marketing students 3. Male native marketing students 4. Female native marketing students The cumulative grade point averages for the first two years of college were compared. Grades earned by each 98 group in the four lower-level marketing courses were also compared. Grade point averages of transfer students were determined from the college transcripts issued by the regionally accredited colleges. These averages were com- pared with the grade point averages of the native students as determined from Ferris State College student academic records. The academic progress of the transfer and native students was carefully followed during their junior and senior years of pursuing a baccalaureate degree in marketing at Ferris State College. Cumulative grade point averages of each group’s lower-level work were compared with the grade point averages for the first quarter of their junior year. These results of the transfer students’ grade point average comparisons were then compared with the results of the native students’ comparisons. Data for native student comparisons were taken from Ferris State College student records and from other regionally accredited college transcripts as well as Ferris State College records for the transfer students. Cumulative grade point averages were studied on a quarterly basis for each group in their upper-division studies. This information was accumulated from Ferris State College student records. Grade point averages of transfer students for their last two years were compared with those of native students for their final two years. 99 Grades earned by students in the five selected upper-level "capstone" marketing courses were used in measuring applications of prior learning experiences, including principles covered in the four lower-level mar- keting courses. Grades earned by transfer students in the five upper-level marketing courses were compared with those earned by native students. These data were also studied by comparing grades earned in the upper-level marketing courses by students who took lower-level marketing courses at other regionally accredited colleges with those of students who took lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College. Data for these analyses were taken from the other regionally accredited college transcripts and from Ferris State College student academic records. Detailed information concerning course withdrawals was collected. Percentages of the numbers of courses with- drawn by transfer and native students were compared. Infor- mation for this analysis was extracted from Ferris State College student academic records. Student attrition in the Marketing Department was studied and two types of comparisons made between transfer and native students. The first comparison was made of attrition percentages, data for which was determined from student academic record information. The second comparison considered reasons for attrition, information for which was taken from exit records as well as from student academic record information. 100 Students who were not performing satisfactorily were placed on academic probation at Ferris State College. Table 8 lists the guidelines used for determining academic probation. According to firndepp_flendhppk1 provisions, when a student’s cumulative grade point average fell, for the first time, within the stated range for the number of quar- ter hours earned, the student was placed on probation. However, a student who earned less than a 2.00 average for two consecutive quarters was placed on probation regardless of the student’s cumulative grade point average. Table 8. Academic Probation Policy at Ferris State College Based on Quarter Hours Earned and Grade Point Average Range for Placement on Probation Ferris Cumulative Grade Point Average Ferris Quarter Hours Range for Placement of Credit Earned on Academic Probation* 1st Ferris Qtr. ................ 0.00--1.99 1--30.9 ................ 1.40--1.99 31--45.9 ................ 1.60--1.99 46--75.9 ................ 1.70--1.99 76-100.0 ................ 1.80--1.99 101-145.9 ................ 1.90--1.99 146 & above ................ l.95--1.99 Source: Ferris State College, firpfienr_flen§peek (Big Rapids, MI.: Student Services, 1984), p. 5. *Any student whose cumulative grade point average falls below the range for the number of hours earned may be denied further admission in the school in which the stu- dent is enrolled. 101 The percentages of students being placed on academic probation were calculated. Transfer student probation per- centages were compared with native students’ percentages. These data were extracted from student academic records. Graduation percentages of transfer and native stu- dents were also compared. Graduation data were secured from the Office of the Registrar. Won: In determining how transfer marketing students compared academically with native marketing students at Ferris State College, answers to the following research questions were considered in reaching conclusions to the primary concern of this study: 1. Do grade point averages of college freshman and sophomore transfer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students? 2. Do grade point averages of transfer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students for selected lower-level marketing courses? 3. Do grade point averages of college junior and senior transfer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students? 4. Do students experience transfer shock after transferring to a baccalaureate marketing curriculum at Ferris State College? 102 5. Do grade point averages of transfer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students for selected upper-level marketing courses? 6. Do grade point averages of students for selected upper-level marketing courses, who took selected lower-level marketing courses at other regionally accredited colleges, differ from those of students who took selected lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College? 7. Do course withdrawal percentages of transfer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students? 8. Do percentages of attrition of transfer mar- keting students differ from those of native marketing stu- dents? 9. Do percentages of attrition, for selected rea- sons, of transfer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students? 10. Do academic probation percentages of transfer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students? 11. Do graduation percentages of transfer mar- keting students differ from those of native marketing stu- dents? 12. Do academic accomplishments of male and female transfer marketing students differ from those of male and female native marketing students? 103 Breathaaos To answer each of the research questions listed the following twelve null hypotheses were tested: 1. There are no significant differences in cumu- lative grade point averages between those of transfer mar- keting students and those of native marketing students during their college freshman and sophomore years. 2. There are no significant differences in grade point averages between those of transfer marketing students and those of native marketing students in four selected lower-level marketing courses. 3. There are no significant differences in cumula- tive grade point averages between those of transfer mar- keting students and those of native marketing students during their junior and senior years at Ferris State College. 4. There are no significant differences in cumula- tive freshman and sophomore grade point averages and their grade point averages for the first quarter of their junior year between those of transfer marketing students and those of native marketing students. 5. There are no significant differences in grade point averages between those of transfer marketing students and those of native marketing students in five selected upper-level marketing courses. 6. There are no significant differences in grade point averages of students for five selected upper-level 104 marketing courses, between those of transfer marketing stu- dents who had taken four selected lower-level marketing courses at other regionally accredited colleges and those of native marketing students who had taken four selected lower- level marketing courses at Ferris State College. 7. There are no significant differences in percent- ages of course withdrawals between those of transfer mar- keting students and those of native marketing students during their junior and senior years at Ferris State College. 8. There are no significant differences in percent- ages of attrition between those of transfer marketing stu- dents and those of native marketing students during their junior and senior years at Ferris State College. 9. There are no significant differences in percent- ages of attrition for selected reasons between those of transfer marketing students and those of native marketing students during their junior and senior years at Ferris State College. 10. There are no significant differences in percent- ages of students on academic probation between those of transfer marketing students and those of native marketing students during their junior and senior years at Ferris State College. 11. There are no significant differences in percent- ages of graduation from a baccalaureate marketing curriculum 105 between those of transfer marketing students and those of native marketing students at Ferris State College. 12. There are no significant differences in academic accomplishments between those of male and female transfer marketing students and those of male and female native mar- keting students at Ferris State College. AnalzaiuLnata All transfer marketing students were compared with all native marketing students by each of the following ten criteria: 1. Cumulative grade point average for the freshman and sophomore years of college. (To test null hypotheses 1, 4, and 12 and to answer research questions 1, 4, and 12) 2. Grade point average for selected lower-level marketing courses. (To test null hypotheses 2 and 12 and to answer research questions 2 and 12) 5 3. Cumulative grade point average for junior and senior years at Ferris State College. (To test null hypotheses 3 and 12 and to answer research questions 3 and 12) 4. Grade point average for the first quarter of the junior year at Ferris State College. (To test null hypotheses 4 and 12 and to answer research questions 4 and 12) 5. Grade point average for selected upper-level marketing courses taken at Ferris State College. (To test 106 null hypotheses 5, 6, and 12 and to answer research questions 5, 6, and 12) 6. Percentage of course withdrawals by marketing students at Ferris State College. (To test null hypotheses 7 and 12 and to answer research questions 7 and 12) 7. Percentage of attrition of marketing students at Ferris State College. (To test null hypotheses 8 and 12 and to answer research questions 8 and 12) 8. Reasons for attrition of marketing students at Ferris State College. (To test null hypotheses 9 and 12 and to answer research questions 9 and 12) 9. Percentage of marketing students on academic probation at Ferris State College. (To test null hypotheses 10 and 12 and to answer research questions 10 and 12) 10. Graduation percentage of marketing students at Ferris State College. (To test null hypotheses 11 and 12 and to answer research questions 11 and 12) The statistical methods used for analyzing data in this study were the following: (1) various descriptive procedures including computation of mean grade point aver- ages, standard deviation for grade point averages, percent- ages of students by various categorizations, and (2) infer- ential techniques including analysis of variance tests for means, Chi Square tests for equality of proportions, and Chi Square tests for independence. Data for the various methods used in this study were obtained from transcripts from regionally accredited 107 colleges for transfer students and from Ferris State College student records for both transfer and native students. The results of the analyses were compared by status and by gender. Wares 1.Moan_§raao_foinf_Axarasos The formula used for determining the arithmetic mean was Y’ {X n = number of data sample mean where total of all data The specific mean obtained prior to testing null hypotheses 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 12 were the student’s grade point averages. It was determined by the formula GPA '—" %%E where GPA = grade point average ZHP = sum of all honor points {CH = sum of all credit hours earned. Table 9 shows the twelve-point scale used in con- verting alpha grades to numeric equivalents. 108 Table 9. Alphabetical Grade and Honor Points Allowed Per Credit Hour at Ferris State College Alpha Honor Points Alpha Honor Points Grade Per Credit Hour Grade Per Credit Hour A 4.0 C 2.0 A- 3.7 C- l 7 B+ 3.3 D+ 1 3 B 3.0 D 1 0 B- 2.7 D- 0 7 C+ 2.3 F 0 0 Source: Ferris State College, Studept Hendbook (Big Rapids, MI.: Student Services, 1984), p. 5. 2. t n v' ' n for G P ‘ v e The standard deviation for grade point averages was also determined prior to testing null hypotheses 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 12. It was determined by the formula in: -':'<')2 n - l Std. Dev. = where Std. Dev. = standard deviation x = grade point average 2 = mean grade point average n = number of grade point averages 3. e nt V C - nations Percentages of students by various categorizations were obtained prior to testing null hypotheses 7, 8, 9, 10, 109 11, and 12. Percentages were calculated for course with- drawals (to test null hypotheses 7, l2), attrition (to test null hypotheses 8, 12), reasons for attrition (to test null hypotheses 9, 12), probation (to test null hypotheses 10, 12), and graduation (to test null hypotheses 11, 12). The percentages of course withdrawals, attrition, probation, and graduation were determined by the formula W x Y or Z W Y or 2 P = 1:, t4 t, t or P = NixN, N, N t nt N nN where Pt = proportion of transfer students who withdrew from courses, attrited, were on academic probation, or graduated Wt = number of transfer students who with- drew from selected numbers of courses Xt = number of transfer students who attrited Yt = number of transfer students on aca- demic probation for any one quarter Zt = number of transfer students who grad- uated nt = total number of transfer students involved in each case PN = proportion of native students who withdrew from courses, attrited, were on academic probation, or graduated WN = number of native students who with- drew from selected numbers of courses number of native students who attrited a" Y = number of native students on academic probation for any one quarter 110 ZN : number of native students who grad- uated nN : total number of native students involved in each case Data to determine attrition reason percentages were taken from Student Withdrawal Interview Forms and Withdrawal Clearance Forms completed at the time of student withdrawal as well as from student academic records. (See Appendix G, "School of Business Student Withdrawal Interview“ and Appendix H, "Withdrawal Clearance Form") The reasons given by transfer marketing students for withdrawing from Ferris State College were separated from the reasons given by native marketing students for with- drawing from Ferris State College. The percent that each reason represented of the total number of transfer marketing students who withdrew was obtained. The percent that each reason represented of the total number of native marketing students who withdrew was also obtained. The percent of the total in each case was determined by the formula X. X 1 i P. : — or P. = — 1 nt 1 nN where Pi = proportion of students who specified reason 1 X1 = number of students who specified rea- son 1 nt = number of transfer students who withdrew nN = number 2of native students who withdrew 111 Inferential Technigues 1. Analysis of Variance Tests for Means Null hypotheses 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 12 involved comparisons of many grade point averages among transfer and native male and female students. Smith3 saw the analysis of variance test as a method to give some knowledge in advance if somewhere in the mass of these comparisons there was a likelihood of finding one or more comparisons that might be significant. If the preliminary analysis indicated that significant differences existed somewhere among the possible combinations, the location of such differences could then be investigated. This was done by obtaining p-values for each trans- fer, native, male, and female student group. The F ratio value was then calculated and compared with the critical F value to determine if the differences were significant. In null hypotheses 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 12 there were two kinds of variation represented. One was variation within each student group and the other was variation between the means of each group. If variation between groups was much larger than variation within groups, it was concluded that the groups did not have the same true mean. For these reasons the analysis of variance statistical method to test hypotheses for means was used. 112 The formula used to calculate the F ratio was MSB F ' MSW where F = F ratio MSB = mean square between groups MSW = mean square within groups Smith4 stated that the null hypothesis is probably correct if the F ratio is not significantly greater than 1.00. If, however, the F ratio is found to be significantly greater than 1.00 the null hypothesis is probably false. Daniel’s5 decision rule is to reject the null hypothesis if the calculated value of the test statistic is equal to or greater than the critical value. 2. Chi Sguare Tests The Chi Square test for equality of proportions was used to test null hypotheses 7, 8, 10, 11, and 12. The Chi Square test for independence was used to test null hypoth- eses 9 and 12. Smith6 noted that, in 1900, Karl Pearson developed the Chi Square method for testing hypoth- eses. It was a technique for determining whether the dif- ferences between the theoretical and the observed frequen- cies in any number of categories could reasonably be attri- buted to chance variations in sampling. This method was used to analyze characteristics of the two different sub-groups of the total population. 113 The formula used for the Chi Square test was 2 X2 - §:(0 g E) where x2 = Chi Square 0 = observed frequency E = expected frequency under the assump- tion of no association Garrett7 explained this statistical test by indi- cating that the more closely the observed results approxi- mated to the expected, the smaller the Chi Square and the more similar the agreement between observed data and the null hypothesis being tested. On the other hand, the larger the Chi Square, the greater the probability of a real dis- similarity of observed results from the null hypothesis being tested. 114 Chaotonflooas 1Ferris State College, fippfienp_flenfibepk (Big Rapids, MI.: Student Services, 1984), p. 5. 2Interview with Michael C. Cooper, Ferris State College, Big Rapids, Michigan, 15, 21 May 1986. 36. M. Smith. W (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1970), p. 114. 41518., p. 121. 5Wayne W. Daniel, 1153195 (Boston: Houghton Miffin Co., 1984), p. 223. 68mith, p. 186. 7Henry E. Garrett and R. S. Woodworth, Spepie; (New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1958), p. 254. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF RESULTS Inorodaofion The purpose of this study was to compare the academic performance of transfer baccalaureate marketing students with native baccalaureate marketing students in the School of Business at Ferris State College. Comparisons were made to determine their similarity or dissimilarity as measured by various grade point averages, course with- drawals, attrition percentages, reasons for attrition, aca- demic probation percentages, and graduation percentages. Detailed statistical information showing these comparisons 'appears in Appendix I, "Statistical Data.“ In this chapter each null hypothesis will be tested and research question answered. Tables are presented showing the appropriate statistical information. Wm Wasting W There are no significant differences in cumulative grade point averages between those of transfer marketing students and 115 116 those of native marketing students during their college freshman and sophomore years. Tables 53-54 in Appendix I provide source data for Tables 10-11. Table 10 presents the cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point averages for all transfer and native students (status) included in this study. Table 10. Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Statistics Speppe Transfer and Transfer Native Native Students Students Students Number 67 Number 86 Number 153* Mean 2.82 Mean 2.67 Mean 2.74 Std. Dev. .51 Std. Dev. .50 Std. Dev. .51 *Only 153 of the 155 student population total are reported since cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point aver- ages are unavailable for one male transfer student and one female transfer student included in the study. It is noted that there is a difference between transfer' students’ averages (2.82) and native students’ averages (2.67) for their first two years of college. To test the significance of the difference the anal- ysis of variance test was used. Table 11 shows the results of this test. 117 Table 11. Analysis of Variance Test of Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Averages Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean F ratio critical p- Variation Squares Freedom Square value F value value (.05 level) Status .897 l .897 3.83 3.84 .052 Gender- Status .921 1 .921 3.94 3.84 .049 Since the p-value for the Gender-Status combination (.049) is less than the level of significance (.05) there is a significant interaction between gender and status in this set of data. This interaction is further substantiated by the F ratio value for the Gender-Status combination (3.94) being greater than the critical F value (3.84). While there is a difference between transfer and native students’ (status) cumulative grade point averages for their freshman and sophomore years, the difference is not significant. This is suggested by the fact that the p- value for status (.052) is greater than the level of signif- icance (.05) and the F ratio value (3.83) is less than the critical F value (3.84). Thus, there is no significant difference based on status and Null Hypothesis One cannot be rejected. MW Do grade point averages of college freshman and sophomore transfer marketing students 118 differ from those of native marketing stu- dents? The data presented in Table 10 show a difference between transfer and native marketing students’ freshman and sophomore grade point averages. Null Hypothesis One cannot, however, be rejected. Thus, the answer to Research Question One is that grade point averages of college freshman and sophomore transfer marketing students do differ, but not significantly so, from those of native marketing students. W There are no significant differences in grade point averages between those of trans- fer marketing students and those of native marketing students in four selected lower- level marketing courses. In Null Hypothesis Two, grades for all selected lower-level marketing courses taken by students included in this study were used in calculating grade point averages for the four selected lower-level marketing courses. Tables 55-56 in Appendix I provide source data for Tables 12-13. Table 12 presents the grade point averages earned in the four lower-level marketing courses by all transfer and native students (status) in this study. 119 Table 12. Grade Point Statistics for Four Selected Lower- Level Marketing Courses ta u Transfer and Transfer Native - Native Students Students Students Number 66 Number 86 Number 152* Mean 2.71 Mean 2.54 Mean 2.82 Std. Dev. .71 Std. Dev. .56 Std. Dev. .64 *Only 152 of the 155 student population total are reported since two male transfer students and one female transfer student included in the study did not complete any of the four selected lower-level marketing courses. It is noted that there is a difference between transfer students’ averages (2.71) and native students’ averages (2.54) for the four lower-level marketing courses. To test the significance of the difference the analysis of variance test was used. Table 13 shows the results of this test. Table 13. Analysis of Variance Test of Grade Point Averages for Four Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean F ratio critical p- Variation Squares Freedom Square value F value value (.05 level) Status 1.120 1 1.120 2.84 3.84 .094 Gender- Status .333 1 .333 .84 3.84 .360 Since the p-value for the Gender-Status combination (.360) is greater than the level of significance (.05) there 120 is not a significant interaction between gender and status in this set of data. This lack of interaction is further substantiated by the F ratio value for the Gender-Status combination (.84) being less than the critical F value (3.84). While there is a difference between transfer and native students’ (status) grade point averages for the four selected lower-level marketing courses, the difference is not significant. This is indicated by the fact that the p- value for status (.094) is greater than the level of signif- icance (.05) and the F ratio value (2.84) is less than the critical F value (3.84). Thus, there is no significant difference based on status and Null Hypothesis Two cannot be rejected. EasoorohjaasoioLIno Do grade point averages of transfer mar- keting students differ from those of native marketing students for selected lower-level marketing courses? The data presented in Table 12 show a difference between transfer and native students’ grade point averages earned in the selected lower-level marketing courses. Null Hypothesis Two cannot, however, be rejected. Thus, the answer to Research Question Two is that grade point averages of transfer marketing students do dif- fer, but not significantly so, from those of native mar- keting students for selected lower-level marketing courses. 121 l H o h i as There are no significant differences in cumulative grade point averages between those of transfer marketing students and those of native marketing students during their junior and senior years at Ferris State College. Tables 57-58 in Appendix I provide source data for Tables 14-15. Table 14 presents the cumulative junior and senior grade point averages for all transfer and native- students (status) included in this study. Table 14. Cumulative Junior and Senior Grade Point Statistics fiiéiué Transfer and Transfer Native . Native Students Students Students Number 67 Number 86 Number 153* Mean 2.57 Mean 2.80 Mean 2.59 Std. Dev. .55 Std. Dev. .48 Std. Dev. .51 *Only 153 of the 155 student population total are reported since one male transfer student and one female transfer student included in the study did not complete any full quarter at Ferris State College. It is noted that there is a difference between transfer students’ averages (2.57) and native students’ averages (2.60) for their last two years of college. 122 To test the significance of the difference the analysis of variance test was used. Table 15 shows the results of this test. Table 15. Analysis of Variance Test of Cumulative Junior and Senior Grade Point Averages Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean F ratio critical p- Variation Squares Freedom Square value F value value (.05 level) Status .011 1 .011 0.05 3.84 .832 Gender- Status 1.102 1 1.102 4.42 3.84 .037 Since the p-value for the Gender-Status combination (.037) is less than the level of significance (.05) there is a significant interaction between gender and status in this set of data. This interaction is further substantiated by the F ratio value for the Gender-Status combination (4.42) being greater than the critical F value (3.84). While there is a difference between transfer and native students’ (status) cumulative grade point averages for their junior and senior years, the difference is not significant. This is supported by the fact that the p-value for status (.832) is greater than the level of significance (.05) and the F ratio value (.05) is less than the critical F value (3.84). Thus, there is no significant difference based on status and Null Hypothesis Three cannot be rejected. 123 MW Do grade point averages of college junior and senior transfer marketing students dif- fer from those of native marketing students? The data presented in Table 14 show a difference between transfer and native marketing students’ junior and senior grade point averages. Null Hypothesis Three cannot, however, be rejected. Thus, the answer to Research Question Three is that grade point averages of college junior and senior transfer marketing students do differ, but not significantly so, from those of native marketing students. Wiles: There are no significant differences in cumulative freshman and sophomore .grade point averages and their grade point aver- ages for the first quarter of their junior year between those of transfer marketing students and those of native marketing stu- dents. Tables 59-60 in Appendix I provide source data for Tables 16-17. Table 16 presents the differences between cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point averages and the first quarter junior averages for all transfer and native students (status) included in this study. 124 Table 16. Differences in Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Statistics and Grade Point Statistics for First Quarter of Junior Year Speppg ~ Transfer and Transfer Native Native Students Students Students Number 66 Number 86 Number 152* Mean -.25 Mean -.02 Mean -.12 Std. Dev. .63 Std. Dev. .57 Std. Dev. .61 *Only 152 of the 155 student population total are reported since (a) cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point averages are unavailable for one female transfer student and one male transfer student included in the study and (b) the latter student as well as one female transfer stu- dent included in the study did not complete any full quar- ter at Ferris State College. It is noted that there is a difference between the change of transfer students’ averages (-.25) and native students’ averages (-.02) when comparing the cumulative averages for their first two years of college with those of the first quarter of their junior year. To test the significance of the difference the analysis of variance test was used. Table 17 shows the results of this test. 125 Table 17. Analysis of Variance Test of Differences in Cumu- lative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Aver- ages and Grade Point Averages for First Quarter of Junior Year Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean F ratio critical p- Variation Squares Freedom Square value F value value (.05 level) Status 2.170 1 2.170 6.26 3.84 .013 Gender- Status 1.304 1 1.304 3.76 3.84 .054 Since the p-value for the Gender-Status combination (.054) is greater than the level of significance (.05) there may be no significant interaction between gender and status in this set of data. This possible lack of interaction is further substantiated by the F ratio value for the Gender- Status combination (3.76) being less than the critical F value (3.84). The difference of change of transfer students’ aver- ages and native students’ averages between their cumulative grade point averages for the first two years of college and the first quarter of their junior year is significant, however. This is evidenced by the fact that the p-value for status (.013) is less than the level of significance (.05) and the F ratio value (6.26) is greater than the critical F value (3.84). Thus, there is significant difference based on sta- tus and Null Hypothesis Four is rejected. 126 c s 0 Do students experience transfer shock after transferring to a baccalaureate marketing curriculum at Ferris State College? The data presented in Table 16 show changes between grade point averages for the first two years of college and the first quarter of the junior year occurred for all students included in this study. Null Hypothesis Four is rejected. Thus, the answer to Research Question Four is that students do experience transfer shock after transferring to a baccalaureate marketing curriculum at Ferris State College. W There are no significant differences in grade point averages between those of trans- fer marketing students and those of native marketing students in five selected upper- level marketing courses. In Null Hypothesis Five, grades for all selected upper-level marketing courses taken by students included in this study were used in calculating grade point averages for the five selected upper-level marketing courses. Tables 61-62 in Appendix I provide source data for Tables 18-19. Table 18 presents the grade point averages earned in the five upper-level marketing courses by all transfer and native students (status) in this study. 127 Table 18. Grade Point Statistics of Juniors and Seniors for Five Selected Upper-Level Marketing Courses Sperpe Transfer and Transfer Native - Native Students Students Students Number 57 Number 79 Number 136* Mean 2.39 Mean 2.48 Mean 2.43 Std. Dev. .57 Std. Dev. .53 Std. Dev. .54 *Only 136 of the 155 student population total are reported since five male transfer students, seven female transfer students, five male native students and two female native students included in the study did not complete any of the five selected upper-level marketing courses. It is noted that there is a difference between transfer students’ averages (2.39) and native students’ averages (2.46) for the five upper-level marketing courses. To test the significance of the difference the analysis of variance test was used. Table 19 shows the results of this test. Table 19. Analysis of Variance Test of Grade Point Averages of Juniors and Seniors for Five Selected Upper- Level Marketing Courses Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean F ratio critical p- Variation Squares Freedom Square value F value value (.05 level) Status .116 1 .116 .40 3.84 .530 Gender- Status .142 1 .142 .48 3.84 .488 128 Since the p-value for the Gender-Status combination (.488) is greater than the level of significance (.05) there is not a significant interaction between gender and status in this set of data. This lack of interaction is further substantiated by the F ratio value for the Gender-Status combination (.48) being less than the critical F value (3.84). While there is a difference between transfer and native students’ (status) grade point averages for the five selected upper-level marketing courses, the difference is not significant. This is suggested by the fact that the p- value for status (.530) is greater than the level of signif- icance (.05) and the F ratio value (.40) is less than the critical F value (3.84). Thus, there is no significant difference based on status and Null Hypothesis Five cannot be rejected. s r h v Do grade point averages of transfer mar- keting students differ from those of native marketing students for selected upper-level marketing courses? The data presented in Table 18 show a difference between transfer and native students’ grade point averages earned in the selected upper-level marketing courses. Null Hypothesis Five cannot, however, be rejected. 129 Thus, the answer to Research Question Five is that grade point averages of transfer marketing students do dif- fer, but not significantly so, from those of native mar- keting students for selected upper-level marketing courses. Was There are no significant differences in grade point averages of students for five selected upper-level marketing courses, between those of transfer marketing students who had taken four selected lower-level marketing courses at other regionally accred- ited colleges and those of native marketing students who had taken four selected lower- level marketing courses at Ferris State College. In Null Hypothesis Six, grades for. all selected upper-level marketing courses taken by students included in this study were used in calculating grade point averages for the five selected upper-level marketing courses. Likewise, students must have taken at least three of four selected lower-level marketing courses at a regionally accredited college other than Ferris State College or three of four selected lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State Col- lege to be included in the calculations. Tables 63-64 in Appendix I provide source data for Tables 20-21. Table 20 presents the grade point averages earned in the five upper-level marketing courses by all 130 transfer students who took lower-level marketing courses at regionally accredited colleges other than Ferris State College, and by all native students who took lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College. Table 20. Grade Point Statistics of Juniors and Seniors for Five Selected Upper-Level Marketing Courses of Transfer Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower- Level Marketing Courses at Colleges Other Than Ferris State College and of Native Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses at Ferris State College tat Transfer and Transfer Native Native Students Students Students Number 18 Number 74 Number 92* Mean 2.47 Mean 2.46 Mean 2.46 Std. Dev. .66 Std. Dev. .54 Std. Dev. .56 *Only ninety-two of the 155 student population are reported since (a) thirty-one male transfer students and twenty female transfer students included in the study did not com- plete at least three lower-level marketing courses at regionally accredited colleges other than Ferris State College and (b) nine male native students and three female native students included in the study did not complete at least three lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College. It is noted that there is a difference in grade point averages for selected upper-level marketing courses between transfer students who had taken lower-level marketing courses at other colleges (2.47) and native students who had taken lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College (2.48). 131 To test the significance of the difference the analysis of variance test was used. Table 21 shows the results of this test. Table 21. Analysis of Variance Test of Grade Point Averages of Juniors and Seniors for Five Selected Upper- Level Marketing Courses of Transfer Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses at Colleges Other Than Ferris State College and of Native Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower- Level Marketing Courses at Ferris State College Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean F ratio critical p- Variation Squares Freedom Square value F value value (.05 level) Status .005 1 .005 .01 3.84 .903 Gender- Status .068 1 .068 .22 3.84 .643 Since the p-value for the Gender-Status combination (.643) is greater than the level of significance (.05) there is not a significant interaction between gender and status in this set of data. This lack of interaction is further substantiated by the F ratio value for the Gender-Status combination (.22) being less than the critical F value (3.84). While there is a difference in upper-level marketing course grade point averages between transfer students (status) who took lower-level marketing courses at colleges other than Ferris State College and native students (status) who took lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College, the difference is not significant. 132 This is indicated by the fact that the p-value for status (.903) is greater than the level of significance (.05) and the F ratio value (.01) is less than the critical F value (3.84). Thus, there is no significant difference based on status and Null Hypothesis Six cannot be rejected. We: Do grade point averages of students for selected upper-level marketing courses, who took selected lower-level marketing courses at other regionally accredited colleges, differ from those of students who took selected lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College? The data presented in Table 20 show a difference in grade point averages earned in upper-level marketing courses between transfer students who took lower-level marketing courses at other colleges and native students who took lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College. Null Hypothesis Six cannot, however, be rejected. Thus, the answer to Research Question Six is that grade point averages of students for selected upper-level marketing courses, who took selected lower-level marketing courses at other regionally accredited colleges do differ, but not significantly so, from those of students who took selected lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College. 133 BMW There are no significant differences in percentages of course withdrawals between those of transfer marketing ’students and those of native marketing students during their junior and senior years at Ferris State College. Tables 65-66 in Appendix I provide source data for Tables 22-23. Table 22 presents the course withdrawal num- bers and percentages for transfer and native students (status) included in this study. Table 22. Course Withdrawals of Juniors and Seniors tat Transfer and Transfer Native Native Number of 5111112111.: madam * 812.92an Courses Withdrawn Number % Number % Number % 0 25 36.2: 26 30.2* 51 32.9* 1 16 23.2 12 14.0 28 18.1 2 10 14.5 26 30.2 36 23.2 3 or more 1.8 .2611 2.2. .2516 .42 .2518 69 100.0 86 100.0 155 100.0 * Column percent It is noted that there is a difference between transfer and native students in the percentages for each of the four number categories of courses withdrawn. 134 To test the significance of the differences the Chi Square test was used. Table 23 shows the results of this test. Table 23. Chi Square Test of Course Withdrawals of Juniors and Seniors critical Chi Square Degrees of Chi Square value p- Freedom value (.05 level) value 3 6.314 7.815 .097 While there is a difference between transfer and native students’ (status) withdrawal percentages, the dif- ference is not significant. This is supported by the fact that the p-value (.097) is greater than the level of signif- icance (.05) and the Chi Square value (6.314) is less than the critical Chi Square value (7.815). Thus, there is no significant difference based on status and Null Hypothesis Seven cannot be rejected. WM Do course withdrawal percentages of transfer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students? The data presented in Table 22 show a difference between transfer and native marketing students’ percentages of course withdrawals. Null Hypothesis Seven cannot, however, be rejected. Thus, the answer to Research Question 135 Seven is that course withdrawal percentages of transfer marketing students do differ, but not significantly so, from those of native marketing students. Null Hypothesis Eight There are no significant differences in percentages of attrition between those of transfer marketing students and those of native marketing students during their junior and senior years at Ferris State College. Tables 67-68 in Appendix I provide source data for Tables 24-25. Table 24 presents the attrition numbers and percentages for transfer and native students (status) included in this study. Table 24. Attrition of Juniors and Seniors Status Transfer and Transfer Native Native Srueente 3111119an 511m Total Att. Att. Total Att. Att. Total Att. Att. No. No. % No. No. % No. No. % 69 15 21.7 86 12 14.0 155 27 17.4 It is noted that there is a difference between transfer students’ percentage of attrition (21.7%) and native students’ percentage of attrition (14.0%). 136 To test the significance of the difference the Chi Square test was used. Table 25 shows the results of this test. Table 25. Chi Square Test of Attrition of Juniors and Seniors critical Chi Square Degrees of Chi Square value p- Freedom value (.05 level) value 1 1.613 3.841 .204 While there is a difference between transfer and native students’ (status) attrition percentages, the dif- ference is not significant. This is evidenced by the fact that the p-value (.204) is greater than the level of signif- icance (.05) and the Chi Square value (1.613) is less than the critical Chi Square value (3.841). Thus, there is no significant difference based on status and Null Hypothesis Eight cannot be rejected. Want Do percentages of attrition of transfer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students? The data presented in Table 24 show a difference between transfer and native marketing students’ attrition 137 percentages. Null Hypothesis Eight cannot, however, be rejected. Thus, the answer to Research Question Eight is that attrition percentages of transfer marketing students do differ, but not significantly so, from those of native marketing students. Nu 1 othesis N ne There are no significant differences in percentages of attrition for selected rea- sons between those of transfer marketing students and those of native marketing stu- dents during their junior and senior years at Ferris State College. Tables 69-70 in Appendix I provide source data for Tables 26-27. Table 26 presents the numbers and percentages of reasons for attrition for all transfer and native stu- dents (status) included in this study. 138 Table 28. Reasons for Attrition of Juniors and Seniors Speppe Transfer and Transfer Native Native Students Students Students Att. Att. Att. Att. Att. Att. Att. Reason No. % No. % No. % Grades 5 33.3* 8 66.7* 13 48.2* Financial 5 33.3 2 16.7 7 25.9 Illness 1 6.7 0 0 1 3.7 Live at Home 1 6.7 0 0 1 3.7 Cur. Change 1 6 7 2 16.7 3 11.1 Unknown _g 13,3 _Q 0 _2 7 15 100.0 12 100.0** 27 100.0 * Column percent **Values actually add to 100.1% because of rounding each percent to nearest one-tenth It is noted that there is a difference between transfer and native students in the numbers and percentages for each of the six attrition reasons studied. It is also noted that grades accounted for an overwhelmingly large percentage of the reasons for attrition. The remaining reasons were so few that they were grouped together to form more adequate numbers to test for significance by using the Chi Square test. Table 27 shows the results of this test. 139 Table 27. Chi Square Test of Reasons for Attrition by Grades Compared to Other Reasons for Attrition of Juniors and Seniors critical Chi'Square Degrees of Chi Square value p- Freedom value (.05 level) value 1 2.967 3.841 .085 While there is a difference between transfer and native students’ reasons for attrition, the difference is not significant. This is suggested by the fact that the p- value (.085) is greater than the level of significance (.05) and the Chi Square value (2.967) is less than the critical Chi Square value (3.841). Thus, there is no significant difference based on status and Null Hypothesis Nine cannot be rejected. Beeeanctjneetiondim Do percentages of attrition, for selected reasons, of transfer marketing students dif- fer from those of native marketing students? The data presented in Table 28 show a difference between transfer and native students’ reasons for attrition. Null Hypothesis Nine cannot, however, be rejected. Thus, the answer to Research Question Nine is that percentages of attrition for selected reasons, of transfer 140 marketing students do differ, but not significantly so, from those of native marketing students. W There are no significant differences in percentages of students on academic pro- bation between those of transfer marketing students and those of native marketing stu- dents during their junior and senior years at Ferris State College. Tables 71-72 in Appendix I provide source data for Tables 28-29. Table 28 presents the academic probation numbers and percentages for all transfer and native students (status) included in this study. Table 28. Juniors and Seniors on Academic Probation for Any One Quarter Statue Transfer and Transfer Native Native Students fitment-e Stodenta Total Pro. Pro. Total Pro. Pro. Total Pro. Pro. No. No. % No. No. % No. No. % 69 4 5.8 86 7 8.1 155 11 7.1 It is noted that there is a difference in probation percentages between transfer students (5.8%) and native students (8.1%). 141 To test the significance of the difference the Chi Square test was used. Table 29 shows the results of this test. Table 29. Chi Square Test of Juniors and Seniors on Academic Probation for Any One Quarter critical Chi Square Degrees of Chi Square value p- Freedom value (.05 level) value 1 .319 3.841 .572 While there is a difference between transfer and native students’ academic probation percentages, the dif- ference is not significant. This is indicated by the fact that the p-value (.572) is greater than the level of signif- icance (.05) and the Chi Square value (.319) is less than the critical Chi Square value (3.841). Thus, there is no significant difference based on academic probation percentages and Null Hypothesis Ten cannot be rejected. W Do academic probation percentages of trans- fer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students? The data presented in Table 28 show a difference between transfer and native marketing students’ academic 142 probation percentages. Null Hypothesis Ten cannot, however, be rejected. Thus, the answer to Research Question Ten is that academic probation percentages of transfer marketing students do differ, but not significantly so, from those of native marketing students. Nulljznothesiajlexen There are no significant differences in percentages of graduation from a bacca- laureate marketing curriculum between those of transfer marketing students and those of native marketing students at Ferris State College. Tables 73-74 in Appendix I provide source data for Tables 30-31. Table 30 presents the graduation numbers and percentages for transfer and native students (status) included in this study. Table 30. Seniors Who Graduated by Spring 1986 Statue Transfer and Transfer Native Native Students Students Students Total Grd. Grd. Total Grd. Grd. Total Grd. Grd. No. No. % No. No. % No. No. % 69 54 78.3 86 73 84.9 155 127 81.9 143 It is noted that there is a difference between transfer students’ percentage of graduation (78.3%) and native students’ percentage of graduation (84.9%). To test the significance of the difference the Chi Square test was used. Table 31 shows the results of this test. Table 31. Chi Square Test of Seniors Who Graduated by Spring 1986 critical Chi Square Degrees of Chi Square value p- Freedom value (.05 level) value 1 1.135 3.841 .287 While there is a difference between transfer and native students’ (status) graduation percentages, the dif- ference is not significant. This is supported by the fact that the p-value (.287) is greater than the level of signif- icance (.05) and the Chi Square value (1.135) is less than the critical Chi Square value (3.841). Thus, there is no significant difference based on status and Null Hypothesis Eleven cannot be rejected. Wiener; Do graduation percentages of transfer mar- keting students differ from those of native marketing students? 144 The data presented in Table 30 show a difference between transfer and native students’ graduation per- centages. Null Hypothesis Eleven cannot, however, be rejected. Thus, the answer to Research Question Eleven is that graduation percentages of transfer marketing students do differ, but not significantly so, from those of native marketing students. There are no significant differences in aca- demic accomplishments between those of male and female transfer marketing students and those of male and female native marketing students at Ferris State College. 0 w v Do academic accomplishments of male and female transfer marketing students differ from those of male and female native mar- keting students? Null Hypothesis Twelve will be tested and Research Question Twelve will be answered considering gender for each of the variables appearing in the preceeding eleven null hypotheses and research questions. Thus, Null Hypothesis Twelve and Research Question Twelve will each be numbered 12-1 through 12-11, variables considered. Tables ments female 12-1. Tables 32-33. of male transfer, native “1- - 53-54 in Appendix I provide source date for 145 male native, and sophomore grade point averages. female transfer, to coincide with each of the eleven Table 32 presents the academic accomplish- and students based on their cumulative freshman Table 32. Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Statistics by Gender Status Transfer and Transfer Native Native Gender Students Students Students Male Number 40 Number 48 Number 88 Mean 2.78 Mean 2.49 Mean 2.62 Std. Dev. .53 Std. Dev. .45 Std. Dev. .51 Female Number 27 Number 38 Number 65 Mean 2.87 Mean 2.90 Mean 2.89 Std. Dev. .49 Std. Dev. .47 Std. Dev. .47 It is apparent that there is a difference between male transfer students’ college. students’ averages students’ (2.49) averages (2.78) and male native for their first two years of There is also a difference between female transfer ages (2.90) for the same period of time. averages (2.87) and female native students’ aver- 146 To test the significance of the differences the analysis of variance test was used. Table 33 shows the results of this test. Table 33. Analysis of Variance Test of Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Averages by Gender Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean F ratio critical p- Variation Squares Freedom Square value F value value (.05 level) Gender- Status .921 1 .921 3.94 3.84 .049 Here the p-value (.049) is less than the level of significance (.05) and the F ratio value (3.94) is greater than the critical F value (3.84). These values for this part of the set of data show a significant interaction and Null Hypothesis 12-1 is rejected. The data presented in Table 32 show a significant difference in academic accomplishments when comparing cumu- lative freshman and sophomore grade point averages between male transfer and male native students, and between female transfer and female native students. Null Hypothesis 12-1 is rejected. Thus, the answer to Research Question 12-1 is that academic accomplishments of transfer marketing students, by gender, do differ significantly from those of native mar- keting students when based on their cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point averages. 147 12-2. G d P t Ave u - LexeLMaflsetinsmraea Grades for all selected lower-level marketing courses taken by students included in this study were used in calculating grade point averages for the four selected lower-level marketing courses. Tables 55-56 in Appendix I provide source data for Tables 34-35. Table 34 presents the academic accomplishments of male transfer, male native, female transfer, and female native students based on their grade point averages in four selected lower-level marketing courses. Table 34. Grade Point Statistics by Gender for Four Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses Status Transfer and Transfer Native Native Gender Students Students Students Male Number 39 Number 48 Number 87 Mean 2.68 Mean 2.43 Mean 2.54 Std. Dev. .69 Std. Dev. .55 Std. Dev. .63 Female Number 27 Number 38 Number 65 Mean 2.75 Mean 2.69 Mean 2.71 Std. Dev. .74 Std. Dev. .56 Std. Dev. .84 It is apparent that there is a difference between male transfer students’ averages (2.68) and male native students’ averages (2.43) for the four selected lower-level marketing courses. There is also a difference between female transfer students’ averages (2.75) and female native students’ averages (2.69) for the same courses. 148 To test the significance of the differences the analysis of variance test was used. Table 35 shows the results of this test. Table 35. Analysis of Variance Test Of Grade Point Averages by Gender for Four Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean F ratio critical p- Variation Squares Freedom Square value F value value (.05 level) Gender- Status .333 l .333 .84 3.84 .360 Here the p-value (.360) is greater then the level of significance (.05) and the F ratio value (.84) is less than the critical F value (3.84). These values for this part of the set of data show no significant interaction and Null Hypothesis 12-2 cannot be rejected. 4 The data presented in Table 34 show a difference in academic accomplishments when comparing grades earned in selected lower-level marketing courses between male transfer and male native students, and between female transfer and female native students. Null Hypothesis 12-2 cannot, how- ever, be rejected. Thus, the answer to Research Question 12-2 is that academic accomplishments of transfer marketing students, by gender, do differ, but not significantly so, from those of native marketing students when based on their grade point averages earned in selected lower-level marketing courses. Tables 38-37. of male transfer, 12-3. Amazes Tables male native, 149 female transfer, What 57-58 in Appendix I provide source data for Table 38 presents the academic accomplishment and female native students based on their cumulative junior and senior grade point averages. Table 36. Cumulative Junior and Senior Grade Point Statistics by Gender firerge Transfer and Transfer Native Native Gender Students Students Students Male Number 40 Number 48 Number 88 Mean 2.58 Mean 2.45 Mean 2.51 Std. Dev. .53 Std. Dev. .45 Std. Dev. .49 Female Number 27 Number 38 Number 85 Mean 2.57 Mean 2.79 Mean 2.69 Std. Dev. .57 Std. Dev. .47 Std. Dev. .52 It is apparent that there is a difference between male transfer students’ averages (2.58) and male native students’ averages (2.45) for their last two years of college. There is also a difference between female transfer students’ averages (2.57) and female native students’ averages (2.79) for the same period of time. To test the significance of the differences the analysis of variance test was used. Table 37 shows the results of this test. 150 Table 37. Analysis of Variance Test of Cumulative Junior and Senior Grade Point Averages by Gender Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean F ratio critical p- Variation Squares Freedom Square value F value value ' (.05 level) Gender- Status 1.102 1 1.102 4.42 3.84 .037 Here the p-value (.037) is less than the level of significance (.05) and the F ratio value (4.42) is greater than the critical F value (3.84). These values for this part of the set of data show a significant interaction and Null Hypothesis 12-3 is rejected. The data presented in Table 36 show a significant difference in academic accomplishments when comparing cumu- lative junior and senior grade point averages between male transfer and male native students, and between female trans- fer and female native students. Null Hypothesis 12-3 is rejected. Thus, the answer to Research Question 12-3 is that academic accomplishments of transfer marketing students, by gender, do differ significantly from those of native mar- keting students when based on their cumulative junior and senior grade point averages. 151 12-4. Differences in Cpppletive Freehpep epd o o r v r s d Gr Year Tables 59-60 in Appendix I provide source data for Tables 38-39. Table 38 presents the academic accomplish- ments of male transfer, male native, female transfer, and female native students based on their differences between cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point averages and the first quarter junior averages. Table 38. Differences in Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Statistics and Grade Point Statistics for First Quarter of Junior Year by Gender Stetpe Transfer and Transfer Native Native Gender Students Students Students Male Number 40 Number 48 Number 88 Mean -.28 Mean .12 Mean -.06 Std. Dev. .70 Std. Dev. .52 Std. Dev. .63 Female Number 26 Number 38 Number 84 Mean -.20 Mean -.18 Mean -.19 Std. Dev. .52 Std. Dev. .59 Std. Dev. .56 It is apparent that there is a difference in the changes in the averages of male transfer students (-.28) and male native students’ changes (.12) between their first two years of college and the first quarter of their junior year. There is also a difference in the change in the averages of female transfer students (-.20) and female native students (-.18) for the same comparison. 152 To test the significance of the changes the analysis of variance test was used. Table 39 shows the results of this test. Table 39. Analysis of Variance Test Of Differences in Cumu- lative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Aver- ages and Grade Point Averages for First Quarter of Junior Year by Gender Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean F ratio critical p- Variation Squares Freedom Square value F value value (.05 level) Gender- Status 1.304 1 1.304 3.76 3.84 .054 Here the p-value (.054) is greater than the level of significance (.05) and the F ratio value (3.76) is less than the critical F value (3.84). These values for this part of the set of data show no significant interaction and Null Hypothesis 12-4 cannot be rejected. The data presented in Table 38 show a difference in the change of cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point averages compared with the first quarter junior averages between male transfer and male native, and female transfer and female native students. Null Hypothesis 12-4 cannot, however, be rejected. Thus, the answer to Research Question 12-4 is that academic accomplishments of transfer marketing students, by gender, do differ, but not significantly so, from those of native marketing students when based on changes of grade 153 point averages between cumulative freshman and sophomore years and the first quarter of the junior year. 12-5. d t ve F - Wee: Grades for all selected upper-level marketing courses taken by students included in this study were used in calculating grade point averages for the five selected upper-level marketing courses. Tables 61-62 in Appendix I provide source data for Tables 40-41. Table 40 presents the academic accomplishments of male transfer, male native, female transfer, and female native students based on their grade point averages in five selected upper-level marketing courses. Table 40. Grade Point Statistics of Juniors and Seniors by Gender for Five Selected Upper-Level Marketing Courses $15125 Transfer and Transfer Native Native Gender Students Students Students Male Number 36 Number 43 Number 79 Mean 2.35 Mean 2.36 Mean 2.35 Std. Dev. .53 Std. Dev. .47 Std. Dev. .49 Female Number 21 Number 36 Number 57 Mean 2.45 Mean 2.59 Mean 2.54 Std. Dev. .64 Std. Dev. .57 Std. Dev. .59 It is apparent that there is a slight difference between male transfer students’ averages (2.35) and male native students’ averages (2.36) for the five selected 154 upper-level marketing courses. There is also a difference between female transfer students’ averages (2.45) and female native students’ averages (2.59) for the same courses. To test the significance of the differences the analysis of variance test was used. Table 41 shows the results of this test. Table 41. Analysis of Variance Test of Grade Point Averages of Juniors and Seniors by Gender for Five Selected Upper-Level Marketing Courses Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean F ratio critical p- Variation Squares Freedom Square value F value value (.05 level) Gender- Status .142 1 .142 .48 3.84 .488 Here the p-value (.488) is greater than the level of significance (.05) and the F ratio value (.48) is less than the critical F value (3.84). The values for this part of the set of data show no significant interaction and Null Hypothesis 12-5 cannot be rejected. The data presented in Table 40 show a difference in academic accomplishments when comparing grades earned in selected upper-level marketing courses between male transfer and male native students, and between female transfer and female native students. Null Hypothesis 12-5 cannot, how- ever, be rejected. Thus, the answer to Research Question 12-5 is that academic accomplishments of transfer marketing students, by 155 gender, do differ, but not significantly so, from those of native marketing students when based on their grade point averages earned in selected upper-level marketing courses. 12-6- WW v Mark Cou es of Tra r St 0 H k Selec d o r- ev l rk tin our e t Col e es Other T n Fe St t o N v u t w - v Windlass Grades for all selected upper-level marketing courses taken by students included in this study were used in calculating grade point averages for the five selected upper-level marketing courses. Likewise, students must have taken at least three of four selected lower-level marketing courses at a regionally accredited college other than Ferris State College or three of four selected lower-level mar- keting courses at Ferris State College to be included in the calculations. Tables 63-64 in Appendix I provide source data for Tables 42-43. Table 42 presents the academic accomplishments based on their grade point averages in five selected upper-level marketing courses for male and female transfer students who had taken lower-level marketing courses at regionally accredited colleges other than Ferris State College and for male and female native students who had taken lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College. 156 Table 42. Grade Point Statistics of Juniors and Seniors by Gender for Five Selected Upper-Level Marketing Courses of Transfer Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses at Col- leges Other Than Ferris State College and of Native Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower- Level Marketing Courses at Ferris State College £33335 Transfer and Transfer Native Native Gender Students Students Students Male Number 10 Number 39 Number 49 Mean 2.42 Mean 2.34 Mean 2.35 Std. Dev. .64 Std. Dev. .49 Std. Dev. .52 Female Number 8 Number 35 Number 43 Mean 2.53 Mean 2.59 Mean 2.58 Std. Dev. .72 Std. Dev. .57 Std. Dev. .60 It is apparent that there is a difference in grade point averages earned in five selected upper-level marketing courses between male transfer students (2.42) who had taken lower-level marketing courses at other colleges and male native students (2.34) who had taken lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College. There is also a difference in grade point averages in five selected upper-level marketing courses between female transfer students (2.53) who had taken lower-level marketing courses at other colleges and female native stu- dents (2.59) who had taken lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College. 157 To test the significance of the differences the analysis of variance test was used. Table 43 shows the results of this test. Table 43. Analysis of Variance Test of Grade Point Aver- ages of Juniors and Seniors by Gender for Five Selected Upper-Level Marketing Courses of Trans- fer Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses at Colleges Other Than Ferris State College and of Native Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses at Ferris State College Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean F ratio critical p- Variation Squares Freedom Square value F value value (.05 level) Gender- Status .068 1 .068 .22 3.84 .643 Here the p-value (.643) is greater than the level of significance (.05) and the F ratio value (.22) is less than the critical F value (3.84). The values for this part of the set of data show no significant interaction and Null Hypothesis 12-6 cannot be rejected. The data presented in Table 42 show a difference in academic accomplishments when comparing grade point averages of upper-level marketing courses between male transfer stu- dents who completed lower-level marketing courses at other colleges and male native students who completed lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College, and between female transfer students who completed lower-level marketing courses at other colleges and female native students who 158 completed lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College. Null Hypothesis 12-6 cannot, however, be rejected. Thus, the answer to Research Question 12-6 is that academic accomplishments of transfer marketing students, by gender, do differ, but not significantly so, from those of native marketing students when based on their grade point averages of upper-level marketing courses for transfer stu- dents who took lower-level marketing courses at other regionally accredited colleges in comparison to native stu- dents who took lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College. 12-7. our e t we J 0 Tables 65-66 in Appendix I provide source data for Tables 44-45. Table 44 presents the academic accomplishments of male transfer, male native, female transfer, and female native students based on their percentages of course withdrawals for each of the four categories of numbers presented. 159 Table 44. Course Withdrawals of Juniors and Seniors by Gender Speppe Transfer and Transfer .Native Native Number of Students Students Students Courses Gender Withdrawn Number % Number % Number % Male 0 14 34.2* 11 22.9* 25 28.1* 1 10 24.4 8 16.7 18 20.2 2 6 14.6 13 27.1 19 21.4 3 or more 11 23,8 .13 33,3 31 33,3 41 100.0 48 100.0 89 100.0 Female 0 11 39.3* 15 39.5* 26 39.4* 1 6 21.4 4 10.5 10 15.2 2 4 14.3 13 34.2 17 25.8 3 or more _1 23.9 _§ _l§t§ 13 .12t1 28 100.0 38 100.0 66 100.0** * Column percent **Values actually add to 100.1% because of rounding each percent to nearest one-tenth It is apparent that there is a difference in the course withdrawal percentages between male transfer students and male native students in each of the four categories of course withdrawal numbers presented. There is also a dif- ference between female transfer students and female native students in each of the four categories of course withdrawal numbers presented. To test the significance of the differences the Chi Square test was used. Table 45 shows the results of this test. 160 Table 45. Chi Square Test of Course Withdrawals of Juniors and Seniors by Gender critical Chi Square Degrees of Chi Square value p- Gender Freedom value (.05 level) value Male 3 3.559 7.815 .313 Female 3 4.444 7.815 .217 Here the p-value for males (.313) is greater than the level of significance (.05) and the Chi Square value (3.559) is less than the critical Chi Square value (7.815). These values for this part of the set of data do not show a significant interaction. The p-value for females (.217) is also greater than the level of significance (.05) and the Chi Square value (4.444) is less than the critical Chi Square value (7.815). These values do not show a significant interaction. Thus, the above data show that Null Hypothesis 12-7 cannot be rejected. The data presented in Table 44 show a difference in academic accomplishments when comparing course withdrawal percentages between male transfer and male native students and between female transfer and female native students. Null Hypothesis 12-7 cannot, however, be rejected. Thus, the answer to Research Question 12-7 is that academic accomplishments of transfer marketing students, by gender, do differ, but not significantly so, from those of 161 native marketing students when based on their percentages of course withdrawals. 12-8. tri on o J ‘o r Tables 67-68 in Appendix I provide source data for Tables 46-47. Table 46 presents the academic accomplishments of male transfer, male native, female transfer, and female native students based on their attrition numbers and percentages. Table 46. Attrition of Juniors and Seniors by Gender Statue Transfer and Transfer Native Native Sundenta Students Students Total Att. Att. Total Att. Att. Total Att. Att. Gender No. No. % No. No. % No. No. % Male 41 7 17.1 48 9 18.8 89 16 18.0 Female 28 8 28.6 38 3 7.9 66 11 16.7 It is apparent that there is a difference in attrition percentages between male transfer students (17.1%) and male native students (18.8%). There is also a difference in attrition between female transfer students (28.6%) and female native students (7.9%). 162 To test the significance of the differences the Chi Square test was used. Table 47 shows the results of this test. Table 47. Chi Square Test of Attrition of Juniors and Seniors by Gender critical Chi Square Degrees of Chi Square value p- Gender Freedom value (.05 level) value Male 1 .042 3.841 .837 Female 1 4.962 3.841 .026 Here the p-value for males (.837) is greater than the level of significance (.05) and the Chi Square value (.042) is less than the critical Chi Square value (3.841). These values for this part of the set of data do not show a significant interaction and Null Hypothesis 12-8 for males cannot be rejected. The p-value for females, however, (.026) is less than the level of significance (.05) and the Chi Square value (4.962) is greater than the critical Chi Square value (3.841). These values for this part of the set of data do show a significant interaction and Null Hypothesis 12-8 for females is rejected. 163 The data presented in Table 46 show differences in academic accomplishments when comparing attrition between male transfer and male native students, and between female transfer and female native students. . Null Hypothesis 12-8 cannot, however, be rejected for male students while it can be rejected for female students. Thus, the answer to Research Question 12-8 is that academic accomplishments based on attrition of male transfer marketing students do differ, but not significantly so, from those of male native marketing students, while the accom- plishments of female transfer marketing students based on attrition do differ significantly from those of female native marketing students. 12-9. r o J 0 Table 69 in Appendix I provides data for Table 48. Table 48 presents the numbers and 'percentages of reasons for attrition of male transfer, male native, female transfer, and female native students. 184 Table 48. Reasons for Attrition of Juniors and Seniors by Gender Speppe Transfer and Transfer Native Native Students Smdents Students Att . Att . Att . Att . Att . Att . Att . Gender Reason No. % No. % No. % Male Grades 1 14.3* 7 77.8* 8 50.0* Financial 4 57.1 2 22.2 6 37.5 Illness 0 0 0 0 0 0 Live at Home 1 14.3 0 0 1 6.3 Cur. Change 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unknown 1, 14,3 Q 0 _1 8,3 7 100.0 9 100.0 16 100.03: Female Grades 4 50.0* 1 33.3* 5 45.5* Financial 1 12.5 0 0 1 9.1 Illness 1 12.5 0 0 1 9.1 Live at Home 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cur. Change 1 12.5 2 68.7 3 27.3 Unknown 1 12.5 3 Q _1 3,1 8 100.0 3 100.0 11 100.0** * Column percent **Values actually add to 100.1% because of rounding each percent to nearest one-tenth It is apparent that there is a difference in reasons for attrition between male transfer students and male native students, and between female transfer students and female native students for each of the reasons selected. Again, since grades were the predominant reason for attrition, they were compared with all other reasons com- bined in testing the significance of the differences. The expected values are, however, too low to furnish adequate 165 support for the Chi Square test. Therefore, the Chi Square test of Null Hypothesis 12-9 cannot be performed. The data presented in Table 48 show differences in reasons for attrition between male transfer and male native students, and between female transfer and female native students. Since Null Hypothesis 12-9 cannot, however, be tested it is inappropriate to answer statistically Research Question 12-9. 112-10. W JunioLLanLSeniors Tables 71-72 in Appendix I provide source data for Tables 49-50. Table 49 presents the academic accomplishments of male transfer, male native, female transfer, and female native students based on their academic probation numbers and percentages. Table 49. Juniors and Seniors by Gender on Academic Probation for Any One Quarter 313135 Transfer and Transfer Native Native Students Students Students Total Pro. Pro. Total Pro. Pro. Total Pro. Pro. Gender No. No. % No. No. % No. No. % Male 41 2 4.9 48 7 14.8 89 9 10.1 Female 28 2 7.1 38 0 0 86 2 3.0 166 It is apparent that there is a difference in pro- bation percentages between male transfer students (4.9%) and male native students (14.6%). There is also a difference in probation between female transfer students (7.1%) and female native students (0.0%). To test the significance of the differences the Chi Square test was used. The expected values for females, however, are too low to furnish adequate support for the Chi Square test for that grouping. Therefore, the Chi Square test for females in Null Hypothesis 12-10 cannot be per- formed. Table 50 shows the results of the Chi Square test for males. Table 50. Chi Square Test of Male Juniors and Seniors on Academic Probation for Any One Quarter critical Chi Square Degrees of Chi Square value p- Gender Freedom value (.05 level) value Male 1 2.291 3.841 .130 Here the p-value (.130) is greater then the level of significance (.05) and the Chi Square value (2.291) is less than the critical Chi Square value (3.841). These values for this part of the set of data show no significant interaction and Null Hypothesis 12-10 for males cannot be rejected. 167 The data presented in Table 49 show differences in academic accomplishments when comparing academic probation between male transfer and male native students, and between female transfer and female native students. Null Hypothesis 12-10 cannot, however, be rejected for male students. Thus, the answer to Research Question 12-10 is that academic accomplishments of male transfer marketing students do differ, but not significantly so, from those of male native marketing students when based on their percentages of academic probation. Since Null Hypothesis 12-10 for females cannot be tested, it is inappropriate to answer statis- tically Research Question 12-10 for females. 12-11. W Tables 73-74 in Appendix I provide source data for Tables 51-52. Table 51 presents the academic accomplishments of male transfer, male native, female transfer, and female native students based on their graduation numbers and percentages. 168 Table 51. Seniors by Gender Who Graduated by Spring 1988 Statue Transfer Native All Students Studente Students Total Grd. Grd. Total Grd. Grd. Total Grd. Grd. Gender No. No. % No. No. % No. No. % Male 41 34 82.9 48 38 79.2 89 72 80.9 Female 28 20 71.4 38 35 92.1 66 55 83.3 It is apparent that there is a difference in graduation percentages between male transfer students (82.9%) and male native students (79.2%). There is also a difference in graduation percentages between female transfer students (71.4%) and female native students (92.1%). To test the significance of the differences the Chi Square test was used. Table 52 shows the results of this test. Table 52. Chi Square Test of Seniors by Gender Who Graduated by Spring 1986 critical Chi Square Degrees of Chi Square value p- Gender Freedom value (.05 level) value Male 1 .202 3.841 .653 Female 1 4.962 3.841 .026 169 Here the p-value for males (.853) is greater than the level of significance (.05) and the Chi Square value (.202) is less than the critical Chi Square value (3.841). These values for this part of the set of data show no sig- nificant interaction and Null Hypothesis 12-11 for males cannot be rejected. The p-value for females, however, (.026) is less than the level of significance (.05) and the Chi Square value (4.962) is greater than the critical Chi Square value (3.841). These values do show a significant interaction and Null Hypothesis 12-11 for females is rejected. The data presented in Table 51 show differences in academic accomplishments when comparing graduation percent- ages between male transfer and male native students, and between female transfer and female native students. Null Hypothesis 12-11 cannot, however, be rejected for male stu- dents while it can be rejected for female students. Thus, the answer to Research Question 12-11 is that academic accomplishments based on graduation percentages of male transfer marketing students do differ, but not signif- icantly so, from those of male native marketing students, while the academic accomplishments of female transfer mar- keting students based on graduation percentages do differ significantly from those of female native marketing stu- dents. CHAPTER V FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Findings Twelve research questions were considered in this study. A null hypothesis was developed to accompany each research question. Thus the answer to each research question was based on test results of the appropriate null hypothesis. The research questions are now answered by referring to their accompanying null hypothesis test. BoeearoLQuestionJlne Do grade point averages of college freshman and sophomore transfer marketing students differ from those of native marketing stu- dents? The answer to Research Question One was that grade point averages of college freshman and sophomore transfer marketing students differed, but not significantly so, from those of native marketing students. The cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point average of transfer students was 2.82, compared to 2.67 for native students. An analysis of variance test for Null Hypothesis One suggested, however, that this difference was not significant at the .05 confidence level. 170 171 W Do grade point averages of transfer mar- keting students differ from those of native marketing students for selected lower-level marketing courses? The answer to Research Question Two was that grade point averages of transfer marketing students differed, but not significantly so, from those of native marketing stu- dents for selected lower-level marketing courses. The grade point average of transfer students was 2.71 for selected lower-level marketing courses, compared to 2.54 for native students. An analysis of variance test for Null Hypothesis Two indicated, however, that this difference was not significant at the .05 confidence level. Boeearenfiuestionlhnee Do grade point averages of college junior and senior transfer marketing students dif- fer from those of native marketing students? The answer to Research Question Three was that grade point averages of college junior and senior transfer mar- keting students differed, but not significantly so, from those of native marketing students. The cumulative junior and senior grade point average of transfer students was 2.57, compared to 2.60 for native students. An analysis of variance test for Null Hypothesis Three suggested, however, that this difference was not sig- nificant at the .05 confidence level. 172 W Do students experience transfer shock after transferring to a baccalaureate marketing curriculum at Ferris State College? The answer to Research Question Four was that stu- dents did experience transfer shock after transferring to a baccalaureate marketing curriculum at Ferris State College. The grade point average for the first quarter of the junior year for transfer students averaged .25 less than their cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point aver- ages, compared to only .02 less for native students. An analysis of variance test for Null Hypothesis Four indicated that this difference was significant at the .05 confidence level. Researohfiueetionlixe Do grade point averages of transfer mar- keting students differ from those of native marketing students for selected upper-level marketing courses? The answer to Research Question Five was that grade point averages of transfer marketing students differed, but not significantly so, from those of native marketing stu- dents for selected upper-level marketing courses. The grade point average of transfer students was 2.39 for selected upper-level marketing courses, compared to 2.46 for native students. An analysis of variance test for 173 Null Hypothesis Five suggested, however, that this dif- ference was not significant at the .05 confidence level. Re a c Do grade point averages of students for selected upper-level marketing courses, who took selected lower-level marketing courses at other regionally accredited colleges, differ from those of students who took selected lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College? The answer to Research Question Six was that grade point averages of students for selected upper-level mar- keting courses, who took selected lower-level marketing courses at other regionally accredited colleges differed, but not significantly so, from those of students who took selected lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College. The grade point average of transfer students for selected upper-level marketing courses, who took selected lower-level marketing courses at colleges other than Ferris State College, was 2.47 compared to 2.46 for native students who took the lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College. An analysis of variance test for Null Hypothesis Six indicated, however, that this difference was not signif- icant at the .05 confidence level. 174 Beseamhfiueatim Do course withdrawal percentages of transfer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students? The answer to Research Question Seven was that course withdrawal percentages of transfer marketing students differed, but not significantly so, from those of native marketing students. Approximately 36 percent of transfer students com- pared to 30 percent of native students withdrew from no courses, 23 percent of transfer students compared to 14 percent of native students withdrew from one course, 15 percent of transfer students compared to 30 percent of native students withdrew from two courses, and 26 percent of transfer as well as native students withdrew from three or more courses during their junior and senior years at Ferris State College. A Chi Square test for Null Hypothesis Seven suggested, however, that these differences were not signif- icant at the .05 confidence level. Besoarehjuestimdisht Do percentages of attrition of transfer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students? The answer to Research Question Eight was that attrition percentages of transfer marketing students dif- fered, but not significantly so, from those of native mar- keting students. 175 The attrition of transfer students was 21.7 percent compared to 14.0 percent for native students. A Chi Square test for Null Hypothesis Eight indicated, however, that this difference was not significant at the .05 confidence level. WW Do percentages of attrition, for selected reasons, of transfer marketing students dif- fer from those of native marketing stu- dents? The answer to Research Question Nine was that percentages of attrition for selected reasons, of transfer marketing students differed, but not significantly so, from those of native marketing students. Selected reasons for attrition included grades, financial, illness, live at home, curriculum change, and unknown. Grades accounted for the major reason for attrition. The remaining reasons were so few that they were grouped together to test for significance. While the per- centages of transfer students withdrawing from Ferris State College for each reason were different from those for native students, a Chi Square test of Null Hypothesis Nine sug- gested, however, that these differences were not significant at the .05 confidence level. 176 Besoerehjuoetionlen Do academic probation percentages of trans- fer marketing students differ from those of native marketing students? The answer to Research Question Ten was that aca- demic probation percentages of transfer marketing students differed, but not significantly so, from those of native marketing students. Approximately 8 percent of native students, compared to 6 percent of transfer students were on academic pro- bation for at least one quarter of their junior and senior years at Ferris State College. A Chi Square test for Null Hypothesis Ten indicated, however, that this difference was not significant at the .05 confidence level. WM Do graduation percentages of transfer mar- keting students differ from those of native marketing students? The answer to Research Question Eleven was that graduation percentages of transfer marketing students dif- fered, but not significantly so, from those of native mar- keting students. Approximately 78 percent of transfer students, compared to 85 percent of native students, graduated. A Chi Square test for Null Hypothesis Eleven suggested, however, that this difference was not significant at the .05 con- fidence level. 177 Research Question Twelve Do academic accomplishments of male and female transfer marketing students differ from those of male and female native mar- keting students? Research Question Twelve considers gender for each of the variables which apppeared in the preceding eleven research questions. Thus, Research Question Twelve will be numbered 12-1 through 12-11, to coincide with each of the eleven variables considered. No statistical test could be performed on reasons for attrition considered in Research Question 12-9. Academic accomplishments of transfer marketing stu- dents, by gender, differed significantly from those of native marketing students based on the following: 12-1. Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Averages ’ The cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point average of male transfer students was 2.78, compared to 2.49 for male native students, and 2.87 for female transfer students, compared to 2.90 for female native students. 12-3. umulat'v unior d n or Grade Po' t W The cumulative junior and senior grade point aver- age of male transfer students was 2.58, compared to 2.45 for male native students, and 2.57 for female transfer students, compared to 2.79 for female native students. 178 12-8. Attrition of Female Juniors and Seniors The attrition of female transfer students was 28.6 percent, compared to 7.9 percent for female native students. 12-11. Female Seniors Who Graduated by Spring 1986 The graduation of female transfer students was 71.4 percent, compared to 92.1 percent for female native stu- dents. Academic accomplishments of transfer marketing stu- dents, by gender, differed, but not significantly so, from those of native marketing students based on the following: 12-2. Grade Point Averages for Four Selected Lower-Level Market1ng Courses The grade point average of male transfer students was 2.68, compared to 2.43 for male native students, and 2.75 for female transfer students, compared to 2.89 for female native students for selected lower-level marketing courses . 12-4. Differences in Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Averages and Grade Point Averages ef F1rep Qparter of Jun1er leer The grade point average for the first quarter of the junior year for male transfer students averaged .28 less, compared to .12 greater for male native students, and .20 less for female transfer students, compared to .18 less for female native students, than their cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point averages. 179 12-5. Grade Point Averages for Five Selected Upper- Level Marketing Courses The grade point average of male transfer students was 2.35, compared to 2.36 for male native students, and 2.45 for female transfer students,. compared to 2.59 for female native students for selected upper-level marketing courses. 12-6. ra e Po nt Avera es or Five elec Upper-Level Marketing Courses of Transfer Students Who Hed Taken Selected Lower-Level Merketing Courses at Colleges Other Thep Ferris State College, and of Netive Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower-Leve1 Merketing Course at F rris S at l e e The grade point average of male transfer students for selected upper-level marketing courses, who took selected lower-level marketing courses at colleges other than Ferris State College, was 2.42, compared to 2.34 for male native students who took the lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College. The grade point average of female transfer students for selected upper-level marketing courses, who took selected lower-level marketing courses at colleges other than Ferris State College, was 2.53, compared to 2.59 for female native students who took the lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College. 12-7. ur W w J ors and en 0 Approximately 34 percent of male transfer students, compared to 23 percent of male native students, withdrew from no courses; 24 percent of male transfer students, compared to 17 percent of male native students, withdrew 180 from one course; 15 percent of male transfer students, com- pared to 27 percent of male native students, withdrew from two courses; and 27 percent of male transfer students, compared to 33 percent of male native students, withdrew from three or more courses. Approximately 39 percent of female transfer stu- dents, compared to 40 percent of female native students, withdrew from no courses; 21 percent of female transfer students, compared to 11 percent of female native students, withdrew from one course; 14 percent of female transfer students, compared to 34 percent of female native students, withdrew from two courses; and 25 percent of female transfer students, compared to 16 percent of female native students, withdrew from three or more courses. 12-8. Attrition of Male Juniors and Seniore The attrition of male transfer students was 17.1 percent, compared to 18.8 percent for male native students. 12-10. Academic Probation for An One arter of Juniors and Seniors Approximately 5 percent of male transfer students, compared to 15 percent of male native students, were on academic probation for at least one quarter of their junior and senior years. No statistical test could be performed on female students’ probation percentages. 12-11. Mele Seniors Who Graduated by Spring 1986 The graduation of male transfer students was 82.9 percent, compared to 79.2 percent for male native students. 181 Winding: It is thus noted that, based on tests of significant differences used in this study, there is no significant difference between transfer marketing students and native marketing students when comparing (1) cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point averages in Null Hypothesis One, (2) grade point averages of lower-level marketing courses in Null Hypothesis Two, (3) cumulative junior and senior grade point averages in Null Hypothesis Three, (4) grade point averages of upper-level marketing courses in Null Hypothesis Five, (5) grade point averages of upper-level marketing courses of those who took lower-level marketing courses at two-year institutions, with those who took lower- level marketing courses at Ferris State College in Null Hypothesis Six, (6) course withdrawal percentages in Null Hypothesis Seven, (7) attrition percentages in Null Hypoth- esis Eight, (8) reasons for attrition in Null Hypothesis Nine, (9) academic probation percentages in Null Hypoth- esis Ten, and (10) graduation percentages in Null Hypoth- esis Eleven. The only significant difference found between trans- fer and native marketing students was in Null Hypothesis Four, where transfer students suffered a greater decrease in grade point averages for the first quarter of the junior year from that of their cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point averages, than did native students. The 182 following findings were typical of transfer marketing students’ academic achievement: 1. At Two-Year College Similar cumulative grade point averages to those of native marketing students Similar grade point averages in lower-level marketing courses to those of native mar- keting students At Ferris State College a. Greater decrease in grades during first quarter of junior year, compared to cumu- lative freshman and sophomore grades, than that of native marketing students Increase in grades to a point ending very similar to those of native marketing stu- dents for cumulative grade point averages Similar grade point averages in upper-level marketing courses to those of native mar- keting students Similar course withdrawal percentages to those of native marketing students Similar attrition percentages to those of native marketing students Similar reasons for attrition to those of native marketing students Similar academic probation percentages to those of native marketing students 183 h. Similar graduation percentages to those of native marketing students While the only significant difference found between transfer and native (status) marketing students was the decrease in transfer students’ grade point average for the first quarter of the junior year compared to that of their cumulative freshman and sophomore years, the following dif- ferences appeared that were not significant: 1. Transfer students earned higher cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point averages than did native students. 2. Transfer students earned higher grade point averages in lower-level marketing courses than did native students. 3. Native students earned higher cumulative junior and senior grade point averages than did transfer students. 4. Native students earned higher grade point aver- ages in upper-level marketing courses than did transfer students. 5. Transfer students who took lower-level marketing courses at two-year colleges earned higher grade point aver- ages in upper-level marketing courses than did native stu- dents who took lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College. 6. Native students had higher percentages of course withdrawals than did transfer students during their junior and senior years. 184 7. Transfer students had higher attrition per- centages than did native students during their junior or senior years. 8. Native students withdrew from college for poor grades in greater percentages during their junior or senior years than did transfer students. 9. Transfer students withdrew from college for financial reasons in greater percentages during their junior or senior years than did native students. 10. Native students had higher academic probation percentages during their junior and senior years than did transfer students. 11. Native students had higher graduation percent- ages than did transfer students. It is also noted that, by tests of significant differences used in this study, there is‘ a significant difference between transfer students and native students, based on gender, in (1) cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point averages, (2) cumulative junior and senior grade point averages, (3) attrition percentages of female students, and (4) graduation percentages of female students. 185 The following findings were thus typical of male- female students’ academic achievement: 1. Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Averages a. Male transfer students earned higher cumu- lative freshman and sophomore grade point averages than did male native students. b. Female native students earned higher cumu- lative freshman and sophomore grade point averages than did female transfer students. 2. Cumulative Junior and Senior Grade Point Aver- ages a. Male transfer students earned higher cumu- lative junior and senior grade point aver- ages than did male native students. b. Female native students earned higher cumu- lative junior and senior grade point aver- ages than did female transfer students. 3. Attrition Percentages of Female Students Female transfer students had higher attrition percentages than did female native students. 4. Graduation Percentages of Female Students Female native students had higher graduation percentages than did female transfer students. Differences that were not significant were found between transfer and native marketing students, based on gender, in (1) grade point averages in lower-level marketing 186 courses, (2) cumulative grade point average for first two years of college compared to that of first quarter of junior year, (3) grade point averages in upper-level marketing courses, (4) grade point averages in upper-level marketing courses of those who took lower-level marketing courses at other colleges, compared with those who took lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College, (5) course with- drawal percentages, (6) attrition percentages of male stu- dents, (7) academic probation percentages of male students, and (8) graduation percentages of male students. These eight differences are as follows: 1. Grade Point Averages in Lower-Level Marketing Courses a. Male transfer students earned higher grade point averages in lower-level marketing courses than did male native students. b. Female transfer students earned higher grade point averages in lower-level marketing courses than did female native students. 2. Cumulative Grade Point Average for First Two Years of College Compared to That of First Quar- ter of Junior Year. a. Male transfer students’ grade point averages for the first quarter of the junior year were less than were their cumulative fresh- man and sophomore grade point averages, while male native students’ first quarter 187 junior grades were higher than were their cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point averages. b. Female transfer students’ grade point aver- ages for the first quarter of the junior year decreased more than did those of female native students from their cumulative fresh- man and sophomore grade point averages. Grade Point Averages in Upper-Level Marketing Courses a. Male native students earned higher grade point averages in upper-level marketing courses than did male transfer students. b. Female native students earned higher grade point averages in upper-level marketing courses than did female transfer students. Grade Point Averages in Upper-Level Marketing Courses of Those Who Took Lower-Level Marketing Courses at Other Colleges Compared With Those Who Took Lower-Level Marketing Courses at Ferris State College a. Male transfer students who took lower-level marketing courses at other colleges earned higher grade point averages in upper-level marketing courses than did male native stu- dents who took lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College. 188 b. Female native students who took lower-level marketing courses at Ferris State College earned higher grade point averages in upper- level marketing courses than did female transfer students who took lower-level mar- keting courses at other colleges. Course Withdrawal Percentages a. Male native students had higher course with- drawal percentages than did male transfer students. b. Female transfer students had higher course withdrawal percentages than did female native students. Attrition Percentages of Male Students Male native students had higher attrition per- centages than did male transfer students. Academic Probation Percentages of Male Students Male native students had higher probation per- centages than did male transfer students. Graduation Percentages of Male Students Male transfer students had [higher graduation percentages than did male native students. 189 Donoluaiona The general conclusion resulting from this study is that it matters little where students enroll for their first two years of college prior to enrolling in a baccalaureate marketing curriculum at Ferris State College for their last two years of study. This general conclusion is supported by the following specific conclusions: 1. Since transfer students and native students earn approximately the same cumulative grade point average (GPA) during their college freshman and sophomore years it is con- cluded that (a) transfer and native students have similar mental abilities, motivation and interests, and (b) two-year college course requirements and grading standards are simi- lar to those at Ferris State College (FSC). 2. Since transfer students typically take lower- level marketing courses at two-year colleges and native students take them during their last two years at FSC, coupled with the fact that transfer and native students earn approximately the same grades in these classes, it is con- cluded that academic and professional motivation, and the preparation and quality of faculty and students at two-year colleges are similar to those at FSC in like courses. 3. Since transfer students and native students earn approximately the same cumulative GPA’s during their college junior and senior years it is concluded that (a) again, transfer and native students have similar mental abilities, emotions and interests, (b) transfer students eventually 190 make adequate adjustments from two-year institutions to FSC, and (c) transfer students choose curricula in accordance with their interests and abilities. 4. Since there is a significant decrease from the cumulative GPA for the first two years of college to that of the first quarter of the junior year between transfer and native students, it is concluded that transfer students have difficulty in the initial transition to course requirements, grading systems, class sizes, personal adjustments, and/or other variables. 5. Since transfer students and native students earn approximately the same grades in upper-level marketing courses whether lower-level marketing courses are taken at two-year colleges or at FSC, it is concluded that (a) two- year colleges provide similar background preparation in gen- eral education and marketing as does FSC, (b) course prereq- uisites are being met by two-year colleges or prerequisites are not as important as thought to be by marketing educators at FSC, and (c) transfer students and native students can apply principles learned in lower-level marketing courses to upper-level courses similarly. 6. Since transfer students and native students withdraw from Ferris State College, from courses at FSC, and graduate from FSC by approximately the same percentages, it is concluded that transfer and native students have similar personal problems, abilities, interests, satisfaction, moti- vation, perseverance, and/or other characteristics. 191 7. Since transfer students withdraw from FSC for approximately the same reasons as do native students, it is concluded that transfer and native students (a) are equally prepared, adjusted and motivated, and (b) have simi- lar academic and personal experiences, and problems. 8. Since the percentage of transfer students on academic probation for at least one quarter during their junior and senior years at FSC is approximately equal to that of native students, it is concluded that (a) transfer and native students have similar ability, personal problems and prior academic preparation and accomplishments, and (b) the foregoing conclusions show uniformity of grading and administration of probation policy at FSC. 9. Since significant differences were found between transfer students and native students, based on gender, with (a) female native students earning higher cumulative GPA’s than did female transfer students during their college freshman and sophomore years as well as during their col- lege junior and senior years, (b) male transfer students earning higher cumulative GPA’s than did male native stu- dents during their college freshman and sophomore years as well as during their college junior and senior years, (c) female transfer students having higher attrition percentages than did female native students, and (d) female native students having higher graduation percentages than did female transfer students, it is concluded that gender must 192 also be considered in determining academic accomplishments of transfer and native students. 10. Since female transfer students have higher per- centages of attrition and lower percentages of graduation at FSC than do female native students, male transfer students, and male native students, it is concluded that female trans- fer students have lower academic achievement than do the other groups studied. Seaeuuendatione This study found the academic achievement of stu- dents who transfer to a marketing curriculum at Ferris State College, after graduating from a regionally accredited two- year institution, generally to compare favorably with the achievement of marketing students who enroll at Ferris State College as freshmen. Ferris State College thus should continue to 1. Accept courses from regionally accredited two- year colleges as the equivalent of like courses taught at Ferris State College. 2. Accept courses from regionally accredited two- year colleges that are usually taught by Ferris State" Col- lege at the junior level. 3. Implement the various two-plus-two programs. 4. Accept the student’s associate degree from regionally accredited two-year colleges and admit the stu- dent into a two-plus-two program at Ferris State College. 193 5. Honor the Michigan Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officiers (MACRAO) agreement. 6. Implement student recruitment activities at regionally accredited two-year institutions. The major problem found by this study was the severe difference in cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point averages and grade point averages of the first quarter of the junior year (transfer shock) experienced by students when transferring from two-year institutions to Ferris State College. Possible solutions to this critical problem may be found in the concerns associated with transferring from a two-year to a four-year college discussed in Chapter Two of this study. The seven following solutions seem most per- tinent to the problem and should be pursued at Ferris State College: 1. Establish an articulation office 2. Provide desirable housing for transfer students 3. Structure special orientation programs for transfer students as well as for Ferris faculty 4. Provide for greater engagement in student activ- ities for transfer students 5. Furnish proper assistance for transfer students’ financial difficulties 6. Be certain transfer students are receiving proper academic advising 194 7. Provide quality communication to two-year insti- tutions listing the requirements of Ferris State College SuggestioaneLAdditioIWLoh Following are several areas suggested for additional research: 1. A replication of this study should be undertaken for additional time segments and the results compared. 2. A similar study should be conducted for all other School of Business curricula, in addition to mar- keting, at Ferris State College for comparison purposes. 3. This study should be replicated for all other schools at Ferris State College, in addition to the School of Business, and the results compared. 4. A study should be completed which would address student demographic factors, in addition to gender, including the following: a. Age b. Income c. Marital status d. Dependents e. Geographic region f. Employment g. Race h. Benefit sought i. Part time or full time status 195 5. A comparative study should be pursued which would classify two-year colleges on the following bases: a. Location (rural or urban) b. Enrollment (size and racial mix) c. Faculty (experience, academic qualifi- cations, and part time or full time) 6. A study should be conducted to determine the reasons for female transfer students’ lower academic achievement compared to those of female native, male trans- fer, and male native students in marketing curricula at Ferris State College. 7. A study should be conducted exploring solutions to the problem of lower academic achievement of female transfer students compared to that of female native, male transfer, and male native students enrolled in marketing curricula at Ferris State College. Befleotions Ferris State College continues to provide opportun- ities for students who have earned an associate degree to continue their education. The present study has demon- strated the homogeneity of two-year college programs with marketing curricula in the School of Business. It is thus possible for students to transfer to Ferris State College and successfully complete a baccalaureate degree in mar- keting. APPENDICES APPENDIX A FERRIS STATE COLLEGE APPENDIX A FERRIS STATE COLLEGE Historical information on Ferris State College was found in the Ferris State College Sehepl_fipllepipl as well 3 Nott4 and Nye.5 as in the writings of Deupree,2 Junker, Ferris State College was founded as a unique insti- tution in Big Rapids, a city of appproximately 14,000 in the vacation-recreation area of west central Michigan. It was, and continues to be, unique in its endeavor to prepare students for positions requiring career oriented or pro- fessional education while, at the same time, stressing the personal development of each individual. Thus, a student can choose an academic program designed to lead to a job upon graduation but also be provided general education instruction in appropriate areas such as communication, the humanities, and the arts. This dual commitment helped to create an institution with many diverse elements, yet molded these together by the like principles, goals and backgrounds they shared. Ferris State College was named for its founder, Woodbridge N. Ferris, who, in 1884, started the Big Rapids Industrial School. Ferris was an educator and a distin- guished politician, having served two terms as Michigan’s 196 197 governor as well as being elected to the United States Senate. W.N. Ferris was also an extraordinary teacher with ideas that were far ahead of their time. These ideas were to become a part of the continued Ferris philosophy. The Ferris Sgheel_Bu11et1p lists these beliefs: 1. Higher education should be available to anyone willing to profit from it. 2. Students should be counseled and moti- vated in such a way as to help them to make the most of their abilities. 3. While a college should be easy to get into, there should be no compromise on the quality of work a student is expected to perform.6 The above beliefs made the school one of the first institutions in the United States to offer career prepar- atory collegiate training. Ferris opened the Big Rapids Industrial School with an enrollment of fifteen pupils in two rented rooms above a Big Rapids bank. The name was soon changed to the Ferris Industrial School. As the enrollment grew additional space was rented until the first building was built on the southern edge of Big Rapids in 1894. W. N. Ferris combined his strong belief in indi- vidual potentials with his own common sense and experience in dealing with youth to form an unusually effective personalized system of education and vocational guidance. Woodbridge N. Ferris and the school he founded were products of the reflections of his time. He saw education, 198 as his era did, as something of both social and individual concern. He placed great stress on individual responsi- bility. Thus, his school originally paid little attention to formal "credits." A student’s success or failure was based less on credits than on his/her achievement. He believed that education should have been practical, moral, and intellectual. To Ferris, proper education met one’s complete personal, social, and economic needs. The founder ran his school in his own way and on his own principles. His aim was to prepare students for the ordinary, everyday duties of life so that they could make a living. He wanted his school to be in close contact with the needs of society. Thus, when there was a market for telegraphers, he started a telegraphy program. When the United States Mail Service had positions available, he offered a course to prepare aspirants for the examinations. The Pharmacy Program is one of the best known examples of Ferris’ ability to see and seize an opportunity. When a young person asked him, in 1893, for help in preparing for the State Boards (and passed them) Ferris organized a course of study in pharmacy. Since he was a great believer in practical training he provided the Business Department with an actual freight office, a commercial exchange, a wholesale office, a com- mission office, and a model bank. The Ferris curriculum, therefore, showed a strange configuration--Telegraphy and Latin; Music and Shorthand; 199 Elocution and Penmanship--which must have frustrated officials of more conventional schools. Ferris was an effective salesman. He skillfully continued to form his curriculum according to society’s needs by following the market for saleable skills, dropping courses when the market decreased, adding and expanding courses as it expanded. For example, after developing the telegraphy program he expanded it to include repair of instruments, basic electrical theory, electrical wiring, and skills in other railroad communication devices. After the market for telegraphers began to shrink, so did the courses! This unusual philosophy apparently worked, for by 1898 his Annual Report listed a staff of eleven teachers, 1,200 students, a library of 600 volumes, buildings valued at $35,000, an annual budget of $12,000, and indebtedness of only $5,500. In 1902, the school had an enrollment of 2,840 students, showed greater profits, and had practically no debt. The school’s name was changed to Ferris Institute around 1900. Before Mr. Ferris went to Washington as United States Senator, he withdrew from active direction of the school and sold almost all of his stock in 1923. Ferris Institute experienced serious financial difficulties during the depression but managed to remain in existence. After the depression the school again made progress and continued to prosper until World War II. During the war years enrollment suffered a serious decline 200 to a low of 48 students in 1943-44. After the war, however, returning veterans helped enrollment to climb to 940 students. The college continued to operate as a private institution until 1949, when it was offered to the State of Michigan as a gift. At that time Ferris enjoyed an enrollment of 1,100, had assets of $1,000,000, and was debt free. Public Act 114-49 of the Michigan Public Acts of 1949 provided that Ferris Institute become a state institution effective July 1, 1950. The intervention of the "Great Fire of February 21, 1950" accelerated the transition from private to state own- ership. The governor-appointed Board of Control met unof- ficially on March 4, 1950 and concerned itself with plans for rebuilding. A massive construction and land acquisition program developed to transform the less than twenty-acre, one perma- nent building campus to a more than 650 acre expanse, with more than ninety architecturally homogeneous structures. The school’s name was changed to Ferris State College in 1963. Academic programs were also in need of refinement. Consistent with the ideas, aims and purposes of its founder, the following goals were developed as listed in the Ferris Sohooljulletm= 1. To meet the needs of the people of Mich- igan for an institution providing spe- cific curricula designed to prepare individuals for positions requiring 201 career-oriented or professional edu- cation, yet alert to the total personal development of each individual. 2. Create an economy and flexibility of operation not possible in educational institutions of less diversified offerings; but, at the same time, to maintain integrity as a unified insti- tution. 3. To permit and encourage students to accelerate the completion of their edu- cational programs in appropriate cur- ricula. 4. To provide an opportunity for all grad- uates of community and junior colleges, and of other colleges and universities, including graduates of technical and other career-oriented or professional curricula, to continue their education.7 In order to accomplish these goals, the Bu11epin recognizes the following objectives: 1. To conduct a strong general and liberal studies program which would: 3. Provide the general education core for all programs of a postsecondary and collegiate level, the instruc- tional offering for all pre-profes- sional and transfer programs, and the major and minor sequences in selected teacher education programs. b. Provide an accelerated program for high school completion and educa- tional upgrading for mature young people and adults. c. Provide for curricula in public service and other selected career- oriented areas. d. Provide students an opportunity to complete two years of pre- professional or general study in preparation for transfer to a bacca- laureate or professional program in completion of an educational goal. 202 To conduct comprehensive programs of varied length which prepared students to enter professions and occupations related to the general field of busi- ness; and to provide such service to business and industry as the College could appropriately render. To conduct comprehensive programs of education in pharmacy, including such services to the profession as the Col- lege may appropriately render. To conduct extensive industrial and technical educational programs in selec- ted vocational and occupational areas. a. Provide for trade-industrial- technical curricula of a post- secondary and collegiate nature, applicable to the needs of the individual and the changing needs of our state and national economy, of varied length from one year through the baccalaureate degree. b. Provide such educational services to other institutions, and to the statewide program of vocational edu- cation, as the resources of the institution permitted. c. Provide for refresher, upgrading and retraining experiences through work- shops, clinics, seminars, and other appropriate offerings. Provide for curricula of varied length from one year through the baccalaureate degree designed to prepare individuals to enter health-related occupations; and to provide for upgrading, retraining, refresher services to those gainfully employed in health careers via confer- ences, workshops, seminars, and other educational services. To conduct programs in teacher education and learning resources in selected areas appropriate to the purposes and resources of the College, and to provide for service programs to schools, school systems and the state as dictated by demonstrated need. 203 7. To conduct comprehensive programs of education in optometry, including such services to the profession and the state as the College may appropriately render. 8. To conduct a comprehensive program of student personnel services to aid the student’s personal growth within the educational setting. 9. To conduct community educational and service programs, and such off-campus educational programs and activities as were within the resources of the insti- tution, to meet demonstrated needs.8 Evidence of the accomplishment of these aca- demic objectives is the current offering of over one hundred-thirty educational programs. These curricula are available through the seven academic divisions of (1) School of Allied Health, (2) School of Arts and Sciences, (3) School of Business, (4) School of Education, (5) School of Pharmacy, (6) School of Technology, and (7) College of Optometry. These programs lead to associate, bachelor, and master degrees as well as a Doctor of Optometry degree. The history of the School of Business at Ferris State College dates back to 1884 when it was one of the original departments of the Big Rapids Industrial School. In the following century the school grew from instruction for bookkeepers, stenographers, and telegraphers to offering instruction in accounting, computer information systems, management, marketing, and office administration. In harmony with the Ferris philosophy, the School of Business plans its programs to prepare the student for the real employment needs of the business world. The student can 204 choose from among more than forty programs and options requiring two, four, or five years of study. The programs are constantly reviewed and evaluated, to be certain they meet the needs of the student and the changing business world. The objectives of the School of Business are summarized as follows: I. To provide basic training in business and related educational subjects. 2. To enable the student to understand the business environment, to assume addi- tional responsibilities, and to qualify for promotional Opportunities. 3. To inspire the student to acquire fur- ther knowledge not only in the chosen field of activity but also in general education. 4. To instill in the student high ethical standards of conduct in personal, busi- ness, and community relationships. 5. To encourage the student in the devel- opment of better appreciation of good literature, art, music, science, and opportunities for wise use of leisure time. 8. To awaken the student to a full real- ization of personal responsibilities and duties as a citizen of the community, state, and nation.9 The program leading to the accomplishments of these objectives embraces the total school life of the student, including (1) the classroom, (2) student government, (3) convocations, (4) student publications, (5) religious organizations, (6) intercollegiate and intramural athletics, 205 (7) instrumental and vocal music, (8) testing and guidance counseling, and (9) student professional, social, and fra- ternal organizations. 206 Not 1Ferris State College, fiphpp1_3311ep1p, (Big Rapids, MI.: Ferris State College, 1984), 57: pp. 6, 16-17, 91. 2Joseph E. Deupree, A.Son_u_x_ef_QnoertunitL ACentennial History of Ferris State Col1ege (Big Rapids: Ferris State College, 1982), pp. 16- 17, 59- 60, 74- 77. 3Elmer S. Junker, "History of Ferris State College" (A Report for History of Higher Education in the U.S. class, Michigan State University, 1967), pp. 5-6. 4Goldie Tilman Nott, G pf Ferrie Stete Ipst1tute, 1984-1960 (Big Rapids: By the Author, University of Michigan, 1962), pp. 34- 37. 5Russel B. Nye, F r s s : r pf_Irene111pp_1343;1333 (Big Rapids: The Centennial Task Force, 1983), pp. 7-11, 20, 36, 45-46, 48. 6Ferris State College, ephpp1_eg11e11p, p. 6. 71518., p. 16. 81bid., pp. 16-17. 9Ibid., p. 91. APPENDIX B TRANSFER CURRICULA APPENDIX B TRANSFER CURRICULA Effective Fall 1983 10/84 FERRIS STATE W DEPAKIMENT OF ACIJOUNTANCY ~ CHECKLIST I-DR TRANSFER STUDENTS WITH ASSOCIATE DEGREES For students possessing the associate degree granted by a regionally, accredited college. Students having associate degree credit for any of the courses listed below trust: select: an equal nmber of elective hours from General Education offEr- ings as identified in the four year Accountang/ program. 3. S. IN‘EUSINESS (ACCOUNTANCY) MASTER OF ACCOLNTANCY THIRD YEAR FOURTH YEAR FIFTH YEAR First gainer First Quarter First Quarter or Note 3) ACT 312 __ __ ACT 415 4_ __ ACT 553 4_ __ ACT 321 4____ __ ACT 431 4____ __ ACT 525 4___ __ FIN 230 4__ _ ACT 461 4_ __ ACT 538 4_ __ SIT 321 4_ _ IAW 323 4__ __ *ACT __ 4___ _ MIT 262 3_ __ TF— 1T“— ’19—- Second Quarter Second Quarter Second Quarter ACT 313 4___ __ ACT 416 4__ __ ACT 548 4_ __ ACT 322 4___ __ ACT 441 4___ __ ACT 558 4__ __ MW 321 4_ __ acr 451 4_ __ *ACT,__‘_ 4_ __ FIN 322 4__ __ Elective 4__ __ *ACT __ 4___ __ (Note 3) l6 1 I5 Third Quarter Third Quarter Third Quarter ACT 314 4__ __ ACT 417 4__ __ ACT 518 4 __ ACT 323 4___ __ ACT 452 4___ __ ACT 528 4___ __ LAW 322 3_ __ ACT 442 4_ __ *ACT __ 4_ __ MCI 321 4__ __ Elective *ACT __ 4_ __ ECN 306 4_ _ __ __ 4__ _ 19———— "IS—— F'— ms: l. A mininun of 102 quarter hours beyond the associate degree are required for the 3.5. in Business (Accountancy) degree. *mp electives must be 500 level ACT courses. With de- partmental approval, students may elect three 400-500 level 2. Students interested in the Master of Accountancy degree oust: take STT 323 and HOT 380, and apply for candidacy during their third or fourth years (between 100 aid 200 credit hours). 3. Students needing ACT 211 will have only one elective in the fourth year. non-accounting courses . 207 208 7/87 EFFECTIVE DATE - FALL 1987-88 Name of Student Date Name of Advisor Expected Date of Graduation Suggested Curriculum for 8.5. Degree in Business (Computer Information Systems) Two-Year Transfer Program Directions for Completion 1. Mark in the left column: / Courses completed by credit earned at Ferris /tr Courses completed by transfer of credits x Course has been waived 2. Mark in the right: / Courses you are now taking 3. Circle the name of the courses for which you are now preregistering. You are exPected to take the courses in the order in which they are listed on this checklist if such courses are open. Third Year Fourth Year First Quarter First Quarter CIS 201 - Structured Prog. Design 4__ __ O-A 210 - Business Communications 2 CIS 230 - Application Systems 4__ __ C15 330 - Systems Analysis MGT 261 - Fundamentals of Management 3__ __ MKT 321 - Principles of Marketing ACT 321 - Management Accounting 1 4 __ CIS 320 - COBOL 15 Secondeuarter Second Quarter ACT 322 - Management Accounting II 4__ __ FIN 322 - Financial Management MGT 262 - Fund. of Organ. Behavior 3__ __ C18 430 - Systems Design CIS 301 - PL/l Programming 4__ __ LAW 321 - Contracts & Sales Q-M 321 - Business Statistics 1 4__ __ CIS 420 - COBOL Applications D-P 205 - Intro. to Microcomputers 4 __ 19 Third Quarter Third Quarter Q-M 335 - Management Science I or C15 440 - Systems Implementation Q-M 345 - Simulation in Business 4__ __ C15 425 - Online Programming CIS 240 - Computer Operating Systems 4__ __ CIS 480 - Adv. Systems Design & Imp. C15 300 - Data Base Concepts & Fac. 4__ __ *Electives C15 310 - Assembler Language I 4 __ 16 *Suggested Electives: CIS 220 - Prog. & Sys. Tech. Using RPG II MGT 448 - Strategy Formulation C15 410 - Computer Programming 11 MGT 465 - Business and Government C18 400 - Data Base Implementation ACT 322 - Management Accounting II D-P 204 - BASIC Programming ACT 323 - Management Accounting Ill D-P 302 - FORTRAN Programming O-A 252 - Principles of Office Admin. D-P 309 - PASCAL Programming SPE 221 - Group Discussion Q-M 322 - Business Statistics 11 SPE 232 - Persuasive Speaking Q-M 351 - Quality Control 1 Q-M 451 - Quality Control 2 Transfer Hours Ferris Hours (to date) TOTAL a O‘L‘bl‘b llll |||| p... O‘L‘bl‘b llll |||| mI-‘bb III F a) 209 a. .. v 03.005 v 3: #02 "0.1.2.205. 3...... .852... as 5.2 1 ...>00 .9 30:35 a: .902 v N 8.....2... 305.3 2.. 1-0 3:030 .32.. 0 .03.qu Q 70.7.3030... 400:0. co..0_nE.on. 30.0.... a: #02 V N .EEoU Soc—25 O; (-0 v . 3.3—.03 30530 .Nn 2-0 520:0 .ucouom 0>_.u0_u 300.30 .252 .9222... 2a 52 . .282 .588... 2. z... o>_.uo_w Q‘O 'VV’ .2830 .8... m ImeOn. ..~. Uam .0 no. Uta 0:0 ..- 00m :2 )5. 040. 3.0 2:0... 2:00.... 33.30.. : £03.60 :0 5:3 00:80.03 0. 0200.0. 0.. .35. 33.00... =< ..~. IhZ 0:0 .-~ ZUw ..- 20m .2. 02w .2. 02w .... 02w 60.00.00. 0.0 32.020 0.053 E0... 3.0. .35. so» £09500 0333.0. 0... .0. 5.0.0 3.2.0.. 0.6.. .0: 0.. no. .. .wFZwODhm mwum2..u0.m 3...... a. so... .252 3. ..-o n 03.003 30.. c N .32.. e... .o .5... SN 5.. a 52.8 .20 .... 5.0 No. 5.2 a o. v .8... 2.... .o 5...... .8 ..-o v .5585... ..........< .8 .02 v 2...... as ......o .2. 3.3 «o 3.... .352... so... .2 22.. c . ......< .5“. ... .5... .2 5< 0:000 .3... m GET: .0040. 050.. 30c «0.50U \ .0030; :02. 2.0.. .0... 23.500 x £0.30: 3 00500 2.00.0 ..\ its“. .0 000.00 .._n0.U \ .OZNOMJ £005.32? .2. c0 00.... 0.0 .0... £0.53 5 .003 0... c. «03:00 0;. 9.0. v.30... 2.0.3.. 63.30.. .0 3.0:... 2-03h .ZO_h..—an.n.w .50—3300.0 .0 0.00 .0335. 33>“; .0 0502 20.5.... .0 0502 210 ..N. Umm .0 2: 0mm 0.... ..NN 00m ..NN >nn. 0:3 0«.0 0.00... 2:00.... 63.30.. .. 0.0;... ..N. 1.54 0..- .NNN 200 ..NN 20m .2. 02m .2. 02m .... 02m .50.... 030. .35 00.. £09500 ”5.5.3. 0.... .0. ..00.0 L . 8...... . a: 5.2 2.52.0.2... 0:00 300.25 a: .51 .. 5.30 0..- .Sa 3. .0... .0..a 0...... L a .5.... o .00.??000... x005. 8.3.2.3.. 38...... 2. .5: c N .5600 .50 SN (.0 o .00.... 0.00 .0 $.20. NoN mun. .0..0& 00000... ll L. 9.088.... .2... 8. B: as»: 358...... 2. 5:. .05.... .582... 2. 2.... -~ 8.0.3.... .2... 2. 5.0 Sta .2... ¢ 1.5.30... :9 0.. L . . 8.5.2... e... .2 5.0 . 05.9.3: ... .5... .2 5.... as»... 02.2.8... :n 5.2 .3... d .3 .5... RN 2... :0 48¢ .. s. .o .5... 3... .5... Big 0...... lo a m. 33.00.... M £20.. 0.0 .0 .000... SN #02 s 3.5... c N ..uu< .0... .0 .5... SN h0< .0..a 00000.0. \0 .L 9.30!“ a 22502.... .98.... SN .5.... . a... 3.53.. .5...... .- a5 . . 08.. .5. .o .5... .2 5.. .8a .2... ¢ Dusk 0.5.00.0 ca .0 00.... 0.. .0: 0.005 NN. mam .02-0.0... 0.0 002.00.... 0.0.... 0030. 0.. .0... 9.... .8 5. a... .. 5.2.0:... 5.2....» 3.00.0. $50.. .50.. «0.500 \. .0030) 000.. 0.3.. .0... 39500 x £0.20... 3 000.00 300.0 .< 6.20.. .0 000.00 3.00.0 \ .0200“; 509.3005 2... :0 00.... 0.0 .0... :0...) c. .008 0.... c. «02:00 0... 00.0. 0.00... 3000....» 63.30.. «a .30.... S<¢UO~E ummnz<¢h ¢0ih .m0.20200u nanfiDn. mmmZfiDo z. .wd 0'5 00.30030 .0 0.00 00.0098 . neo. ....<... “2.00.3.0 .3.>0< .0 00.02 .503... .o 252 211 8.0200000... 00. .00.. .0230 0.0.00.0 .00.0. :00. 3000.00.60. 02:00 0.0... .00. 3.0030... 0.5.. 0..) 2000.... ..0..>00 00 0..) 00000.03 0. 0200.0. 0.. .30. $3.00.... ..< ..N. 1...... 000 .NNN 20“. :2 200 .2. 02... .2. 02... .... 020 628...... 2. .3000... 22.... so... 9.: .3... 2... .2358 052...... 2.. .o. 0...: 2.2 .2 8 2.. .. 3.2.0:... 0.....z<... \D 00.. VD 0... O... 02.03020 .0 0.00 00.009... .2... .35. 02.00.00 0.0.00... 3.02.0002... 0.0.00.0 0:00 300...... can #02 00:00.... 0. .00....0m n: z... .0..0a 0...... 2060.050 .0 .30 3. .0... 00000... 0. 20030.... no. 2.... .00E0w0002 0:02.00 a: 2.". N ..00< .0... N: h0< .0..0a 00000m .2205... .02.... .2 z... . .00.... .282... 2. 2.. . .60.. a... z. .0... .5...... 0... .82.. .2 200 4.90.4.0 «(0) Ihmnon. canonL SMCGML V0 .000 02.00.“ . .5... .35.... .2 z... .5.... 0.0 .o .95.. S. .0... 9.09:... .o .5... .2 C... .80.... .0 .022. SN 00 .0..0& 0...: 0.0.00.0 .00... 0.00 .0 .033 NON 0-0 . 3.300.. 300.2... .2 1-0 00.000000! .0 .00.... SN .02 N ..00< .0... .0 .0.... SN ...0< .0..0& 00000. 8:2... .o .5.... 8. 2.. ~ .5500 .2... 2. <6 .0... 0... .0... a... on. 2... . .60.. a... .o a... .8 .0< a . ~. 00...... 2(0000... mmumz-03h .0020< .0 00.02 .0002. .0 00.02 212 6:230:93 0...: ufiEESmoi 00.000.000.32 .SN 90 v... 09595. c3000. 0 .0 .3» 0:0 .30. .0 80.0600 .35 300005 .2 0% a S. 0%. 2. .5. 00... ..- >2 829:8 8.. 28... 25.5: 63.22. : .83»... S 5.3 385:8 c. 8.09.8 2. :2: .36....» ..< .2 rt... .8. #2 20m :2 20m .2. 02m .2. 02... .5 02m 688.2. 8. 328...... 22.; so... 9.: :2: 8. .3280 2.32.2 2.. a. :38 «>2. .8 8 :2. .. “€2.53... 5&5...» L L n 32.8... o 8.8 B. 202.50 .2 5... e .2332»... 2. 5.2. a N 8.5.2» .Sa «2 2-0 3:3. 32.3.. 8. 5.2 n 52.8 .50 .o .23. SN .52 .. 3...: .. 8...). buta BEE Eta Pi; 2 2 .. 958.5: .o .5... .2 5.2 a 0.30 B. .2... a; 5.2 a .5535: .923. SN 5... a $03330305 0.00:0. c _ 3.3.23.0. .25 .2 2-0 8.3.253". 3823 2. Gs. .. N .60... .5... .o .5... ~o~ 5< . 3...: a 5.5 .0..u& vecuum . Etna vacuum 3 :33 9:2. 30: 39500 \. 2 a . .80.. 5r. .0 5.... .8 5.. 8....) 5.x. 22 .2. 2.280 x a 50.02 a .005 2mm _0 .33 ~o~ 9.0 .839: .3 0050... 3:020 .< a .5...). c3268.. .2 .6: .. ~ .558 .25 SN (-0 3:0“. 2. 92:3 3.8.0 . a _ ..Emz..a_u.c2r. N: z: e 8.3.. 523m... .020& ~23 aria 3...“. :5; 1:50.. m 9:2» .3053005 :5 c0 .00.»: 0... >05 £023 :. .030 u...— c. 38:00 05 0x2 0. 0.0 «000:: 6.3.32. 3. .803. 25.00.... ”.9325: 55.03.— 38233 220.2235: mmmzaac z. .2 02.0 02.3—09.0 _0 030 03009.“... .0n_>v< .0 2:02 20.53 .0 0502 n2.— ._._<..._ nirvana“ 213 60:02.0.» .0. 00.300. 0.0 200; 2: ”5.02 ._N. u... .o 3. 0.... 05 :2 00... :2 >2 8.: 8.. 0.8... 3502. 63.32. .. 03;... 5 5.; 85.0.50 5 088.: 2. .3... $3.00.... __< .z. :5 0... .2 20m. :2 20.. .2. 02.. .N: 02.. :2 02.. "028.0... 0.. 33.8.0 0.2.; so... 9.3 .3... 8.. .3338 9.32.2 0... .o. :0... 0.2. .9. 0.. :9. .. 3.2.5:»... 0.0225: L L a 5.0:. . .3338»... 3.. 5.2. 6...... 32.3.. o: .0: n 3...... . Pastas. .0 .5... .2 C... II. . 0...»: E26500... .2 .0: a $300 .0 .30 3.. has. .2... .0 i=2 .0... or. 2... m0 0 N 3:508 .26 -n 2-0 .000< 4m: .0 .5... SN ._.U< 50“.. Utrz. scuba quP m. n .202 2 0 30:05.00... 0.00:0. w 0.03.003. .353“. .020... 0.... 5.2 a $20.. 0.0 .o .25.. 2. 5.2 .. N .5500 .2... a: (.0 a 8.0.2 a _ 3.2.005 .30 .2 2-0 a N ..00< .0... .0 é...— ~o~ hU< .0..0& 0c000m SEEM 0:000m £9.00 9:00 30: 0,0950U \. .0030) c000 0>0s .05 08.00U x £0.30: .3 000.00 3.005 .< n— 6:50". a. VOCLQO nu-UOLU \ 2 0 02.005 a .0?! n .00E0w0c0s. .0000... SN #02 .OZuUm. .. 0sz 305...... N2 2.. a 3.0.2 0 .00... 0.00 .0 .>.:m ~o~ 0-0 0 . .000< .0... .0 .5... SN hu< .0..0a 2.... .030 02.... 53> 1.5.30“. a 0.2:... J00£§0050 25 :0 .00.»: 0.0 >05 4023 c. .030 05 0. 000500 05 00.0. 2:050 80003. 63.300 00 .209.— 2_hUmuLm 214 2 v 0.5.03” 0 .03 5... 30.3.3.8... 3...... 32.30 20 .02 0 0.30 0 :2:30 000 .0: 0 0.0.... 0 3.... 3...... :0 3.... .2330 .8...» N. . 0.... 4...... .80 .32 20 .0... 0 3...... 0 .030 .80 .2... .30 .3 .02 0 .23.. .02....» 03 .02 0 0 .550 38.30 2. <0 .0..000 vcouom o— . 0 8.0.3.0 .30 .0. 2-0 0 05.... .883... 20 .02 0 . .25: .289... .00 z... 0 .30 .32 2 ..... 02 2-0 00 9.2.88... .30 80 52 .0..000 .0..n. a 1.0300. 00:03.05 .0. 00:00.0. 0.0 0.00.. 8. "whoz ..N. Una .0 no. on... .00 ..NN 00.0. ..NN >mn. 0.0.9000 00.0 0.0030 0.00.5.0 63.0000 .. ..00.>.00 00 5.3 0000.0...00 0. 00.00.00 0.. .00... 00200.0 ..< ..N. It: 000 .NNN ZUm ..NN 200 .n: 020 .N: 020 .2. 020 "00.00.00. 0.0 00>..00_0 0.0..) 0.0... 9.0. .00.... 00» 000.000 9.30:0. 0... .0. 200.0 0.000.. 0.6... .00 0.0 00» .. 222003.; mwumz-03... $202035... 302000 2. .00 0.00 02.00030 .0 0.00 00.00000 8.3: 1.12“. m>...Umn.n.w .00.>0< .0 09.02 .0010; .0 00002 215 .2 Dan 5 no. Uta vac ..~N UOn ..- >9. 9.3 0:- e.3£n 3:83: 63.32. .. ..~. 2...: 9... .-~ 20m ..- 20m .2. 02m .2. 02m .2. 02m 60:95:. 3- 33503 30...? Ev... 3.3 .35 :9. 609509 met-6:0. 9.. .5. 5.0.5 50.23... «>2. .0: at so. .. .thmODhm uuunz<¢h L n u>..uo.u M. o N .5500 30525 EN (.0 o 6:93.. o>..uo..oU an #02 c 959.32 .0 é... .: 5.2 c 3...... 30530 0: ho: o its: 3.0833... .un #02 a ...>oU a 30530 3. ho: a .35 d .32 6.“. as 2..... a0 a N 8.3.33 32:25 «an 2-0 Juu< an: .0 .c... as hU< 583:“ YEP aria 3:: w. m— a 03.003 3.2.. a 33303 n .223 .80 .o .25“. SN .52 . 2:282... a :83 3. 5: . .553 .3. a on; in .5: o 5.5353... 3833 a: S: o . 3.2.35 30525 .2 2-0 . o u Juu< 6.". .96.... 3N ._.U< .otaa vcouon 3.5mm vacuum o. n. .533 9:2. >3: 32:00 a 6.qu d 16.. 3...... .3 3.... a den. 030 .0 $5.». «on 9.0 63.2.. C3.. 02:. «a... 32:00 x a .532 .0558... nun .53. n 20:335.. .995... .3 #02 36.39: an. «.053 8.3.0 .5 o . £sz .2255“. -n 2.... o 3:23... .o .5.... .2 ml. 6.53". .0 .55-0 8.?!U x a .33 a $2.. .22: SN .2. o _ ..8< .5... .o .5... .8 .U< 52mg... butama 3...". ¢ 1.5.30“. m 057... Jooguxuocu n2. :0 tus: 3a .0... so...) c. .33 2.. c. 3225 o... 9.3 2:9.» 85.53 63.32. 3 3.3:. 32:00.... ammmz<¢h «5.;ch .mzo....<..m~. ..<.~..5:oz.:zm=2mov< .o oEoz 30.33 .o 0:32 cum. ......hUmn.n.m 216 £2 a0 v:- .o~_ 2h: Eco 30:30 «stem 93020 a. «co 0...: .35 80:26 BE; v0.8.0 a. .3 UL: ”802 £2 1.22 .2 P333. 3.. Pi 3:55 5.23:. ._~_ 0.3 3 no. 0.5 new :2 00m :2. >3 8.2 33 2:9: Scots: 63.32. = ._N_ $.52 vc- .-~ 20m ..- ZUu .2. 02m .2. 02m ._ 2 02m 68:05:. 8. 32.903 30:3 Eu...“ 8.8 «SE so» .3953 u5.90:3 2: .5. 22...... .829: 2.2. 3: on 30> = ”mhzm—oahm mummz<¢h IL L . 5.588... a. .53 .3 5: h 3:85 o 3:0; 32:30 0: ho: a 6:: .323»; J... N: 0&2 o 5.60 a 32.3.5 no; #02 o JEuZ 3.2.033... In #02 a n 3:58..“ 302.30 -n 3-0 a Jou< J92 .0 .5:— no~ ._.U< botma “:2... .otmfl 32... L L s 832 2:9...“ .. 63¢. 8:02 a as: .2 9:2 o 3.3.32.0“. 383% a: 0.92 n .3509 .30 .o .95“. «an #02 o N .5600 32:25 SN (-0 a 3a.. 30525 .Eum. 3N B<.._ . c _ 3:233 30539 .Nn 2-0 a N Juu< .cE .0 it; Now ._.U< . batmfi vcouom Lotu& vcouom 2 .5.... 9:3 to: 38300 M. a .35 3.5 .0 55m ~o~ m-0 62:2: :02. 25... .2: .3500 x a 03505 n 25899322 3.95... .3 #01 3.32.3. an 853 3330 .5 a .«Emz 75:020.. nuns—.02 a 958.52 .0 .5... in 5:2 itch— : v8.3 2530 \ a — J6»: .3253". «Na 2.". a _ Juu< .cE «0 .55 .on hU< "him—Um.— .otoam .2?— sotqlad 3...... ¢ I250". ¢ 05+: Juufixuogu :5 :0 v3»: 9.- 35 523 c. 3.80 2.: c. 39.36 05 9.3 2:05 mucous: 637.3; 3 .28:— 203h 32m2m0§UmuLu 217 03000.0 :0 no 00:... 0a .0: 0.00:» 50525 0. 5200083. .-. n09 4N— Umn so 2: Una 0:- :2 UOn JNN >9”. 0:3 8.0 0.005 00> 63.300 = ._N_ 1...: 0:0 .-~ 200 :2 ZUM .2. 02m .N: 02-". ._ : 020 "00330:. 0..- n0>=u0_0 000:) 505 033 «SE :0» 309500 9:30:0— 05 c. 3.0000 03:03 0>05 «0: 00 30> = uthNDDhn mummz<¢h . L n. 2.60;. 3...: .. Jews. 38:5 :25. o: 5.2 . 5.30 38.3: o: 5.2 a 05.9.3: .o .5... .2 Si . .{60 a 22.30 3.. 5: a 0502 502.3... :n S: . 20:00.30 a £080 :a 5.: .. ..8< is. 3 at: «2. 5< L .0: 0:2... 00:0 0.2... IL L n 0.5903 00.02 Illa ._00< a $0.... .05.: now 0-0 0 m:_n_t0>0< «0 .5...— -N >0< 0 ~ .3580 300.30 SN (-0 e cots—0E3". 3009.3- ”: 0.02 n .2200 .90 .0 .000“. SN 0.0.2 0 N 3.3.305 30:35 «um 5-0 0 00:05.»:— 00. .55 .2 m2— 0 ”Scan—Q d .0025 0.0 #02 a N JUU< .5....— .O .cfn— NON .—.U( 00: 0:000m 00.0mm 0:000m 2 2 £033 ”£00 30: 32:00 a _ 3.320% 30530 .3 2-0 a .00... 200 _0 .23 Non 0-0 .0030) :00.- 0>0: «05 000.500 x a .05»: 0:00:00 Cu 0.02 n 0:060:52 00.0:0L SN #02 £0309: 3 00:30 20000 :< a _ .05»: 30:05“. -n 27. a 30.. 30530 .805 _- Ba: .n_t0m .0 00:30 2.00:0 \ a 5.003: 9.39.002 nu. .55 a _ Juu< 6E no .55 SN hU< 52000.— 00: «CE ¢ .0000... ¢ 05:... .00053005 :5 :0 000...: 00- >05 :02) c. .0000 05 :_ 003000 05 0...: 0.005 3:003: .0333; no .39.:— ZCKUOmn— mumnz<1h m-09h CZmEuU0< .0 0:32 E0005 .0 0602 on: 40¢... 025.00%.“ 218 £00.00 :0 5.3 00:03.20 :. 0300.0. 00 .SE «0230.0 ..< ..N. 00m .0 no. 00m 0:0 ..NN UOn ..NN >9. 0.0.0500 00.0 0.30..0 3:00...0 63.20.. .. ..N. 1.2 0:0 .NNN ZUm ..NN 20“.. .n: 020 .N.. 020 .2. UZu 00.00.02 0.0 003.003 000...0 20.... 0..0. .36 =0» £02000 9.50:0. 0.... 00. 200.0 0.5... .0: 00 :0» = “#200320. mmun2<¢h Man . m. €002.23 00:052. 0: n2. ”.0 n .2. .00... .2023. nnN .02. 20200202 .3.. N00 .02. a 02.003 0 3...... 800.20 0: ...U2 0 3.3 0 0.000.000 .Nn D<. 0 ...>00 .0 300.30 30 #02 n £200 .90 .0 .000... NoN ...02 o N 3.5.0... 32.30 NNn 2.0 0 ..00< £02 .0 2.00 SN ..U< 00.0ma 00...... 00.00.“ 0...... IL... 3... . n 0.2.00.0 200.20. nnN 33.003 n 30.. 00:052. can D<.. 0 05.03002 .0 .5.... .Nn 5.2 0 02.0.0600". 30.0.3 :0 #02 o .2. 5.00... a 0.... NnN .02. 0.2.00.0 00:052. n 20200202 .0 .000... SN .02 o . 3:225 32.30 .Nn 2.0 0 N ..00< 2E .0 2.... NON hU< 00.. 0:000... Sta 0:000lm. M. M. 2030. 2.0.. 30: 000.500 0 03.005 00:052. . o 0000...". .0 2.02 can 2.“. .0020) :02. 03... .0... «09500 x 0 ..0..< .0 .00... 6.0.2 3N 0-0 a 00:052. .0 2.... .n. 02. £0.23. an 00500 8.00.0 0.. o . .2202 1.002.“. NNn 2.". 0 .00... 0.00 .0 $5.0. NON 0-0 6.0.0... .0 00500 3.00.0 x o N .2800 32.30 SN (.0 o . ..00< é... .0 2.... .0N ._.0< .0sz."... 00.3 .2... 00.:0a .2... ¢ 2.5.00... . ¢ 00...... ..00€..00..0 ”.5 :0 00.... 0.0 .0... :0...) :. 000.0 0... :. «02:00 0... 030. 0.09.0 3:003. .0333... .0 00.02. 2<¢00¢m ummmz0< .0 0202 2003.0. .0 0202 8-2 01.0.... 02.00:... 219 NAME OF STUDENT DATE NAME OF ADVISOR EXPECTED DATE OF GRADUATION Ferris State College 8/85 B. 5. BUSINESS (ADVERTISING) - TRANSFER PROGRAM Directions for Completion of Checksheet: I. Mark in the left column: Courses completed by credit earned at Ferris. /tr Courses completed by transfer of credit. X The course has been waived. 2. Mark in the right column: \/ Courses you are now taking. 3. Circle the name of the courses for which you are now pre-registering. THIRD YEAR FOURTH YEAR First garter First garter O—A 210 - Business Communications II 14 __ _ Q-M 32! - Business Statistics 0 __ _ ADV 222 - Principles of Advertising 4 _ _ FIN 322 - Financial Management 0 _ _ MKT 321 - Principles of Marketing 4 _ _ ADV 300 - Public Relations Principles 0 __ __ MCT 261 - Fund. of Management 3 _ Directed Elective 3/0 _ Free Elective _3_ : l$7l6 18 Second garter Second garter ACT 201 - Prin. of Fin. Accounting 1 la MKT 025 - Marketing Research a _ MGT 252 - Fund. of Organ. Behavior 3 : : ADV «so - Advertising Management a : _ ADV 3ll - Adv. Layout 6: Production 0 __ _ Choose one of the following: a _ _ ADV 308 - Advertising Media 0 ADV 382 - TV a Radio Adv. AN 350 - Advertising Copy it — — ADV 385 - Retail Advertising l—§ — -— ADV 083 - Direct Advertising Directed Elective 2/3 _ M715 Third finer Third Quarter ACT 202 - Prin. of Fin. Accounting ll 0 ADV 033 - Advertising Campaigns a D-P 202 - Survey of Data Proc. Ii __ : MKT 09l - Marketing Policy a — : MKT 23l - Professional Selling 0 _ __ MGT 065 - Business and Government a : __ MKT 322 - Consumer Behavior 0 _ _ Directed Elective 3 _ Directed Elective (MTH 121) 3/a l _ Students having Associate degree credit for any of the courses listed above must substitute General Studies course requirements as identified in the Iii-year Marketing/Advertising program. 220 NAME OF STUDENT DATE NAME OF ADVISOR ' EXPECTED DATE OF GRADUATION Ferris State College ~ 7/85 8.5. BUSINESS (MARKETING) - TRANSFER PROGRAM Directions for Completion of Checksheet: I. Mark in the left column: I Courses completed by credit earned at Ferris. ltr Courses completed by transfer of credit. it The course has been waived. 2. \/ Courses you are now taking. 3. Circle the name of the courses for which you are now preoregistering. THIRD YEAR FOURTH YEAR First Year First Quarter MKT 321 - Principles of Marketing ll ADV 222 - Principles of Advertising a MKT 231 - Professional Selling h MKT 378 - Marketing Data Analysis ll ACT 20l - Prin. of Fin. Accounting l ‘6 MGT 262 - Fund. of Organ. Behavior 3 MTH l28 - Math Analysis 0 MKT Ml - International Marketing ll 3 l6 Directed Elective _: : 18 Second garter Second arter Q-M 321 - Business Statistics Ii _ __ MKT 473 - Marketing Cases 6: Problems ll _ _ MKT 322 - Consumer Behavior ‘6 _ _ MKT #25 - Marketing Research ll _ _ D-P 202 - Survey of Data Processing 4 _ __ Choose 2 of the following: 8 _ _ ACT 202 - Pnn. of Fin. Accounting ll ll MKT 337 - Prin. of Retailing MKT #72 - Phys. Dist. Management ADV 300 - Public Relations Prin. MKT MO - Industrial Marketing T6 Third Quarter Third finer MKT 030 - Analytical Mkt. Techniques '5 _ MKT ¢9I - Marketing Policy It _ __ MKT 365 - Tramportation ll _ __ O-A 210 - Business Communications II It _‘_ _ MGT 26I - Fund. of Management 3 _ _ MGT #65 - Business and Government a __ __ FIN 322 - Financial Management ll __ __ Directed Elective ll __ _ Directed Elective T3! _ _ R 221 \IAME OF STUDENT DATE VIAME OF ADVISOR EXPECTED DATE OF GRADUATION Ferris State College 8/85 3. S. BUSINESS (MARKETING - RETAIL - TRANSFER PROGRAM) iirections for Comgletion of Checksheet: . Mark in the left column: I Courses completed by credit earned at Ferris. ltr Courses completed by transfer of credit. x The course has been waived. 2. Mark in the right column: Courses you are now taking. l. Circle the name of the courses for which you are now pre-registering. THIRD YEAR FOURTH YEAR ’irst Quarter First garter \DV 222 - Principles of Advertising 0 __ _ MKT 339 - Retail Merchandising a _ _ \CT 201 - Prin. of Fin. Accounting I la _ _ LAW 321 - Contracts and Sales to _ __ MKT 32l - Principles of Marketing l4 __ _ MKT 226 - Fashion Div. Merchandising a __ __ VIGT 261 - Fund. of Management 3 __ __ ADV 300 - Public Relations Principles i _ _ 'l‘S 16 Second garter Second garter ACT 202 - Prin. of Fin. Accounting II to _ _ MKT li38 - Retail Management to _ __ MKT 229 - Visual Merchandising ll _ _ MKT 232 - Home Division Merchandising ll _ __ MKT 322 - Consumer Behavior a __ _ MKT 025 - Marketing Research 0 __ __ )-P 202 - Survey of Data Processing '4 _ _ MKT ll73 - Marketing Cases 6: Problems u (ACT 252 - Fund. of Organ. Behavior 3 __ _ 1'6""— '— T5 Third arter Third Quarter _ )-M 321 - Business Statistics I ll _ _ ADV 385 - Retail Advertising Ii _ _ VlKT 23l - Professional Selling 0 _ _ MKT l691 - Marketing Policy ll __ ViKT 337 - Principles of Retailing ._ a _ _ O—A 210 - Business Communications ll ll — ’IN 322 - Financial Management _2_ _ _ Directed Elective T6— — '— _ 16 a — ‘— itudents having Associate Degree credit for any of the courses listed above must substitute General studies course requirements as identified in the b-year Marketing program. 222 NAME OF STUDENT DATE NAME OF ADVISOR EXPECTED DATE OF GRADUATION Ferris State College. 8/85 8. 3. BUSINESS MARIETING - SALES - TRANSFER PROGRAM Directions for Completion of Checksheet: I. Mark in the left column: I Courses completed by credit earned at Ferris. Itr Courses completed by transfer of credit. x The course has been waived. 2. Mark in the right column: Courses you are now taking. 3. Circle the name of the courses for which you are now pre-registering. THIRD YEAR FOURTH YEAR First Quarter First Quarter ADV 222 - Prin. of Advertising 4 Choose 2 of the following: 8 MKT 321 - Prin. of Marketing a MKT «at - International Marketing MKT 231 — Professional Selling A MKT 3A1 - Credits 8 Collections ACT 201 - Prin. of Fin. Acct. I h ___ MKT A72 - Phys. Dist. Management 16 ADV 3&0 - Pub. Relations Prin. ADV 360 - Advertising COpy MKT A36 - Sales Management A MOT 261 - Fund. of Management 3 Free Elective _1 18 Second Quarter Second Quarter O-M 321 - Business Statistics 4 MKT A73 - Mkt. Cases s Problems 4 MKT 322 - Consumer Behavior 4 PIN 322 - Financial Management a D-P 202 - Survey of Data Proc. 4 MKT «25 - Marketing Research 4 ACT 202 - Prin. of Fin. Acct. II lo HGT 262 - Fund. of Organ. Behavior 3 73' Directed Elective 3 TE “ Third Quarter Third Quarter MKT £66 - Purchasing MKT 365 - Transportation LAN 321 - Contracts and Sales SPC 332 - Persuasion . MKT 491 - Marketing Policy O-A 210 - Business Comm. II MKT 43h - Advanced Selling Directed Elective lamb» .0 DG‘I‘S‘ _- 0‘ If Associate degree is not from a technical field. up to 12 hours of Laboratory Science must be substituted for listed courses for which prior credit has been received. Other substi- tutions will be from the General Studies course requirements as identified in the h-year Marketing - Sales program. 223 Name of Student Date Name of Advisor Expected Date of Graduation FERRIS STATE COLLEGE 0:8/85 B.S. Degree in Business - Office Administration ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Transfer Program (Choose one: Track A or Track B or Track C ) This curriculum is designed for transfer students who have been granted an Associate Degree from a regionally accredited college. Students having transfer credit for any of the courses liSted below must, in consultation with their advisor, select an equal number of elective hours from General Education (non-business). Students not having transfer credit for the following courses must take them: ENG Ill, ENG “2, ENG 113 and MTH 121. First Quarter First Quarter The student's program for the first quarter of the MGT 262 Fund. of Org. Behavior 3 junior year will be designed by the student's ECN 222 Prin. of Economics 2 ll academic advisor in consultation with the student. D-P 202 Survey of Data Processing 4 The student will choose an Area of Concentration, O-A 310 Business Communications 3 a Track A, B, or C. (See DIRECTED ELECTIVES.) 15 The program will be designed according to the specific needs of the student in relation to his or her progress in meeting the requirements of the 8.5. Degree. Primary attention will be given to major and related requirements, business core requirements, and general education requirements. (la hours minimum) Second giarter Second Quarter O-A 210 Business Communications 2 li *Q-M 321 Business Statistics I a ACT 201 Prin. of Fin. Accounting 1 li MKT 321 Prin. of Marketing a O-A 150 Prin. of Records Mgmt. 3 O-A 352 Admin. Information Syst. l4 O-A 2141 Calculating Machines 2 OeA 360 Records Administration 0 ' 16 O-A 252 Prin. of Office AdminiStration Ll 17 Third arter Third Quarter O-A 209 Office Communication Tech. 3 MGT 261 Fundamentals of Management 3 ACT 202 Prin. of Fin. Accounting 2 ii ECN 221 Prin. of Economics 1 l4 O-A 350 Micrographlcs 3 FIN 322 Financial Management ti LAW 321 Contracts and Sales 0 O-A 1452 Seminar in Office Admin. a O-A 351 Prin. of W.P. Management u 16 Above classes are all required, plus those scleCted from Track A g Track B o_r Track C. Mlnlmunl Number of Quarter Hours Requned for Bachelor of SClence Degree . . . 190 Hours (Includlng Transfer Hours) ‘lntermt-dluu- algebra level competence is a prcrcqmslte to Q—M 321. APPENDIX C THE FAMILY EDUCATIONAL RIGHTS AND PRIVACY ACT OF 1974 AS AMENDED APPENDIX C THE FAMILY EDUCATIONAL RIGHTS AND PRIVACY ACT OF 1974 AS AMENDED (Popularly known as the ”Buckley Amendment") Sec. 438. (a) (l) (A) No funds shall be made available under any applicable program to any educational agency or institution which has a policy of denying. or which effectively prevents. the parents of students who are or have been in attendance at a school of such agency or at such institution. as the case may be, the right to inspect and review the education records of their children. If any material or document in the education rec- ord of a student includes information on more than one student. the parents of one of such students shall have the right to inspeot and review only such part of such material ’or document as relates to such student or to be informed of the specific information con- tained in such part of such material. Each educational agelloy or institution shall es- tablish appropriate procedures for the grant- ing of a request by parents for access to the education records of their children within a reasonable period of time. but in no case more than fortyofive days after the request has been made. (8) The first sentence of subparagraph (A) shall not operate to make available to students in institutions of postsecondary ed— ucation the following materials: (i) financial records of the parents of the student or any information contained therein: (iii confidential letters and statements of recommendation. which were placed in the education records prior to January 1. 1975. if such letters or statements are not used for-purposes other than those for which they were speCifically intended; (iii) if the student has signed a waiver of the student's right of access under this 224 subsection in accordance with subparagraph (C) . confidential recommendations— (I) respecting admission to any educa- tional agency or institution. (II) respecting an application for employ- ment. and (III) respecting the receipt of an honor or honorary recognition. (C) A student or a person applying for admiSSlon may waive his right of access to confidential statements described in clause (iii) of subparagraph (B). except that such waiver shall apply to recommendations only if (i) the student is. upon request. notified of the names of all persons making confi- dential recommendations and (ii) such recommendations are used solely for the purpose for which they were specifically in- tended. Such waivers may not be recurred |sic| as a condition for admission to. receipt of financial aid from, or receipt of any other services or benefits from such agency or institution. (2) No funds shall be made available un- der any applicable program to any educa- tional agency or institution unless the par- ents of students who are or have been in attendance at a school of such agency or at such institution are provided an opportunity for a hearing by such agency or institution. in accordance with regulations of the Secre- tary, to challenge the content of such stu- dent's education records. in order to insure that the records are not inaccurate, mislead- ing. or otherwise in violation of the privacy or other rights of students. and to provide an opportunity for the correction or deletion of any such inaccurate. misleading. or other- wise inappropriate data contained therein 225 and to insert into such records a written ex- planation of the parents respecting the con- tent of such records. (8) For the purposes of this section the term “educational agency or institution" means any public or private agency or insti- tution which is the recipient of funds under any applicable program. (4) (A) For the purposes of this section. the term “education records" means. except as may be provided otherwise in subparagraph (8) . those records. files. documents. and other materials which— (i) contain information directly related to a student; and (ii) are maintained by an educational agency or institution. or by a person acting for such agency or institution. (3) m term “education records” does not include— (1) records of institutional. supervisory. and administrative personnel and educa- tional pcaonnel ancillary thereto which are in the sole possession of the maker thereof and which are not accessible or revealed to any other person except a substitute; (ii) if the personnel of a law enforcement unit do not have access to education records under subsection (b)(l). the records and documents of such law enforcement unit which (I) are kept apart from records de- scribed in subparagraph (A). (II) are main- tained solely for law enforcement purposes. and (III) are not made available to persons other than law enforcement officials of the same jurisdiction; (ill) in the case of persons who are em- ployed by an educational agency or institu- tion but who are not in attendance at such agency or institution. records made ant: maintained in the normal course of business which relate exclusively to such person ill that person‘s capacity as an employee and are not available for use for any other pur- pose; or (iv) records on a student who is 18 years of age or older. or is attending an institu- tion of postsecondary education. which are created or maintained by a physician. psy- chiatrist. psychologist. or other recognized professional or para-professional acting in his professional or para-professional ca- pacity. or assisting in that capacity. and- which are created. maintained. or used-only in connection with the provision of treat- ment to the student. and are not available to anyone other than persons providing such treatment; provided. however. that such rec- ords can be personally reviewed by a physi- cian or other appropriate professional of the student's choice. (5) (A) For the purposes of this section the term "directory information" relating to a student includes the following: thestudent't: name. address. telephone listing. date and place of birth. major field of study. Participa tion in ofiicially recognized activities and sports. weight and height of members Ol athletic teams. dates of attendance. de- grees and awards received. and the most recent previous educational agency or in stitution attended by the student. (3) Any educational agency or institutic making public directory information aha give public notice of the categories of in formation which it has designated as suci information with respect to each student at- tending the institution or agency and shall allow a reasonable period of time after such notice has been given for a parent to inform the institution or agency that any or all of the information designated should not be released without the parent's prior consent. (6) For the purposes of this section. the term “student" includes any person with re- spect to Whom an educational agency or in- stitution mnintainr. education records or personally identifiable information. but does not include a person who has not been in attendance at such agency or institution. (b) (i) No funds shall-be made available under any applicable program to any edu- cational agency or institution which has a policy or practice of permitting the release of education records (or personally identifi- able information contained therein other than directory information. as defined in paragraph (5) of subsection (a)) of students without the written consent of their par- onto to any individual. agency. or organiza- tion. other than to the following— (A) other school officials. including teach- ers within the educationai institution or lo- cal educational agency who have been de- termined by such agency or institution to have legitimate eduational interests: (8) officials of other schools or school systems in which the Mt socks or. in- tends to enroll. upo condition thatthe stu- dent'a parents be otified of the transfer. receive a rarity of the record if desired. and have an «input-innit)! for a hearing to chal- lenge the «uncut of the record: (0) authorized representatives of (i) the (‘mnptmller General of the Ohm States. (it) the Secretary. (iii) an administrative head of an education agency (as defined in section dour) of this Act). or (iv) State outluatktllai authorities. under the condi- tions set forth in paragraph (8) of this sub- nectlon: and (D) in connection with a student's appli- cations for. or receipt of. financial aid: (E) State and local officials or authorities to which such information is specifically required to be reported or disclosed pursuant to State statute adopted prior to November 19. 1974: (F) organizations conducting studies for. or on behalf of. educational agencies or in- stitutions for the purpose of developing. validating. or administering predictive tests. administering student aid programs. and im- proving instruction. if such studies are con- ducted in such a manner Ls will not permit the personal identification of students and their parents by persons other than repre- sentatives of such organizations and such information will be destroyed when no longer needed for the purpose for which it is conducted: (0) accrediting organizations in order to carry out their accrediting functions: (if) parents of a dependent student of such parents. as defined in section 152 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954: and (I) subject to regulations of the Secretary in connection with an emergency. appropri- 226 ate persons if the knowledge of such infor- mation is necessary to protect the health or safety of the student or other persons. (2) No funds shall be made available un- der any applicable program to any education agency or institution which has a policy or practice of releasing. or providing access to. any personally identifiable information in education records other than directory infor- mation. or as is permitted under paragraph (1) of this subsection unless— ' (A) there is written consent from the student's parents specifying records to be released. the reasons for such release. and to whom. and with a copy of the records to be released to the student's parents and the student if desired by the parents. or (B) such information is furnished in com- pliance with Judicial order. or pursuant to any lawfully issued subpoena. upon condi- tion that parents and the students are noti- fied of all such orders or subpoenas in ad- vance of the compliance therewith by the educational institution or agency. (3) Nothing contained in this section shall preclude authorized representatives of (A) the Comptroller General of the United States. (8) the Secretary. (C) an administra- tive head of an eduction agency or (D) State educational authorities from having access to student or other records which may be neces- sary in connection with the audit and evaluation of Federally supported education programs. or in connection with the enforce- ment of the Federal legal requirements which relate to such programs: Provided. That except when collection of personally iden- tifiable information is specifically authorised by Federal law. any data collected by such officials shall be protected in a manner which will not permit the personal identification of students and their parents by other than those omclals. and such personally iden- tifiable data shall be destroyed when no longer needed for such audit. evaluation. and enforcement of Federal legal requirements. (4) (A) Each educational agency or insti- tution shall maintain a record. kept with the education records of each student. which will indicate all individuals (other than thus specified in paragraph (l)(A) of -this subsection) . agencies. or organizauons which have requested or obtained access to a stu- dent’s education records maintained by such eduactional agency or institution. and which will indicate specifically the legitimate inter- est that each such person. agency. or orga- nization has in obtaining this information. Such record of access shall be available only to parents. to the school oi‘l'lcisl and his assistants who are responsible for the custody of such records. and to persons or organiza- tions authorized in. and under the conditions of. clauses (A) and‘(C) of paragraph (1) as a means of auditing the operation of the system. (8) With respect to this subsection. per- sonal information shall only be transferred to a third party on the condition that such party will not permit any other party to have access to such information without the written consent of the parents of the student. (c) The Secretary shall adopt appropriate regulations to protect the rights of privacy of students and their families in connection with any surveys or data-gathering activi- ties conducted. assisted. or authorized by the Secretary or an administrative head of an education agency. Regulations established under this subsection shall include pro- visions controlling the use. dissemination. and protection of such data. No survey or data-gathering activities shall be conducted by the Secretary. or an administrative head of aneducatlon agency under an applicable program. unless such activities are author- ized by law (d) For the purposes of this section. when- ever a student has attained eighteen years of age. or is attending an institution of post- secondary education the permission or con- sent required of and the rights accorded to the parents of the student shall thereafter only be required of and accorded to the student. (e) No funds shall be niade' available under any applicable program to any educa- , tional agency or institution unless such agency or institution informs the parents of students. or the students. if they are eighteen years of age or older. or are attend- ing an institution of postsecondary educa- tion. of the rights accorded them by this section. (f) The Secretary. or an administrative head of an education agency. shall take ap- propriate actions to enforce provisions of this section and to deal with violations of this section. according to the provisions of this Act. except that action to terminate assist- ance may be taken only if the Secretary finds there has been a failure to comply with the provisions of this section. and he has deter- mined that compliance cannot be secured by voluntary means. (g) The Secretary shall establish or desig- nate an office and review board within the Department of Health. Education. and Wei- fare for the purpose of investigating. process- ing. reviewing. and adjudicating violations of the provisions of this section and com- plaints which may be filed concerning alleged violations of this section. Except for the conduct of hearings. none of the functions of the Secretary under this section shall be carried out in any of the regional ences of such Department. APPENDIX D FERRIS STATE COLLEGE APPROVAL APPENDIX D FERRIS STATE COLLEGE APPROVAL FERRIS STATE COLLEGE BIG RAPIDS. MICHIGAN 49307 Office of the Registrar Prakkon Buxldanc. 220 February 25, 1986 To Whom It May Concern: This letter is to certify that Roland R. Ream has presented to the Registrar of Ferris State College an abstract of his proposed doctoral dissertation that he will submit as part of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree from Michigan State University. In order to conduct his research, he will need to review the academic records of a selected group of former Ferris students. In compliance with the provisions of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, it is our policy to release restricted information from student records only to persons doing legitimate educational research and only as long as the anonymity of the individual students are protected. The identity of the students to be included as subjects in the project cannot be disclosed in the course of the research or in the final document. Based upon the contents of Mr. Ream's proposal and discussions I have had with him, his project meets F.E.R.P.A. requirements for the release of information. Therefore, he has received my approval to use the academic records housed in the Registrar's Office (both hard capy and on-line files) for the purpose of gathering the data he requires for his dissertation. Only full- time personnel in the Registrar’s Office will be authorized to provide him assistance in securing the data he needs. Part-time employess and student workers do not have access to the files and materials that will be used by Mr. Ream. Should you have any questions, or require additional information, please feel free to direct such inquiries to me. Sincerely, Paul G. Schnepf Registrar 227 APPENDIX E MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY APPROVAL APPENDIX E MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY APPROVAL MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY W COMMITTEE ON mo: INVOLVING EAST LANSING 0 WGAN 0 «124-l0“ Hum SUIJ'ECI'S (DOD-{5) 138 ADWTION BUILDING un)usnu April 8, 1986 Dr. Paul Slocum Teacher Education Erickson Hall Dear Dr. Slocum: Subject: Proposal Entitled, "A Study Comparing the Academic Performance and Graduation Rate of Transfer Students with Native Students in the Baccalaureate Marketing Curriculums in the School of Business at Ferris State College" to be conducted by Roland Ream UCRIHS' review of the above referenced project has now been completed. I am pleased to advise that the rights and welfare of the human subjects appear to be adequately protected and the Committee, therefore. approved this project at its meeting on April 7, 1986. You are reminded that UCRIHS approval is valid for one calendar year. If you plan to continue this project beyond one year, please make provisions for obtaining appropriate UCRIHS approval prior to April 7, I987. Any changes in procedures involving human subjects must be reviewed by the UCRIHS prior to initiation of the change. UCRIHS must also be notified promptly of any problems (unexpected side effects, complaints, etc.) involving human subjects during the course of the work. Thank you for bringing this project to our attention. If we can be of any future help, please do not hesitate to let us know. Sincerely, Henry E. Bredeck Chairman, UCRIHS HEB/jms cc: Idola/nd Ream MSU u - Allin-naive Anion/Equal Opportunity l-ua'nm’o- 228 APPENDIX F RISK BENEFIT RATIO ANALYSIS APPENDIX F RISK BENEFIT RATIO ANALYSIS Students 1. Risk - W Wen - Search is to be con- ducted as follows: a. Researcher will obtain student enrollment lists for the curricula under study from Ferris State Col- lege School of Business offices for research period involved. b. Enrollment lists will be physically carried by researcher to Office of the Registrar. c. Student record data will be searched by student number. d. Search for student record data will be conducted only by researcher and Ferris State College employ- ees in the Office of the Registrar. a. All data including working papers, notes, and memos will be secured at conclusion of each working day. b. Data would thus be unavailable for accidental notice by unauthorized individuals including students, other faculty members, custodians, or the media. 3. Big; - Studggt Identity During Agglzzgtion Progggfi W a. Researcher will assign a number to each student on whom data is to be collected. 229 230 Numbers assigned will classify student only according to gender, age grouping, transfer or native. (gender and age grouping will be the only demographic variables considered in the research) Student name and Ferris State College student number will be removed from working papers. Thus, statisticians working with student data will not have student names or Ferris State College stu- dent numbers available. Enrollment lists obtained from School of Business will not identify students as transfer or native. Study population will be divided into transfer ver- sus native groups at the Office of the Registrar only. Data on transfer students will be identified by total group rather than by particular two-year col- lege attended. No matching of student with particular two-year col- lege will be done. Working papers, notes, and memos will not identify two-year colleges. 2. Risk-WW1}: MW Wishes a. All data including working papers, notes, memos and rough drafts forwarded to typists, printers, com- pilers, etc. will be devoid of student and/or two- year college identity. Research results will be published analyzing accom- plishment of transfer students versus native stu- dents as groups with no identity to individual students and/or a particular two-year college. 231 Egzpig State College a. Care will be taken to assure all working papers, rough drafts, notes, etc. will be secured at the conclusion of each working day. b. No contact will be made to media, students, other faculty regarding potential results during time of research period. Big; - t d t ‘ nd Ach t t F W Wishes a. Final report will not reveal student identity by name, Ferris State College student number or two- year college attended. b. Report will be written so no student identity will be inferred regarding gender, age, ethnic group, academic success or two-year college attended. Risk - Pgigting of Compute; Searched Data and Qigtgi- t to Du n t S r - a n C8 W a. All student record data will be gathered only by researcher and employees of the Office of the Reg- istrar. b. Only one copy of data will be requested. c. All data including working papers, rough drafts, notes, memos, etc. will be secured at conclusion of each working day. lege gpd Tég;Ygar Colleges Should Reagarch Indi- WW V6 0 a. Student identity and/or two-year college will not be disclosed. 232 Academic results from each specific two-year college will not be identified. Any possible inferior transfer student academic accomplishment should be viewed as constructive criticism. The study should result in even greater cooperation between two-year colleges and Ferris State College in resolving causes of any inferior academic accom- lishment. APPENDIX G SCHOOL OF BUSINESS STUDENT WITHDRAWAL INTERVIEW APPENDIX G SCHOOL OF BUSINESS STUDENT HITHDRANAL INTERVIEW Name Curriculum No. of Quarters at Ferris Hours Earned at Ferris Reason for withdrawal Part-time Student? Student No. Date Effective Date of Hithdrawal CHPA SCAT Code Transfer Hours Hi1] Student Return to Ferris? In Same or Different Curriculum? withdrawal Processed in Person 1/75 233 By Telephone By Mail APPENDIX H WITHDRAWAL CLEARANCE FORM APPENDIX H WITHDRAWAL CLEARANCE FORM (Please print or type) Date 1. Student Number Student Name School 2. Permanent Mailing Address City State Zip 3. lam interru tin m trainin p g y g Date Quarter for the following reasons: Student §gnature 4. NOTICE TO STUDENT: A. if you have registered for next quarter, your schedule will be dropped. B. If you wish to return after this date. you must apply through the Admissions Office. C. if this withdrawal is due to health reasons. it will be necessary for you to clear with the Ferris State College Health Center before being re-admitted. D. Please answer the following: Are you a veteran? Yes __ No Do you owe money to the college? Yes __ No Are you receiving financial aid? Yes __ No Did you attend Ferris last quarter? Yes __ No B. Take this form to the Housing Office, South Commons, for clearance (this includes off-campus students). This form will be collected at that office. F. If you live in a residence hall, you must vacate within twenty-four (24) hours after you withdraw. G. Refunds, if appropriate, can be expected within three to four weeks. 5. School Action: Dean's Office Date 6. Housing Office Clearance: For the Director Date 7, Cashier's Office For the Cashier Date gouging: Student—Leave all copies at the Housing Office Housing-Forward all copies to the Cashier‘s Office ' Cashier—Forward yellow and pink copies to Registrar‘s Office 1.000 - 9177 234 APPENDIX I STATISTICAL DATA APPENDIX I STATISTICAL DATA Table 53.‘ Summary of Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Statistics fitgtgg Transfer and Transfer Native Native Gender Students Students Students Male Number 40 Number 48 Number 88 Mean 2.78 Mean 2.49 Mean 2.62 Std. Dev. .53 Std. Dev. .45 Std. Dev. .51 Female Number 27 Number 38 Number 65 Mean 2.87 Mean 2.90 Mean 2.89 Std. Dev. .49 Std. Dev. .4? Std. Dev. .47 Transfer and Native Number 67 Number 86 Number 153* Stu- Mean 2.82 Mean 2.67 Mean 2.74 dents Std. Dev. .61 Std. Dev. .50 Std. Dev. .51 *Only 153 of the 155 student population total are reported since cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point aver- ages are unavailable for one male transfer student and one female transfer student included in the study 235 Table 54. 236 Summary of Analysis of Variance Test of Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Averages Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean F ratio critical p- Variation Squares Freedom Square value F value value (.05 level) Gender 2.581 1 2.581 11.03 3.84 .001 Status .897 1 .897 3.83 3.84 .052 Gender- Status 921 l .921 3.94 3.84 .049 Error 34 6 153 .234 Total 39 255 152 237 Table 55. Summary of Grade Point Statistics for Four Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses Stgtus Transfer and Transfer Native Native Gender Students Students Students Male Number 39 Number 48 Number 87 Mean 2.68 Mean 2.43 Mean 2.54 Std. Dev. .89 Std. Dev. .55 Std. Dev. .63 Female Number 27 Number 38 Number 65 Mean 2.75 Mean 2.69 Mean 2.71 Std. Dev. .74 Std. Dev. .56 Std. Dev. .64 Transfer and Native Number 66 Number 86 Number 152* Stu- Mean 2.71 Mean 2.54 Mean 2.82 dents Std. Dev. .71 Std. Dev. .56 Std. Dev. .64 *Only 152 of the 155 student population total are reported since two male transfer students and one female transfer student included in the study did not complete any of the four selected lower-level marketing courses Table 56. 238 Summary of Analysis of Variance Test of Grade Point Averages for Four Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean F ratio critical p- Variation Squares Freedom Square value F value value (.05 level) Gender 1.050 1 1.050 2.66 3.84 .105 Status 1.120 1 1.120 2.84 3.84 .094 Gender- Status .333 l .333 .84 3.84 .360 Error 58,501 118 .395 Total 60.904 151 239 Table 57. Summary of Cumulative Junior and Senior Grade Point Statistics Status Transfer and Transfer Native Native Gender Students Students Students Male Number 40 Number 48 Number 88 Mean 2.58 Mean 2.45 Mean 2.51 Std. Dev. .53 Std. Dev. .45 Std. Dev. .49 Female Number 27 Number 38 Number 85 Mean 2.57 Mean 2.79 Mean 2.69 Std. Dev. .57 Std. Dev. .47 Std. Dev. .52 Transfer and Native Number 67 Number 86 Number 153* Stu- Mean 2.57 Mean 2.60 Mean 2.59 dents Std. Dev. .55 Std. Dev. .48 Std. Dev. .51 *Only 153 of the 155 student population total are reported since one male transfer student and one female transfer student included in the study did not complete any full quarter at Ferris State College Table 58. 240 Summary of Analysis of Variance Test of Cumu- lative Junior and Senior Grade Point Averages Source of Variation Sum of Degrees of Mean F ratio critical p- Squares Freedom Square value F value value (.05 level) Gender 1.293 1 1.293 5.19 3.84 .024 Status .011 l .011 0.05 3.84 .832 Gender- Status 1.102 1 1.102 4.42 3.84 .037 Error 37.;3; 153 .249 Total 39.537 152 241 Table 59. Summary of Differences in Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Statistics and Grade Point Statistics for First Quarter of Junior Year £13335 Transfer - and Transfer Native Native Gender Students Students Students Male Number 40 Number 48 Number 88 Mean -.28 Mean .12 Mean -.08 Std. Dev. .70 Std. Dev. .52 Std. Dev. .63 Female Number 26 Number 38 Number 64 Mean -.20 Mean -.18 Mean -.19 Std. Dev. .52 Std. Dev. .59 Std. Dev. .56 Transfer and Native Number 66 Number 86 Number 152* Stu- Mean -.25 Mean -.02 Mean -.12 dents Std. Dev. .63 Std. Dev. .57 Std. Dev. .61 *Only 152 of the 155 student population total are reported since (a) cumulative freshman and sophomore grade point averages are unavailable for one female transfer student and one male transfer student included in the study and (b) the latter student as well as one female transfer student included in the study did not complete any full quarter at Ferris State College 242 Table 60. Summary of Analysis of Variance Test of Differ- ences in Cumulative Freshman and Sophomore Grade Point Averages and Grade Point Averages for First Quarter of Junior Year Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean F ratio critical p- Variation Squares Freedom Square value F value value (.05 level) Gender .613 1 .613 1.77 3.84 .185 Status 2.170 1 2.170 6.26 3.84 .013 Gender— Status 1.304 1 1.304 3.76 3.84 .054 Error ,fiLLZZQ 158 .346 Total 55.360 151 243 Table 81. Summary of Grade Point Statistics of Juniors and Seniors for Five Selected Upper-Level Marketing Courses Stgtug Transfer . and Transfer Native Native Gender Students Students Students Male Number 36 Number 43 Number 79 Mean 2.35 Mean 2.36 Mean 2.35 Std. Dev. .53 Std. Dev. .47 Std. Dev. .49 Female Number 21 Number 36 Number 57 Mean 2.45 Mean 2.59 Mean 2.54 Std. Dev. .64 Std. Dev. .57 Std. Dev. .59 Transfer and Native Number 57 Number 79 Number 136* Stu- Mean 2.39 Mean 2.46 Mean 2.43 dents Std. Dev. .57 Std. Dev. .53 Std. Dev. .54 *Only 136 of the 155 student population total are reported since five male transfer students, students, students seven female transfer five male native students and two female native included in the study did not complete any of the five selected upper-level marketing courses 244 Table 62. Summary of Analysis of Variance Test of Grade Point Averages of Juniors and Seniors for Five Selected Upper-Level Marketing Courses Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean F ratio critical p- Variation Squares Freedom Square value F value value (.05 level) Gender 1.164 1 1.164 3.99 3.84 .048 Status .116 1 .116 .40 3.84 .530 Gender- Status .142 1 .142 .48 3.84 .488 Error 38 538 ‘132 .292 Total 39 960 13 0" 245 Table 63. Summary of Grade Point Statistics of Juniors and Seniors for Five Selected Upper-Level Marketing Courses of Transfer Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses at Col- leges Other Than Ferris State College and of Native Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower- Level Marketing Courses at Ferris State College Stgtus Transfer and Transfer Native Native Gender Students Students Students Male Number 10 Number 39 Number 49 Mean 2.42 Mean 2.34 Mean 2.35 Std. Dev. .64 Std. Dev. .49 Std. Dev. .52 Female Number 8 Number 35 Number 43 Mean 2.53 Mean 2.59 Mean 2.58 Std. Dev. .72 Std. Dev. .57 Std. Dev. .60 Transfer and Native Number 18 Number 74 Number 92* Stu- Mean 2.47 Mean 2.46 Mean 2.46 dents Std. Dev. .66 Std. Dev. .54 Std. Dev. .56 *Only ninety-two of the 155 student population are reported since female transfer complete (a) students thirty-one male transfer regionally accredited colleges College and (b) nine male native students and twenty included in the study did not at least three lower-level marketing courses at other than Ferris students State and three female native students included in the study did not com- lower-level marketing courses at plete Ferris State College at least three Table 64. 246 Summary of Analysis of Variance Test of Grade Point Averages of Juniors and Seniors for Five Selected Upper-Level Marketing Courses of Trans- fer Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses at Colleges Other Than Ferris State College and of Native Students Who Had Taken Selected Lower-Level Marketing Courses at Ferris State College Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean F ratio critical p- Variation Squares Freedom Square value F value value (.05 level) Gender 1.143 1 1.143 3.65 3.84 .059 Status .005 1 .005 .01 3.84 .903 Gender- Status .068 1 .068 .22 3.84 .643 Error ‘21‘565 88 .313 Total 28.781 91 247 Table 65. Summary of Course Withdrawals of Juniors and Seniors 55313: Transfer and Transfer Native Native Number of Students Students Students Courses Gender Withdrawn Number X Number X Number x Male 0 14 34.2* 11 22.9* 25 28.1* 1 10 24.4 8 16.7 18 20.2 2 8 14.6 13 27.1 19 21.4 3 or more 11._2fil§. 15 .3313 .21 .3013 41 100.0 48 100.0 89 100.0 Female 0 11 39.3* 15 39.5* 26 39.4* 1 6 21.4 4 10.5 10 15.2 2 4 14.3 13 34.2 17 25.8 3 or more _1 25,9 _5 15,5 15 12,2 28 100.0 38 100.0 66 100.0ta Transfer 0 25 36.2* 26 30.2* 51 32.9* and 1 16 23.2 12 14.0 28 18.1 Native 2 10 14.5 26 30.2 36 23.2 Students 3 or more 15 _2551 22 _ZEIQ. .49 _ZEIB 69 100.0 86 100.0 155 100.0 * Column percent **Values actually add to 100.1% because of rounding each percent to nearest one-tenth 248 Table 66. Summary of Chi Square Test of Course Withdrawals of Juniors and Seniors critical _ Chi Square Degrees of Chi Square value p- Bypotheses Freedom value (.05 level) value 7 (Status) 3 6.314 7.815 .097 12 (Male) 3 3.559 7.815 .313 12 (Female) 3 4.444 7.815 .217 249 Table 67. Summary of Attrition of Juniors and Seniors Statug Transfer and Transfer Native. Native Students Students Students Total Att. Att. Total Att. Att. Total Att. Att. Gender No. No. X No. No. X No. No. X Male 41 7 17.1 48 9 18.8 89 16 18.0 Female 28 8 28.6 38 3 7.9 86 11 16.7 Transfer and Native Students 69 15 21.7 86 12 14.0 155 27 17.4 Table 68. Summary of Chi Square Test of Attrition of Juniors and Seniors critical Chi Square Degrees of Chi Square value p- Bypotheses Freedom value (.05 level) value 8 (Status) 1 1.613 3.841 .204 12 (Male) 1 .042 3.841 .837 12 (Female) 1 4.962 3.841 .026 250 Table 89. Summary of Reasons for Attrition of Juniors and Seniors Status Transfer and Transfer Native Native Students Students Students Att. Att. Att. Att. Att. ~Att. Att. Gender Reason No. X No. X No X Male Grades 1 14.3* 7 77.8* 8 50.0* Financial 4 57.1 2 22.2 -8 37.5 Illness 0 0 0 0 0 0 Live at Home 1 14.3 0 0 1 6.3 Cur. Change 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unknown 1 4.4.3 9 0 _1 __L3 7 100.0 9 100.0 16 100.0** Female Grades 4 50.0* 1 33.3* 5 45.5* Financial 1 12.5 0 0 1 9.1 Illness 1 12.5 0 0 1 9.1 Live at Home 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cur. Change 1 12.5 2 66.7 3 27.3 Unknown 1 .12.}: 9. _1 8 100.0 3 100.0 11 100.0** Transfer Grades 5 33.3* 8 66.7* 13 48.2* and Financial 5 33.3 2 16.7 7 25.9 Native Illness 1 6.7 0 0 1 3.7 Students Live at Home 1 6.7 0 0 1 3.7 Cur. Change 1 6.7 2 16.7 3 11.1 Unknown _2 .111 _Q _0__. _2 _LA 15 100.0 12 100.0** 27 100.0 * Column percent **Va1ues actually add to 100 percent to nearest one-tenth .1X because of rounding each 251 Table 70. Summary of Chi Square Test of Reasons for Attrition by Grades Compared to Other Reasons for Attrition of Juniors and Seniors critical . Chi Square Degrees of Chi Square value p- Hypothesis Freedom value (.05 level) value 9 (Status) 1 2.967 3.841 .085 Table 71. Summary of Juniors and Seniors on Academic Probation for Any One Quarter Statug Transfer and Transfer Native Native Students Students Students Total Pro. Pro. Total Pro. Pro. Total Pro. Pro. Gender No. No. X No. No. X No. No. X Male 41 2 4.9 48 7 14.6 .89 9 10.1 Female 28 2 7.1 38 0 0 66 2 3.0 Transfer and Native Students 69 4 5.8 86 7 8.1 155 11 7.1 252 Table 72. Summary of Chi Square Test of Juniors and Seniors on Academic Probation for Any One Quarter critical Chi Square Degrees of Chi Square ‘ value p- Hypotheses Freedom value (.05 level) value 10 (Status) 1 .319 3.841 .572 12 (Male) 1 2.291 3.841 .130 Table 73. Summary of Seniors Who Graduated by Spring 1986 $33135 Transfer and Transfer Native Native Stunts Manta Student: Total Grd. Grd. Total Grd. Grd. Total Grd. Grd. Gender No. No. X No. No. X No. No. X Male 41 34 82.9 48 38 79.2 89 72 80.9 Female 28 20 71.4 38 35 92.1 66 55 83.3 Transfer and Native Students 69 54 76.3 66 73 84.9 155 1 27 81.9 253 Table 74. Summary of Chi Square Test of Seniors Who Graduated by Spring 1986 critical Chi Square Degrees of Chi Square , value p- Hypotheses Freedom value (.05 level) value 11 (Status) 1 1.136 3.841 .287 12 (Male) 1 .202 3.841 .653 12 (Female) 1 4.962 3.841 .026 BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY hobs Andersen, Charles J. - F o o . Washington, D. C.: American Council on Education, 1981. Chronicle Guidance Publications, Inc. ro £Q£_I;§g§f§;§. Moravia, N. Y.: Chronicle Guidance Publications, Inc., 1983. College Entrance Examination Board. Ibe_§gllggg_flanfihggk 1985-86. New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1985. Cope, Robert, and Hannah, William. ‘B§_leigg_flgg;§___1h§ W NewYork: John W116? Sons, 1975. Daniel, Wayne W. t Boston: Houghton Miffin Company, 1984. Deupree, Joseph E. WWW]: 11W: Biz Rapids. MI.: Ferris State College, 1982. Eells, Walter Crosby. Ih§_iunig;_ggll§g§. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1931. Erickson. Lance. ed. WM WWW. Ann Arbor. MI.: American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers, 1983. Frankel, Martin M. and Gerald, Debra E. Projectiogg 91 WW. Washinston. D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1980. Garrett, Henry E., and Woodworth, R. S. New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1958. 254 255 Gossman, Charles 8.; Nobbe, Charles E.; Patricelli, Theresa; Schmid, Calvin E.; and Steahr, Thomas E. Migration Wed Statgg. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1968. Grant, W. Vance, and Snyder, Thomas D. Digg§t_91_Ede§tign Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1983. Hathaway, Richard J. ed. ch : . Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International, 1979. Knoell, Dorothy M. , and Medsker, Leland L. Ezgm_lnnigr_tg Senior College:__A_fléti2nal.512i2_21—1h§—11§9§191 . Washington, D. C.: American Council on Education, 1965. Marquis Professional Publications. Xeazhggk_gi_fligh§r ucat o D ecto o 0 es U v gitigg. Chicago: Marquis Who’s Who, Inc., 1984. Menacker, Julius. Fro School to : r t and_Iz§n§1§;. Washington, D. C.: American Council on Education, 1975. Mills, Richard L. St ti tic for ed 0 c Eggiggsfi. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1977. National Centero for Education Statistics. Dig§§t_2£ du t t . Washington, D. C. U. S. Department of Education, 1984. National Center for Education Statistics. Ih§_gggditigg Qi_£figgatigg. Washington, D. C.: U. S. Department of Education, 1984. Nye, Russel B. Ferrig 99mg§ of Age: The Year; of Iran- §itigg 1946-1963. Big Rapids, MI. The Centen- nial Task Force, 1983. Parker, Garland Glenwood. 7- Iowa City, IA.: The American College Testing Publications, 1974. Parker. Garland Glenwood- WW v New York: School and Society Books, 1971. 256 Sandeen, Arthur, and Goodale, Thomas. Ih§_1;ag§figg_§tg; dente__An_Aetien_Asende.fer_flighet_Edueetien- Gainesville, FL.: University of Florida, 1976. Smith. G. M. A_Sim2lified_Quide_te_§tetietiee_fer Eexeheleez_end_fldueetien. New York: Holt. Rinehart and Winston, 1970. The College Division. ’ Berren_e_Qemeeet.§uide_te_fiellege Izgggfigz. Woodbury, N. Y.: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1979. Thornton. James W. Jr. Ihe_Qemmunitz_lunier_gellese. 3d ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1972. U. S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of the Census. tio D t ook d G ide to Sources-St tistical Aeetreet_ef_the_flnited_§tetee_12§§- 106th ed. Washington, D. C.: U. 8. Government Printing Office, 1985. Weiss, Neil, and Hassett, Matthew. I no t Reading, MA.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1982. Dissertations Altman, Gene. "An Analysis of Transfer Credits Accepted and Length of Time Taken to Complete Bachelor’s Degrees by Selected Transfer Business Management Students." 0 edited by Patricia M. Colling. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International, 1981. Bulkley, Kent Vernon. "A Study of the Academic Achievement and Graduation Rate of Transfer Students to Michigan State University from Two-Year and Four-Year Insti- tutions " In Diesertetien_Ahetreete_1nternetienel. edited by Patricia M. Colling. Ann Arbor: Uni- versity Microfilms International, 1975. Capraro, Vincent J. "A Comparison of Community College Distributive Education Programs Based on the Grad- uates’ Perceptions of their Performance and Occu- pational Success on the Job." In Dissertation Abetreete_lnternetienel. edited by Patricia M. Colling. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms Inter- national, 1980. 257 Desmond, Mary Ann. "Assessment of a Community College’s Transfer Preparation for Selected Majors, Consider- ing Factors of Student Eligibility, Opinion, and Grade Point Differentials. " In Diasertgtign Wiesel. edited by Patricia M. Colling. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms Inter- national, 1984. Downey, Carolyn R. w-U ' 7 - e r o n ec e 1 C1 r cal Gra u ve A sociat n i ree om Ricks Coll e an s e Four- 0 e e 't . Logan, UT.: By the Author, 1980. Dragon, Albert Leon. "An Investigation of the Academic Success of Community and Junior College Transfers Entering a Four-Year College of Business.“ In Dissertation Abstragts Internatiogal, edited by Patricia M. Colling. Ann Arbor: Univer- sity Microfilms International, 1980. Fleishans. John Thomas 111. W S d n ' uc Co c o inessAdmimLttetien. Tempe. AZ.: By the Author. Arizona State University, 1973. Goodarznia, Homayoun. ”A Comparative Study of Academic Performance Between Northern Virginia Community College Transfer Students and Native Students at the George Mason University." In Digsertgtigg t' , edited by Patricia M. Colling. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms Inter- national, 1983. Impink, Patti Johnson. "Economic Achievement of Junior College Students in Terminal and Transfer Programs." In DiseertetiexLAbetnetalntematienel. edited by Patricia M. Colling. Ann Arbor: University Micro- films International, 1983. Nott, Goldie Tilman. "The Establishment and Growth of Ferris State Institute, 1884-1960." Master’s thesis, School of Education, University of Michi- gan, 1962. Pion, Nelson Everett. ”An Evaluation of the Performance of Marketing and Management Transfer Students at the University of Massachusetts.“ In ° Abstraetantemetienel. edited by Patricia M. Colling. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms Inter- national, 1983. 258 Popple, Diane Dawn. "Comparison of Existing and Recommended Practices of Articulation in Business Education." In Wow. edited by Patricia M. Colling. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International, 1980. Sargent, Duncan MacGregor. "A Comparative Study of the Pre-Grade-Flation, Post-Grade-Flation Academic Success of Michigan Community College Transfer Students to Michigan State University in 1965-67 and 1971-1973." In DiseertetienJ-Astaaetmter: national, edited by Patricia M. Colling. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International, 1978. Sutherland. Lee William W .136'91‘ :- Q- S ‘. xergitx. Boston: By the Author, Suffolk Univer- sity, 1978. Turner, Mary Hill. “Articulation Practices in NABTE Member Institutions Regarding Shorthand and Type- writing Courses Completed in High Schools and Non- collegiate Post-Secondary Schools." In Qiggertgtigg Wiesel. edited by Patricia M. Colling. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms Inter- national, 1983. Intgrvigwg Churchill, Donna. Alumni Records Office Staff. Ferris State College, Big Rapids, Michigan. Interview, 8 July 1985. Cooper, Michael C. Faculty Member. Ferris State College, Big Rapids, Michigan. Interviews, 15 May 1986, 21 May 1986, 18 June 1986, 25 June 1986, 7 May 1987, 11 June 1987. Dickens, Otis. Assistant Dean. Ferris State College, Big Rapids, Michigan. Interviews, 1 July 1985, 9 July 1985, 6 September 1985, 11 March 1986, 27 March 1986, 22 April 1986, 28 April 1987, 24 June 1987. Heisler, Alan A. Faculty Member. Ferris State College, Big Rapids, Michigan. Interview, 21 April 1986. Junker, Elmer S. Faculty Member. Ferris State College, Big Rapids, Michigan. Interview, 26 March 1985. 259 Lucas, Keith E. Faculty Member. Ferris State College, Big Rapids, Michigan. Interviews, 30 January 1985, 9 July 1986, 17 September 1986. Maas, James D. Faculty Member. Ferris State College, Big Rapids, Michigan. Interviews, 25 June 1986, 17 June 1987. Navnarro, Adolfo. Research Consultant. Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. Interviews, 11 October 1985, 25 October 1985. Schnepf, Paul G. Registrar. Ferris State College, Big Rapids, Michigan. Interviews, 8 July 1985, 5 April 1986, 14 July 1986, 24 September 1986. Schnepf, Paul G. Registrar. Ferris State College, Big Rapids, Michigan. Telephone Interview, 4 April 1986. Swartz, Manfred E. Coordinator of Testing. Ferris State College, Big Rapids, Michigan. Interviews, 14 June 1985, 2 July 1985, 9 June 1987. Swartz, Manfred E. Coordinator of Testing. Ferris State College, Big Rapids, Michigan. Telephone Interview, 4 May 1987. Sytsma, Sidney P. Director Planning and Development. Ferris State College, Big Rapids, Michigan. Interviews, 18 June 1985, 2 July 1985. Taylor, William G. News Editor. Ferris State College, Big Rapids, Michigan. Telephone Interview, 4 April 1986. WWW Association of Independent Colleges and Schools. "New AACSB Standards Reflect Transfer-of-Credit for Member Institutions." lg§_gggpg§§ 11 (November 1984): 11. Groft, William L. "Elementary and Intermediate Accounting Achievement of Native and Transfer Students in Selected Colleges and Universities in Pennsylvania." W 20 (Sprins 1980): 1-3. Krzystofik, Anthony T., and Bridgman, Spencer C. "A Need for Closer Integration of Two-and Four-Year Bus- iness Prosrams." Qellesietejesflliens 34 (Spring 1981): 4. 260 Kintzer, Frederick C. "Articulation/Transfer Agreements: Alternative Approaches." ATQ§_mepaaa 46 (July 1982): 10-11; and (August 1982): 4, 6. National Education Association. "Community Colleges Address What Makes a Learner." NEA Higher Education Advo- Qata 18 (March 1986): 1. National Education Association. "ETAL." NEA Higher Educa- tion Advocate 20 (December 1985): 4; 13 (May 1985): 4; 8 (October 1985): 4; and 7 (December 1984): 4. Newspapers "2 Years of Study at Grand Rapids Junior College + 2 Years of Study at Grand Valley State 2 4-Year College Degree,” Tha Grand Rapida Bragg, 5 December 1985, sec. A, p. 15. "College Dropout More Likely if Students Don’t Get Involved," The Grand Rapida Praas, 4 December 1985, sec. D, p. 9. "Junior College, GVSC Coordinate Two-Year, Pre-Nursing Courses,” Tha Grand Rapids Praas, 7 July 1986, sec. C, p. 3. Records and Reports Allred, Marcus, and Wingfield, Julian C. Jr.FolTow-Up tud of 79-80 tu : t C 01' Commu 't Qollaga Systam. Raleigh: North Carolina State Department of Community Colleges, [1982]. Brue, Eldon J.; Engen, Harold B.; and Maxey, E. James. R ch t: 0 Do Communit l Tra r at'o tu nt ‘ 7 No. 41 Iowa City: The American Testing Program, [1971]. Hawaii University. ' r t w G w't Co unit 0 e B c 0 Co u Wail-.89. Honolulu: Office of Institutional Research and Analysis, [1981]. Junker, Elmer S. "History of Ferris State College." Report for History of Higher Education in the U. S. class, College of Education, Michigan State University, 1967. 261 Mohr, Paul B. Sr., and Sears, James C. Apfipgpaaafial Medel_fer_Artieeletiea_end_the_Dexeleement_ef_Ine: Elee:Ire_Eeesrem_Asreemente_§eteeen.Norfelk State Uai2ereitz1_A_Eredemiaeatlz_Bleek_Eeur:Ieer_Eublie Tpatitatioa, apg Tidewatar Qoppuaitz Collaga. A Pr do __e__miaeetlz_Ehite_Meltizfiemeue_1uezleer_fiuhlie ‘ngpaaitz_gpllaga. Durham, ND.: North Carolina Central University, [1979]. Slark, Julie, and Bateman, Harold. ‘Trapafar_§tadaptaL ad mic Per 0 a c at h Un ver - rni t e Californ Stat Univer ' ie C l e n ot l ‘ . Santa Ana: Santa Ana College, [1983]. Slark, Julie, and Bateman, Harold. Traaafiar_§tadantaL dem Pro ress at e Un v si C: - - ° Santa Ana: Santa-Ana-College, t1981j. cher_§eureee Ferris State College laeezfle_Ihe_Eeetet_Eerrie_§tete QpTTaga. Big Rapids, MI. Ferris State College, 1986. Ferris State College. Sahapl_£allatin. Big Rapids, MI.: Ferris State College, 1984. Ferris State College. Staaapt_flanapppk. Big Rapids, MI.: Student Services, 1984. Michigan Association of College Registrars and Admissions Officiers. Th MACRAO Articulat‘on ree t. Dowagiac: Michigan Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers, 1982. U. S. u l t 974 nd . III/WWWI/ffi/flf/Vi/f/Yflfl/M/l/W/F/I I 3 1293 10762 7725