I 70-20 ,*168 HERSHEY, David E., 1932AN ANALYSIS OF THE ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT AND PROGRESS OF STUDENTS ADMITTED TO MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY THROUGH THE "SUMMER TEST ADMIT" PROGRAM 1965-1969. Michigan State University, Ph.D., 1970 Education, higher University Microfilms. A XEROXCompany, Ann Arbor, Michigan AN ANALYSIS OF THE ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT AND PROGRESS OF STUDENTS ADMITTED TO MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY THROUGH THE "SUMMER TEST ADMIT" PROGRAM 1965-1969 By David E. Hershey A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education 1970 ABSTRACT AN ANALYSIS OF THE ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT AND PROGRESS OF STUDENTS ADMITTED TO MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY THROUGH THE "SUMMER TEST ADMIT" PROGRAM 1965-1969 By David E. Hershey The Problem The selection of students for admission by colleges and universities is a paramount concern of our present society. In attempting to respond to society's concern, colleges and universities are faced with a problem, i.e., the feasibility of various methods for admitting students. This study is an analysis of one method of ad­ mission in light of the general problem facing the uni­ versity. The objective of this thesis is to evaluate the academic achievement and progress of Michigan freshmen admitted to Michigan State University through the "Summer Test Admit" program 1965-1969. The "Summer Test Admit" (STA) program is one option provided for the selection of Michigan students. The program consists of a special entrance examination for David E. Hershey Michigan senior high school students with low high school grade point averages. These students have been identified by the high school principal, counselor, or previous scholastic aptitude tests as having more academic ability than the low grade point average indicates. The students who are successful on the examination must enroll for the summer quarter. The special entrance examination is composed of the College Qualification Tests (CQT) and the Michigan State University Tests. Significance This study is significant and timely due to the value placed upon higher education today by society. Society not only values higher education but is concerned with and interested in the admission process, i.e., the selection of students by the university. The concern of society with the process of admit­ ting students to higher education is clear. The university is concerned with the methods of selection of those stu­ dents it feels can succeed, i.e., have normal academic achievement and progress. Society has had a high tolerance and faith in the decision-making process regarding admission options. However, the more concerned society becomes the more uni­ versities will have to evaluate their present systems of admission. David E. Hershey Population There are four groups of Summer Test Admit stu­ dents in this study. Each group has been identified by the year of entry into Michigan State University. To aid in the evaluation of the STA's achievement t and progress, comparisons were made between the STA popu­ lations and matched samples of regularly admitted students. The samples were selected from those Michigan stu­ dents regularly admitted to the fall quarter. The regular admit samples were enrolled in corresponding years to the STA populations. The four regular admit samples were then matched with the corresponding STA groups on the charac­ teristics of CQT total score, MSU reading score, and sex. Method of Analysis The study covers a four-year time period, fifteen continuous quarters, beginning fall quarter 1965 and extend­ ing through spring quarter 1969. The basic design of the study has been repeated for each of the four years cited. The research data collected on each STA and regular admit group was the mean MSU GPA, mean credits earned and rate of absence. The data was collected for each quarter and year of the study. The research data was compiled from student ad­ mission records, Registrar's transcripts, and Office of Evaluation Services data. David E. Hershey This design has been used to make comparisons be­ tween the matched groups using the variables, mean MSU GPA, mean credits earned and absence. The analysis was carried out by first computing the mean and standard deviation for each group. This w a s ( done per quarter using the variables, mean MSU GPA and mean credits earned. The variable of absence was recorded in frequency per quarter. A statistical comparison was then made between each matched STA and regular admit group. This comparison was made to determine if there were significant differences existing on the variables tested. In addition year-end comparisons between matched groups were made using the variables, mean accumulative MSU GPA and mean accumulative credits earned. A two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was first used: (1) to determine significant differences between male and female on the variables tested, (2) to uncover significant differences between matched groups, and (3) to test for interaction of sex and group. Results of the two- way analysis indicated the differences on the variables tested were not consistently present, except between the matched groups. A one-way ANOVA was then used to test for signifi­ cant differences between the matched groups using the variables, mean MSU GPA and mean credits earned. The David E . Hershey variables were compared in each quarter and for the accumu­ lative school years of the study. The statistical method used to determine signifi­ cant differences between groups on the variable of absence was the Chi-square test. , Additional information was gathered in the course of the study which was not tested for significant differ­ ences, but does add to the evaluation of academic achieve­ ment and progress of the STA students. First, the number of credits repeated per quarter by group was recorded; secondly, the withdrawal per group; and third, the number of degrees granted per group. Findings and Conclusions It would be reasonable to conclude that differences do exist between the matched groups of STA and regular admit students in mean MSU GPA, mean credits earned and absence. The STA groups' mean MSU GPA was consistently lower than the matched regular admit groups. And the STA groups' mean number of credits earned was usually below the matched regular adroit students. The rate of absence and number of credits repeated was higher for the STA groups compared to the students in the regular admit groups. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to express his sincere appreci­ ation to Dr. Vandel C. Johnson, Guidance Committee Chairman, for his interest and effort in my behalf during this study. Also my indebtedness to the other committee members; Dr. John A. Fuzak, Dr. Walter F. Johnson, and Dr. James B. McKee for their suggestions and direction. To Dr. Gordon A. Sabine, Vice President for Special Projects, Dr. Terrence J. Carey, Director of Admissions, and my colleagues in the Office of Admissions and Scholar­ ships my graditude for their assistance and support of this writing. To my wife Dolores and children, Scott, Jay, Jill and Anne Marie my special thank you for your charity. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I. INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OFTHE PROBLEM . Introduction ............................. The Problem ................... T h e o r y ............................ Significance ............................. Summary................................... Definition of Terms....................... II. III. IV. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE................... 1 1 2 7 9 10 11 16 The Public C o n c e r n ....................... The University's Concern ................ The Admissions Office (Counselor) Concern The Selection Process ................... Summary................................... 16 19 22 23 26 DESIGN....................................... 27 Population................................ Method of A n a l y s i s ....................... Null H y p o t h e s e s .......................... Summary................................... 27 30 36 36 ANALYSIS OF THE R E S U L T S ................... 38 Two-way Analysis of Variance............. One-way Analysis of Variance............. Chi-square Test of Significance. . . . Credits Repeated, Withdrawal, and Graduation................................ Summary................................... 38 42 53 iii I 58 62 Chapter V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 68 Summary. ................................. Findings and Conclusions ................ Discussion................................ Implications forFurther Research . . . 68 77 78 81 ....................................... 82 BIBLIOGRAPHY I iv LIST OF TABLES Table Page 3.1. Basic STA and Regular Admit Group Data . 4.1. The Results of a Two-way Analysis of Variance Comparing Mean MSU GPA and Mean Credits Earned with Sex and Group . . . 39 A Comparison of Mean MSU GPA Between STA and Regular Admit Groups Using a One-way ................... Analysis of Variance 43 4.2. 4.3. 4.4. 4.5. 4.6. 4.7. 4.8. 4.9; 4.10. . A Comparison of Mean Credits Earned Between STA and Regular Admit Groups Using a One-way Analysis of Variance........ 30 46 A Comparison of Mean Accumulative MSU GPA for School Year Completed Between STA and Regular Admit Groups Using a One-way Analysis of Variance ................... 50 A Comparison of Mean Accumulative MSU Credits Earned for School Years Completed Between STA and Regular Admit Groups Using a One-way Analysis of Variance . . 51 A Comparison of Absence Rates Between STA and Regular Admit Groups Using the Chi-square T e s t ..................... 55 Absence Rates for STA and Regular Admit G r o u p s ............................... 56 Presence Rates for STA and Regular Admit G r o u p s ............................... 57 Mean Credits Repeated for STA and Regular Admit G r o u p s ........................ 59 Withdrawal Rates for STA and Regular Admit G r o u p s ........................ 61 v CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM Introduction The selection of students for admission by colleges and universities is a paramount concern of our present society. In attempting to respond to society's concern colleges and universities are faced with a problem, the feasibility of various methods for admitting students. There are legitimate reasons for this concern: more students are applying for college and university admission than ever before; students are applying with wider ranges of high school achievement, both from college preparatory and general curriculum backgrounds; a college education is becoming a prerequisite for certain kinds of employment; and higher education is increasingly signifi­ cant in society as a birthright. Brubacher states, Would it follow in a society where not just a few but where many are free that all should have a liberal education? Reference to Aristotle would seem to argue that it should, for it was he who remarked that a constitution would be matched by a system of education consistent with its spirit. If so, and since there is 1 2 an undisputed equalitarianism about democratic institutions, it would seem that the democratic spirit demands that liberal education be the ex­ pectation of all.1 As this concern grows, colleges and universities will have to consider solutions to the problem of identi­ fying more students for admission. ' Society has had a high tolerance and belief in the decision-making process regarding admissions options. However, the more concerned society becomes, because of the afore-stated pressures, the more universities will have to evaluate their present programs of admission. The intent of the study is to provide research data about a specific system of admission. This thesis is an attempt to analyze one method of admission in light of the general problem facing the uni­ versity. The Problem The objective of this thesis is to evaluate the academic achievement and progress of Michigan freshmen admitted to Michigan State University through the "Summer Test Admit" program 1965-1969. The "Summer Test Admit" (STA) program is one option provided for the selection of Michigan students. The program consists of a special entrance examination for ^John S. Brubacher, Basis for Policy in Higher Education (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1965), p. i. 3 Michigan senior high school students with low high school grade point averages. These students have applied for admission tp the university but have been denied clear admission because of the low high school grade point average. These students have been identified by the high > school principal /counselor, or previous scholastic apti­ tude tests as having more academic ability than the low grade point average indicates. The students who are successful on the examination must enroll for the summer quarter. The program includes the opportunity for indi­ vidual counseling and academic advisement. Students are enrolled in a standard course schedule as full-time stu­ dents . The special entrance examination is composed of the College Qualification Tests State University Tests. (CQT) 2 and the Michigan 3 The College Qualification Tests . . . are designed to measure several abilities which are indicative of success in college. The test yields four scores: verbal or vocabulary . . . , general information . . . , numerical . . . , and a total score. . . . The total score provides the best single index of college ability for MSU students in general. . . .^ 2 Prepared and distributed by the Psychological Corporation, 304 East 45th Street, New York 17, New York. Also found in Oscar Krisen Buros, e d . , The Sixth Mental Measurements Yearbook (Highland Park, New Jersey: The Gryphon Press, 1965), pp. 708-14. 3 Prepared by Michigan State University, Office of Evaluation Services, East Lansing, Michigan. 4 Testing Bulletin, No. 3 (Revised), The Office of Evaluation Services, University College (East Lansing: Michigan State University, May, 1965). 4 The Michigan State University Tests are divided into three main areas. The MSU English Placement Test . . ... consists of thirty-five objective test items representing various aspects of English usage: spelling, capitalization, grammar, punctuation, sentence structure, and organ­ ization. . . . The MSU Arithmetic Placement Test and the MSU Mathematics Test (algebra) are also adminis- • tered as a part of the Orientation Test battery, but students have an option to select which one of the two tests they will take. Students who plan to enroll in a beginning course in Mathematics must take the Mathematics Test, while all others must take the Arithmetic Test. . . . The MSU Reading Test . . . is a 42-item test of reading comprehension. The score is based upon the student's ability to answer ques­ tions based on reading passages representative of several academic areas at MSU. The test is not re­ stricted to the simple mechanics of reading, but rather the score provides some measure of factors involved in critical thought. . . . Results from studies of this kind have demonstrated that all of the tests have some value in predicting grades [academic achievement].5 Students who are successful on the tests are those who score at the twentieth percentile or higher on the CQT total score and reading portion of the MSU Test. This cut­ off level has been set by mutual agreement between the Office of Admissions, Counseling Services, and Evaluation Services. "The total score of the CQT has generally proved to be the best single predictor of the grade point average for all students in general, followed closely by the MSU Reading Test."® Other options in the admission process for incoming Michigan freshmen are clear admit, withhold decision, 5Ibid. 6Ibid. 5 regular test, and denial (see pages 11-15, Definition of Terms). The Office of Admissions is responsible for implementing these decisions and programs to determine which applicants have the best possible chance to succeed. General Freshman Admission Criterion. i The University seeks to admit only those students who can provide evidence of the intellectual perform­ ance and potential which will permit them to profit from programs of the academic rigor of those offered by Michigan State. The admissions decision takes into account all available information— grades, school rank, test scores, principal-counselor recommendations, leadership qualities, citizenship record, caliber of high school program, firmness of motivation, and appropriateness of proposed field of study in relation to the applicant's apparent abilities— but of these, the most important items always are high school grades. "Since its foundation over a century ago, Michigan State University has honored its commitment to the young people of the state by extending the opportunity for higher education to all who, in its judgment, have demonstrated Q the qualities necessary to benefit from it." Historically, as indicated in Madison Kuhn's book, Michigan State: The First Hundred Years, "Those who can benefit have been 9 selected by some form of entrance examination." 7 Catalog of Courses and Academic Programs, Michigan State University Publication, Vol. LXIII, No. 7 (East Lansing: University Editor's Office, Michigan State Uni­ versity, December, 1968), p. 5. g Improving Undergraduate Education, the Report of the Committee on Undergraduate Education,Michigan State University, 1967, Chapter 3, p. 11. 9 Madison Kuhn, Michigan State: The First Hundred Years (East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1955), p. 19. 6 Academic achievement and progress within the Uni­ versity is one type of yardstick for measuring the success of a student. Academic achievement and progress are also important criteria for consideration in establishing guide­ lines for programs of admission, e.g., STA. i The purpose of this analysis is to determine exactly what kind of an achievement and progress story is present, as measured by this type of yardstick. The academic achievement and progress of each of the four STA groups has been recorded in the form of mean MSU grade point average, mean credits earned, and absence records. A comparison has also been made between the STA populations and a sample of students taken from the regular admit Michigan population for each fall during the limits of the study, 1965-1969. The populations of STA students were matched with an equal number of fall regular admit students on the basis of College Qualification Test total score, Michigan State University Reading Test score, and sex. Statistical analyses were then used to measure significant differences between groups in areas indicating academic achievement and progress, i.e., MSU grade point average, credits earned, and absence. 7 Theory The ideal would be to develop a precise method for predicting a student's academic achievement at college. According to Hoyt, "We know that the most useful pre­ dictions are made when both a scholastic aptitude test and the high school record are used."*® However, the high school records of the STA stu­ dents indicate questionable past academic achievement, i.e., low high school grades. One alternative in view of Hoyt's statement is to use a scholastic aptitude test to indicate the ability necessary for normal academic achievement. In other words, selecting those students who have the ability necessary for normal academic achievement and progress will be accomplished by entrance testing, that is, the College Qualification Test. Ralph Berdie reports on the CQT as follows, In summary, the College Qualification Tests are as good as but no better than the best of the other college aptitude tests. The tests have many advan­ tages and no disadvantages that are not inherent in tests of their type. They are well constructed, edited, and printed. They have satisfactory relia­ bility and are as valid as other tests available for these purposes; they are easy to administer and to score. The CQT is as adequate for identifying, Donald P. Hoyt, "Forecasting Academic Success in Specific Colleges," ACT Research Report, American College Testing Program, No. 27 (Iowa City: American College Test­ ing Program, August, 1968), p. 7. 8 admitting, classifying, and counseling college stu­ dents as any other college aptitude t e s t . H Warren Findley in the same text states, "There was unanimous agreement among the previous reviewers on suitability of the tests for selective admissions pur­ poses." ^ In the publication, College Testing, the American Council on Education states, Tests have repeatedly proven their usefulness as pre­ dictors of success in the most common academic areas — liberal arts, medicine, dentistry, engineering, law, and nursing. They are also being developed rapidly, too, as predictors of academic success in some of the so-called occupational fields, again with the measure of success described either by grade point ratio in these curricula or by achievement scores in later institutional-wide testing.13 These entrance exams are especially valid when the test program is based on local norms. The actual academic achievement and progress of a given student can serve as an index for establishing the validity of the entrance testing program. "This means then that a prediction test which may be highly successful in one situation does not necessarily apply to another and that each institution needs to weigh local factors carefully in anticipation of setting up an effective admission testing program." 11 Buros, op. ci t ., p. 710. 13 14 12 Ibid., p. 711. College Testing (Washington, D.C.: Council on Education, 1959), p. 15. 14Ibid. American 9 Therefore, if it can be determined that the stu­ dents admitted through the Summer Test Admit program have a fair chance for success, i.e., to have successful academic achievement and progress, then this analysis has a role in planning future admissions programs. I Significance This study is significant and timely because of the value placed upon higher education today by society. Society not only values higher education but is concerned with and interested in the admission process, i.e., the selection of students by the university. B. Alden Thresher writes in his book, College Admission and the Public Interest, "Populations have often showed remarkable patience with situations involving mis­ directed selectivity. be running out." There are signs that patience may 15 Paul Dressel, et a l . emphasize the significance of the problem: Higher education today is highly prized; it is also being pressured and probed. The survival and the future of the nation quite apparently depend to a large extent on providing a better education to a larger percentage of our youth.16 ^ B . Alden Thresher, College and University Ad­ missions and the Public Interest (New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1966) , pp. 20-21. ^ P a u l L. Dressel, and Associates. Evaluation in Higher Education (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1961), p. 3. 10 Society is concerned with the college-going pro­ cess, the university is concerned with meeting its commit­ ment to the people, and the admission counselors are dedicated to this important function of selecting students for admission. I Their chief concern is the educational welfare of students entering colleges and universities. That concern takes the form of extending wise counsel to students so that intelligent decisions can be made about a choice of college.I? It would appear then, while this study is specifically concerned with the Michigan State University student, it is also pertinent to other institutions of higher education concerned with the public interest. Summary As our society's concern with the admission process grows, colleges and universities will have to consider various solutions to the problem of selecting students for admission. Society has had a high tolerance and faith in the decision-making process regarding admission options. How­ ever, the more concerned society becomes the more uni­ versities will have to evaluate their present systems of admission. 17 Richard R. Perry, The Admissions Officer (Toledo, Ohio: The University of Toledo, 1963-64), p. 63. 11 The objective of this study is to provide such an analysis of one program of admission in light of the general problem facing the university. Definition of Terms Absence.— The failure of a pupil to be present at school; generally understood as failure to be present at more than half the session. 18 (In this study no GPA or credits earned for that quarter.) Academic Achievement.— Knowledge attained or skills developed in the school subjects, usually designated by test score or by marks assigned by teacher or both. 19 Clear Admit.— Students who have a B-, or better, grade point average in a high school college preparatory curriculum. Students must submit Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) verbal and math scores. Students must have the recommendation of the high school. Synonym Regular Admit. College Qualification Tests.— A battery of tests designed to measure several abilities which may predict success in the university. areas: The test yields scores in four verbal, general information, numerical, and a total T O (New York: Carter V . Good, e d ., Dictionary of Education McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1945), p. 2. 19Ibid., p. 6. 12 score. These tests have been a part of the MSU Orientation testing program. Credits Earned.— A unit for expressing quanti­ tatively the amount of content of a course of instruction, especially with reference to the value of the course in > relation to the total requirements for a degree or certificate. 20 (Those course credits earned and accumulated to establish class standing, e.g., less than 40 credits— Freshman, 40-84 credits earned— Sophomore, 85-129 credits earned— Junior, and 130-183 credits earned— Senior.) Denial (Non-Admit).— This is a possible admission decision because those students denied admission are en­ couraged to continue their education in the juniorcommunity college. This beginning may lead to transfer admission at a later date. Grade Point Average.— A measure of average scho­ lastic success in all school subjects taken by a student during a certain tern or semester, or accumulated for several terms or semesters; obtained by dividing grade points by hours of course work taken, when course marks are weighted by some such system as the following to obtain grade points: A = 40, B = 30, C = 20, D = 10, F = commonly used at the college level. 20Ibid., p. 110. 21 21Ibid., p. 40. 0; most 13 Interaction.— In experimentation, the condition resulting when the effect of one factor or condition is dependent on the presence or absence of another factor or condition; for example, if the effect of size of type on reading rate is dependent on style of type used, there is an interaction between size and style. 22 Matching, Basis o f .— The characteristic or instru­ ment used to match or equate groups in group experimentation. 23 In this study CQT total score, MSU Reading Test score and sex were used to match the groups. Michigan Regular Admit.— In this study, Michigan students clearly admitted to the fall quarter. Michigan State University Tests (Orientation Tests).— A battery of tests designed by the Office of Evaluation Services at MSU to indicate the student's ability in English usage, reading comprehension, arith­ metic and/or mathematics. Matriculation.— The formal process, completed by registration, of being admitted as a student to the rights and privileges of membership in a college or university. Paradigm.— A model or pattern. 22Ibid., p. 223. 24Ibid., p. 253. 23Ibid., p. 251. 24 14 Progress.— The process of completing on the average of one grade per year. 25 (The progress of the student through a given curriculum toward a degree, e.g., in relation to MSU credits earned, 1-39 credits earned in­ clusive equals MSU freshman class status.) » Regular Admit.— Synonym for Clear Admit. See definition of Clear Admit. Regular Test.— This method is used in cases of student applications in which, because of circumstances in the applicant's background, there is incomplete infor­ mation. Normally, these cases would be: have had very low high school grades, (a) veterans who (b) persons with a General Education Diploma, or (c) persons who have not completed a high school diploma program. Sample, Matched.— A sample drawn by selecting cases each having (within limits) the same variate values in the control variables as the corresponding cases in another sample. 26 Success, School.— The degree or measure of pupil achievement at school. 27 Ibid., p. 313. 27Ibid., p. 398. 26Ibid., p. 354. 15 Withdrawal.— The act of a pupil leaving school permanently. drawn. 28 (As requested by the school, i.e., with­ This is as indicated on the official university transcript.) Withhold Admission.— This decision applies to those students who are not clearly admissable because of their high school grade point average. These students often have much higher tested ability than the grade point average indicates. In addition, these students have an upward trend in their high school GPA. The admission is withheld until additional academic information is sent to the university. The student is requested to have the high school grades forwarded at the conclusion of the present semester. If the academic information requested, i.e., transcript of high school GPA, indicates academic improve­ ment, admission is usually granted. 28Ibid., p. 452. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE The literature regarding the admission of college and university students is abundant. However, there is a scarcity of published work relating to the specific topic of this study. In reviewing the literature, three areas stand out: the society's concern with the admissions process; the university's concern for meeting society's demand; and the admissions counselors' (admissions office) continued search for the best method for the selection of students. The Public Concern Society's interest in higher education is one of the most apparent trends in American education. These concerns are lodged in developing conditions over a number of years, conditions which have recently been accentuated. One condition is the American concept of democracy. The belief is prevalent that every individual, no matter from what rank of life he comes, should have a chance to make the best of himself. An open road 16 17 from kindergarten to university is the ideal of Americans.* Industrialism, increase in the number completing secondary education, and higher education for status, both social and economic, are conditions which have accelerated public concern about admission to higher education. The factors seem to unite in creating a greater need for higher education and a correspondingly increased demand for its opportunities. They are manifestations of forces deeply rooted in the social order; and a policy which seeks to determine who should go to insti­ tutions of higher education, without regarding the implications of these factors, is not likely to be very effective. Such a policy may place the insti­ tutions of higher learning in opposition to trends which future progress may take and thus hamper their influence as a constructive force in society. A policy of selection which considers the implications of these changing conditions will have to adjust itself to the demands of increasing numbers of students.2 The 1964 Educational Policies Commission of the National Education Association in its publication "Uni­ versal Opportunity for Education Beyond the High School" stated, If individual freedom is the American ideal and if education is increasingly pertinent to the social well being the common practice of ending one's education at the high school level cannot be defended. It should be public policy to promote the universalization of educational opportunity beyond the high s c h o o l . 3 Habib Amin Kurani, Selecting the College Student in America, Bureau of Publications (New York: Columbia University, Teachers College, 1931), p. 65. 2Ibid. 3 James D. Logsdon, "A Case for the Junior College," The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, (December, 1968), 64. 18 Nevitt Sanford also indicates the public's concern: The social benefits of college seem to be regarded as highly as the economic ones, and to be inseparably interrelated with them. For the great middle class, college has become a social necessity, while for mem­ bers of the lower class it is a prime means for social advancement.* He goes on to say, ' The crisis in higher education is chronic. The great problem today is essentially the same as it has been for a long time. It is how to do better the things that colleges are intended to do; how to realize more fully, despite pressures from without and divided council within, the aim of developing the potentiali­ ties of each student.5 Albert H. Dunn states, "The popularization of higher education with its exploding enrollment has created a vast new public of parents, relatives, and new alumni with a continuing interest in the affairs of their uni­ versity."6 Thresher, Bowles, Garret and Rich, Doebler, Rivlin, and others affirm that the public today is increasingly interested and concerned with higher education. David D. Henry, president of the University of Illinois, sums up the public interest, Let us assume that America will not accept a philosophy of dividing up what educational service it has instead 4 Nevitt Sanford, College and Character (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1964), p. 4. 5 Ibid., p. 10. 6Albert H. Dunn, "Admissions as a Public Relation Function," The Journal of the Association of College A d ­ missions Counselors, XII, No. 3 (19^7), 1-3. 19 of creating m ore. Educated men and women are America1s chief resource, and the people will have the wisdom to develop it if they understand the issues and I believe they are coming to understand the issues. The remark­ able growth in the record of private giving to higher education, the formal declarations of organized busi­ ness and organized labor, the increased attention to discussions of problems of higher education are all hopeful signs that the climate of public opinion basic to adequate support will develop in time to enable colleges and universities to meet their new obligations and new opportunities.7 The University's Concern The university's concern and obligation to society is reflected in a statement by the MSU Committee on Under­ graduate Education: The admissions decision is at once an instrument of public policy, representing the university's obligation to the citizens who support it, and an instrument of academic policy representing its obligation to achieve high standards in all the programs it conducts. Every admission decision, from rejection of a single appli­ cant to the far reaching determination of overall size and growth and distribution, every decision affects in unaccountable ways, not only the vitality of the Uni­ versity's courses of study, but the lives of individual men and women and the capacity of society to reach its own best hopes for all its members.8 Sir Eric Asby, in an MSU Administrative group meetI ing, April 25, 1967, stated that, The idea that a student has a right to an education is so well grounded in America that it could probably 7 Raymond Howes, e d ., Higher Education and the Society It Serves (Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1957), p. 11. 0 Improving Undergraduate Education, op. cit., p. 11. 2 0 not be dispelled. It is a matter of living with the idea and of trying to solve the problems that arise as a result of it.9 J. B. Johnson suggests, It seems to me that an intelligent, successful and enduring society will provide educational facilities to enable each individual to secure training for some occupation suited to his native abilities or endow- ' ments, so that he may perform his share of the world's work in a field which he can work at best.10 John T. Caldwell indicates: Compulsions to limit enrollment may arise from so simple a fact as the lack of space in which to grow, or from the subtle fact that a faculty of competent scholars will nearly always prefer, and press for, conditions which will furnish more good students and fewer poor ones. On the whole, however, the university must keep attuned to society's desire and challenge to have policies which enable selection to be based on new evidence.11 The eight-year study of the Progressive Education Association, summarized by Aiken, indicates that prepar­ ation for higher education could take many different forms. This would be in direct contrast to previous studies, e.g., Fine, in his Admissions to American Colleges, found, For the most part, the colleges expect successful candidates to have mastered an academic program cover­ ing such subjects as English, algebra, plane geometry, Q Sir Eric Asby, Michigan State University Adminis­ trative Board Meeting, Minutes, April 25, 1967. ^®John B. Johnston, Scholarship and Democracy (New York: D. Appleton, Century, 1937), p. 1. ^How e s , op. cit., p. 75. 2 1 social science, natural sciences, and foreign language. With this "core curriculum" behind him, a student can probably meet the entrance requirements of a majority of institutions of higher learning in the country.12 A policy of selection which considers the impli­ cations of these changing conditions will have to be adjusted to the demands of increasing numbers of students. The response of the university in meeting these demands, can then be rigid and automatic or it can be flexible and individualized. It would appear that a con­ cerned university can best serve its own obligations, and society's, by instituting its own admissions or selection requirements. "At no point should the institution be de­ prived of its right to establish its own admission policies based on the clearly stated objectives it wishes to achieve with i t 's students." 13 The importance of admissions to a university cannot easily be overestimated, for upon its admission policy must depend, in significant measure, the quality of its academic programs and the character of community life it can support. A university is rarely (and never for very long) better than the students it e n r o l l s . ^ The implementor of this policy within the uni­ versity is the admissions office (counselor). 12 (New York: Benjamin Fine, Admission to American Colleges Harper & Brothers, 1946), p. 27. 13 J. G. Darley, and others, The Use of Tests in College, American Council on Education Studies, Series VI, V o l . X I , No. 9 (Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education Studies, 1947) p. 18. 14 p. 10. Improving Undergraduate Education, op. c i t ., 2 2 The Admissions Office (Counselor) Concern Admissions counselors are concerned with meeting their responsibility of selecting students for admission. Burns, Millet, Ayers, and Russell give significant justifi­ cation to the importance of admission. Burns identifies the admissions office as an administrator of importance. Millet identifies the importance of the admission process to an institution by establishing that the quality of stu­ dents admitted is reflected in the quality of the college or university.^ Perry states, "Specialization in the field of admissions is relatively new to the scene of American higher education having come along to us most generally since World War II."*® This specialization has been directed toward providing knowledge and understanding to the selection process of students. Admissions counselors are concerned about the decisions or options of admission and their impact upon the student as well as the uni­ versity. Individually and as a group admissions officers are altruistic. Their chief concern is the educational welfare of students entering colleges and universities. This concern takes the form of extending wise counsel to students so that intelligent decisions can be made about a choice of college. *®John D. Millet, The Academic Community (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1962T1 *®Perry, op. cit., p. 7. 23 The Selection Process Since decisions must be made in the selection of students for admission the admissions counselor must utilize previous research in admission and develop local programs for selection. Much of the admissions literature deals with prediction on the basis of tests. A consider­ able volume of literature exists on academic prediction studies. Juola, Segal, Garrett, Borow, Douglas and Lavin would be representative of authors who have compiled pre­ diction studies and summaries. Scholastic aptitude tests are probably the most widely used and investigated predictor of college success. Darflinger, and Wagner have completed research in corre­ lation between SAT and college performance. In addition, research seems to indicate that tests are only one predic­ tor. Used alone they are not perfect criteria for selection. "Tests must not be viewed as the ready-made, flaw­ less answer to admissions puzzles; they supply substantial clues in each situation but their application has limitations not always apparent to the uninitiated." 18 "The three important elements of the process— the program of the institution, the caliber of the applicant group in general, and the success criterion of the institution— can and probably will change in time." 18 College Testing, op. cit., p. 24. 19Ibid. 19 24 Therefore, Every college that wants to take the trouble can dis­ cover its intellectual floors or thresholds by testing its students and comparing their scholastic aptitude tests with their college records; some colleges can choose the level of ability with which they wish to deal. To protect itself, the college should administer its own test, preferably a standardized one; but, if not, one which it has carefully validated and cali­ brated on its own s t u d e n t s . 20 Fine, Berdie, and Bowles have examined these criteria in relation to the admission process and generally have encouraged utilization of several factors for selec­ tion. Fishman summarizes this way, A review of all college guidance and selections studies completed during the decade 1948-1958 shows that this area is one of the most intensively investigated in the entire field of educational research. What is the up­ shot of all this inquiry? Unfortunately, it can be summarized quite briefly. The most usual way of pre­ dicting college performance is to look at high school grades and scores on scholastic aptitude t e s t s . 2 1 Other examples of achievement and/or ability tests are the American College Testing Program, College Entrance Examination Board Program, College Qualification Test, Minnesota College Aptitude Test and Ohio University Psychological Examination. The use of predictors, i.e., achievement and/or ability tests is one method of gaining additional infor­ mation about applicants to the university. Other 20Ibid., p. 19, item 13. 21 Joshua Fishman, "Student Selection and Guidance,” College and Character, edited by Nevitt Sanford (New Yorks John Wiley & Sons, 1964), p. 81. 25 traditional methods are also used to admit students, e.g., rank in class, high school grade point average, and high school recommendation. One procedure for selection like one option for admission should from time to time be evaluated. "There ^s thus good reason to reconsider the elements periodically and every reason to subject all admissions practices, including the tests and test procedures utilized, to 22 reappraisal." The selection process involves making a choice of students. Choices must be made in the higher education admission process. "Choice must be made in planning an educational program, and the effectiveness of the program must also be studied. in education." Evaluation is therefore inevitable 23 The objective then becomes that of first deter­ mining those who have a reasonable chance for academic success and subsequently evaluating the resulting success or failure of those selected. The central question becomes that of determining whether students who are considered adequate or in­ adequate on the evaluation instrument are actually adequate or inadequate on other more direct criteria of academic success [i.e., MSU GPA]. Regardless of who makes the decision, its validity is determined by 22 23 College Testing, op. cit., p. 24. Dressell, et a l ., op. cit. , p. 6. 26 subsequent success or failure of students who have 24 followed the required or suggested course of action. Summary The concern of society with the process of admit­ ting students to higher education is clear. The university is concerned with the methods of selection of those stu­ dents it feels can succeed, i.e., have normal academic achievement and progress. The admissions office is the implementor of the selection process and the agency within the university responsible for making the decision to admit or not admit the candidate. 24 > Arvo E. Juola, "Selection, Classification and Placement of Students," Evaluation in Higher Education, edited by P. Dressel (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1961), p. 305. CHAPTER III DESIGN Population There are four groups of Summer Test Admit students in this study. Each group has been identified for this study by the year of entry into the university and labeled with a number representing the group and year. Group 1, STA 1965, 176 students; Group 3, STA 1966, 286 students; Group 5, STA 1967, 279 students; Group 7, STA 1968, 276 students. There is a total of 1,017 students in the STA populations. Table 3.1, page 30, provides basic population and sample data, i.e., the group size, mean high school grade point average, mean CQT total scores, mean MSU Read­ ing score, and the year of matriculation. It ^hould be noted that Group 1, STA 1965, enrolled first in the university fall term 1965. The other three STA populations started during the summer quarter of the school year, 1966 through 1968. In addition to the four groups (populations) of STA students, there were four samples selected from the total population of Michigan regular fall quarter admitted students, 1965-1969. 27 28 The four samples were selected from the total regular fall Michigan populations on the basis of matching College Qualification Test total scores and MSU Reading Test scores derived from MSU Orientation Tests. The samples were also matched on the basis of sex with the I corresponding STA group. Each regular fall admit student in the sample was matched exactly on the College Qualifi­ cation Test total score and sex. An interval of four was necessary in matching the regular admit samples to the STA groups on the MSU Reading Test score. The regular admit samples were admitted to the fall quarter in corresponding years to the STA populations. Each group of regular admits has been identified for this study by the year of entry and labeled with a number representing the group and year. Group 2, regular admit sample 1965, 176 students; Group 4, regular admit sample 1966, 286 students; Group 6 , regular admit sample 1967, 279 students; and Group 8 , regular admit sample 1968, 276 students. Each of the samples were selected from approximately 6,000 students. The characteristics for matching the regular admit students with the STA students were selected from the Registrar's enrollment data. This information was avail­ able in the Registrar's file maintenance change card table. This is also available in the data processing department, Program R4701. 29 There were eighty possible characteristics which could have been used for matching the groups. The three characteristics selected were the student's CQT total score, MSU reading score and sex. These characteristics were specifically chosen to provide homogenous ability groupings. The characteristics of CQT total score and MSU reading score had a wide range of scores for both male and females which permitted matching without loss of the popu­ lation or sample cases. Most difficulties that occur in the application of parallel-group design with matching revolve around the matching procedure. The first question that must be solved by the research worker is to determine what variable or variables to use for matching. Matching on a number of variables that are correlated with the dependent variable will reduce errors more than match­ ing on a single variable that is less highly corre­ lated. In attempting to match on more than two variables, however, a difficult problem often comes up because of the impossibility of finding individuals who are reasonably well-matched on several variables. Under these conditions, the research worker must dis­ card many subjects for whom satisfactory matches cannot be obtained.3Therefore, by matching on the characteristics of sex, CQT total score and MSU reading score, students in the STA population were not discarded. In addition, the sample of regular admits had perfect matches in each case on sex and CQT total score and were matched within an interval of four (-1-2 , -2) on the reading score. ^■Walter R. Borg, Educational Research: An Intro­ duction (New York: McKay Company, Inc., 1967), p. 299. 30 The students for the regular admit sample were selected from a Registrar's yearly alphabetical list of all Michigan regular admits. The Michigan regular admits are those Michigan students clearly admitted to the fall quarter. The individual students in the sample were matched to the STA students on all characteristics by progressing completely through the alphabetical list before returning to "A." The STA groups and the matched regular admit samples were organized by group per year of enrollment. Each matched pair of students within each group was given a serial number for identification purposes. TABLE 3.1.— Basic STA and regular admit group data. Group Year N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1965 1965 1966 1966 1967 1967 1968 1968 176 176 286 286 279 279 276 276 MF 133-43 133-43 196-90 196-90 188-91 188-91 161-115 161-115 X H.S. GPA X CQT Total Score 2.28 2.80 2.33 2.95 2.33 3.01 2.35 3.00 129 129 129 129 129 129 127 127 X MSU Reading Score 30 30 29 29 31 31 30 30 Method of Analysis The analysis of the STA students' academic achieve­ ment and progress was carried out through a "non-equivalent 31 2 control group, multiple time series design." This type of design provides one way to repeat the test of the hypotheses at each point in time, e.g., per quarter. The study has covered a four-year time period, fifteen continuous quarters, beginning fall quarter 1965 i and extending through spring quarter 1969. The research data has been compiled from student admission records, Registrar's transcripts, and Office of Evaluation Services data. This design has been used to make comparisons be­ tween the matched groups using the variables, mean MSU GPA, mean credits earned, and absence. The basic design of the study has been repeated for each of the four years cited. David E. Lavin states. College admissions officers and guidance personnel are certainly interested in predicting more than a student's grades during freshman year. It would be valuable to be able to predict the level of performance throughout the college career be­ cause a student's performance may fluctuate widely in quality. If this type of performance were predictable, and if it were possible to know whether or not future performance was likely to improve, educational adminis­ trators would be in a position to make sounder de­ cisions. More longitudinal research may provide some answers for these problems.3 2 Donald T. Campbell and Julian C. Stanley, Experi­ mental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research (Chicago: Rand McNally and Company, 1969), p. 47. ^David E. Lavin, The Prediction of Academic Per­ formance , Science Editions (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1965), p. 45. 32 The analysis was carried out by first computing the mean and standard deviation for each group. This was done per quarter using the variables, mean MSU GPA and mean credits earned. The variable of absence was recorded in frequency per quarter. , A statistical comparison was made between each matched STA and regular admit group. This comparison was made to determine if there were significant differences using the variables tested. In addition year-end comparisons between matched groups were made using the variables, mean accumulative MSU GPA and mean accumulative credits earned. An analysis of variance was used to determine if significant differences exist between groups using the variables, mean accumulative MSU GPA, and mean accumulative credits earned. "The really important feature of the analysis of variance is that it permits the separation of ail of the potential information in the data into distinct and non­ overlapping portions, each reflecting only certain aspects of the experiment." 4 A two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used first between the matched groups ( 1 & 2 , 3&4, 5&6, 7 & 8) to compute significant differences existing between the,sexes within each group, between matched groups, and 4 William L. Hays, Statistics for Psychologists (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1965), p. 408. 33 for interaction on the variables, mean MSU GPA and mean credits earned per quarter. This method of analysis was used in order to deter­ mine any significant difference between M and F f and to see if there were any significant interactions between group » and sex. The two-way analysis of variance provided the best method to evaluate these differences. "The mechanics of the analysis of variance allow the experimenter to arrange and summarize his data in nonredundant ways, in order to decide if effects exist and to estimate how large or important those effects may be."'* Therefore, two sets of one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) were carried out between matched groups (1 & 2, 3 &4, 5 & 6 , 7 & 8 ). quarter. The analysis was repeated each Specifically there were seventy-two one-way analyses of variance computed. One analysis for each quarter of the study was made between the matched groups using the dependent variables, mean MSU GPA and mean credits earned. Yearly summaries were computed indicating mean accumulative MSU GPA and mean accumulative credits earned by group for each school year completed. To compute the accumulative year-end grade point average, sum of honors points was divided by sum of the credits earned to date. 5Ibid.. p. 409. 34 The statistical procedure used to compare the groups using the mean accumulative MSU GPA and mean accumu­ lative credits earned for school years completed was a one­ way analysis of variance. This analysis provided yearly summaries based on l grand means of the variables, mean accumulative MSU GPA and mean accumulative credits earned. The analysis com­ pared the STA and regular admit groups by testing for significant differences between the group means. The year-end analyses were made over the following quarters for Groups 1 and 2. The first school year com­ pleted, quarters 1-3; second year, quarters 1-7; third school year completed, quarters 1-1 1 ; and fourth year, quarters 1-15. Groups 3 and 4 school years completed were the first year, quarters 4-7; second year, quarters 4-11; third year, quarters 4-15. Groups 5 and 6 year-end analyses were made over quarters 8-11 for the first year and quarters 8-15 for the second accumulative year. The Groups 7 and 8 had one year-end comparison on each variable, quarters 12-15. The statistical method used to determine signifi­ cant differences between groups using the variable of absence was the Chi-square test. "Chi-square is used as a test of significance when we have data that is expressed in frequencies or data that is in terms of percentages or 35 proportions, and that can be reduced to frequencies."6 The equivalent significance level to .05 for Chi-square is 3.84.7 Individual research paradigms have been used to arrange and relate the results of the two-way analysis of I variance; the one-way analyses of variance by quarter; the one-way analyses for school years completed; absence per quarter; and the Chi-square test results per quarter. Additional information was gathered in the course of the study which was not tested for significant differ­ ences, but does add to the evaluation of academic achieve­ ment and progress of the STA students. First, the number of credits repeated per quarter by group was recorded; secondly, the withdrawal per group; and third, the number of degrees granted per group. The five hypotheses listed in Null form represent a consolidation of individual statements of no difference on the variables tested in each quarter or year of the study. Methods 6N. M. Downie and R. W. Heath, Basic Statistical (New York: Harper and Row, 1965), p. l6 6 . 7 Sidney Siegel, Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1956), p. 249. 36 Null Hypotheses Ho. There is no significant difference in mean MSU GPA by quarter completed, fall quarter 1965 through spring quarter 1969, between Groups 1 and 2, 3 and 4, 5 and 6 , 7 and 8 . Ho_ There is no significant difference in mean credits earned by quarter completed, fall quarter 1965 through spring quarter 1969, between Groups 1 and 2, 3 and 4, 5 and 6 , 7 and 8 . Ho, There is no significant difference in mean accumulative MSU GPA for school years com­ pleted, fall quarter 1965 through spring quarter 1969, between Groups 1 and 2, 3 and 5 and 6 , 7 and 8 . ' 4, Ho. There is no significant difference in mean accumulative credits earned for school years completed, fall quarter 1965 through spring quarter 1969, between Groups 1 and 2, 3 and 4, 5 and 6 , 7 and 8 . Ho,. There is no significant difference in absence by quarter completed, fall quarter 1965 through spring quarter 1969, between Groups 1 and 2, 3 and 4, 5 and 6 , 7 and 8 . Summary The purpose of this research design and method of analysis has been to evaluate the academic performance and progress of the STA population, to compare the STA students to those regularly admitted to the university and to establish a basis for comparison with each new STA popu­ lation. To accomplish this purpose the research has described the past university academic achievement and progress of students enrolled through the STA programs 1965-1969. 37 The statistical method of analysis of variance was used to determine significant differences in mean MSU GPA and mean credits earned between matched groups of STA stu­ dents and those regularly admitted, 1965-1969. Differences were also measured between groups using the variable of absence by the Chi-square test. Chapter IV describes and illustrates the results of the method of analysis. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS Two-way Analysis of Variance The two-way analysis of variance was the statisti­ cal procedure used to measure for any significant differ­ ences present between the sexes within a group. The variables were mean MSU GPA and mean credits earned per quarter. The analysis also tested for differences between matched groups on the variables of mean MSU GPA and mean credits earned, and to see if there was interaction between group and sex. Table 4.1, pages 39-40, illustrates the results of this analysis. Significant differences occurred between the sexes using the variable, mean MSU GPA for Groups 1 and 2, twice in fifteen academic quarters; Groups 3 and 4, zero times in eleven quarters; Groups 5 and 6 , zero times in seven quarters; and Groups 7 and 8 , zero times in three quarters. The significant differences using the variable of mean credits earned between the sexes by quarters were for Groups 1 and 2, zero in fifteen quarters; Groups 3 and 4, zero in eleven quarters; Groups 5 and 6 , once in seven quarters; and Groups 7 and 8 , zero in three quarters. 38 K M IV P U 1U *1 S • I t IM t n b f W IN - m tW Q f *4 JO W l l t f l - JO 1*9011 «U| Hi s:* WMHH NftMWMI Hi t.i *•»»•*! til t ifii i vn- HI'MI I !!••* til'll 111 i m -m t in* teen I’M *II t lt 'lil I •(•' Vtl'tl ill HI I (I*- I It « M i iw m m t.’V S ll’ l | Ilf" lit IU'1 111 I'f tCl'l I It*' tlt'1 I Iti'tl I Itll* Ulil I lie m i i •«* to# i Sli' #10't t»t* •(I’ll I • lid mi iii tt/l Ill'll us '.I VI Ml •41* »!»'» I ill' tit'll ill Ul't I (t(*|| Ilf 1(1 td't Ml* Ill'll Mi Ul't I M| t •*M*|t| tttf' «(('»» I tit' I N ’I I M » ’ lift S«!‘ Ill'll t tlf ((I'll I ttV Hit lilt 1(1 IV'I I «K* •(«>'• !«r 111! Ill IMI I Ml' ii - tu t m u tir iii I (IV' I: i in* tit't CM' o it'ti i n r net I'.C ttt** I ttt' tti'i nr itfi i tit’ KM i « vitri vi ir.'t vr» (i/ •.«*(• i i iivi i Itl'a ire •in Ill'll tlf I ttt oiwtOWI I 1I 8 «, II IU C | ■*•»I a««»va« j«jS * «(«.W(1|U| tifi i itr m i i ttf itci tit V»VI I tit- 1(11 I ttt M il Mfl | (It* I 1111 III! n r tvv/ t ut* ttt** i ni* uit'i I IM f ((•'( I ltd' 0 4 ’I I h i s.: im*hi lit- (III N U M IS tM ijiW w M4*#in* !> • 6£ 4 *«.(«** r in i||M.vl*» aw i 4.'.77 .411 1 n.ili .141 i n.44* . DO i 1.147 .141 I 4.77* .4*7 i 4.14* .114 I 4.171 .447 1 4.147 n)i i 1.444 .011 1 ’.04* .4*7 1 4.044 .nos I 4.047 .441 l 4.44* .741 l 1.447 .14* I 4.711 .477 1 rt.nfi aai i 4.011 .417 1 1.144 .471 1 1.444 .114* I 1.474 .111 1 1.44* .474 i 4.444 .477 I 4.4*7 1 .4*1 17 ».4>t 44> a.4»> ill 0.747 147 4.44) 7A 1.77) 1)7 4.4*0 144 4.414 1 lO.SOO i*j t •4.474 .11/ 1 I4./I7 .114 1 0.744 .•*) t 41.7*7 .4*4 f 11.417 .1*7 i 4*. 171 .1)4 ) U.MI 470 I 4.4000* .*** 1 4.104 .017 1 44.117 .0*0 1 11.111 .7*4 1 1.411 .411 i 4.1*4 .474 .744 .)»! f 14.474 .m 1 4.7)4 .4)7 0.17) .41) 111 •4.447 1 ill I- 4.1)1 11.40* .74) n.i*04 .*70 1 1 0.0«* .HI 1 11.144 .*447 .aai .7*7 1 0.1*) J.i»74 1 4.114 i 1 a.in 414 4. 71J 444 t 4.7*7 •*.ir. •4# 1 ( II*.41# an if.an 1 4.744 111 14,011 1 0.104 1 1!.**1 1.444 . .474 1 >1 m 1 117 1 t 1*.1)7 1*7 11.74* .414 1 0.417 .0007 1 O.II77 .417 .741 1 11.17* .0007 t 1 0.11) .SAB 1 0.4*4 .411 144 0.40) 1 .7*1 .7*4 . >71 m. m 4407 1 m 1 4.447 1.1*1 .477 1 11.141 0.41) 4*7 4.441 .10) 1 0.411 14.144 .4447 1 14.044 .04*7 1 77* 1 4.441 11.*14 1*4 1 4.471 417 747 11.171 1 .414 1 m *.41* 14.744 .777 4.714 1 14.441 11.707 4.01* 1 0.0407 .0)0 47% 4.744 *47 1 14.440 1 104.404 444 1 1)4.117 1 4.447 744 711 11.440 1 4.44) 47% 11.1*1 11.471 1 4.4H 444 4.771 11* 1 I*.1*1 1.744 774 1 1.411 4)1 41 11.444 47 1.474 .17) 1 14.41* .00*1 1 41* .7*4 1 If.)!* 1 4.741 1 170 1 1*4 711 747 .447 .47* .001 11.117 1 117.41) 0.0)4 1 IS*.070 1 4.417 .474 .40) 4.41* ) 1.470 1 1)1.074 1 .744 0.471 .44* 1 4.14* 4.7*7 1 41.71* M i .470 .474 14.1*7 74) ).l*l 1.47* 471 .171 4.074 < a.14* .44*7 1 .441 t 11.447 .itnA* r. in I.*)! 1 17.*44 1 11.041 .4*1 4.4*7 .47) 1 7.4*4 i 0.101 417 .444 .111 1 4.414 4.41* 0.047 .7*4 ia.au 1 1 4.441 1 1.414 ))* 4.4)7 .74) 1 !.!)* *4.471 .414 1 114.74* .4447 .144 .1*7 1 74.177 741 14.141 .1*7 1 4.4*4 .4*47 1 74.11* 14.111 .447 1 4.1)7 .7*4 11.147 .44*7 1 17.744 .44(7 .741 4.44) 4.441 .174 1 44.7*7 1 1*7.477 .4447 1 Ml.*71 .174 11.474 17.417 I 4.477 1 .444 1 4.4*4 4*7 4.7)7 .41) 1 1.4*7 .44*7 1 144.447 .4*47 1 4.714 .414 447 11.441 1 11.4*4 411 14.44) .414 1 4.444 .771 a 1.144 17.414 .44*4 1 11.471 .44*7 t 74.744 .an 1 4.17* 4*4 4.441 .447 1 4.(44 •M 4.4*4 1 4.144 J44 1 1 1.744 .441 t ati.Mi .4444 i 4.441 •474 •44 11.474 1 i.an .4*4 on 11.114 .4*7 1 1 1 .1*0 >14 411 444 .141 .41* .7*4 .447 1 .777 4.1)4 4. *44 170 17.4*7 17.741 1 4.744 .744 1 .U« in 1 71.174 1*4 14.774 0.47* 1 i 4.4*4 SA 4)7 411 in .441 ia.au .Ml a 4.474 44* 4.44* 1 4.747 ,4)4 .114 .4*47 .444 .441 i m»m .**H t 1.4*4 .444 444 u.au 41 Significant differences in interaction between group and sex using the variable of mean MSU GPA occurred for Groups 1 and 2, zero in fifteen quarters; Groups 3 and 4, once in eleven quarters; Groups 5 and 6 , once in seven quarters; and Groups 7 and 8 , zero in three quarters. For the variable of mean credits earned the inter­ action between sex and group existed for Groups 1 and 2, once in fifteen quarters; Groups 3 and 4, once in eleven quarters; Groups 5 and 6 , once in seven quarters; and Groups 7 and 8, zero in three quarters. Significant differences between matched groups using mean MSU GPA per quarter was for Groups 1 and 2, eight out of fifteen quarters; Groups 3 and of eleven quarters; Groups 5 and 6, 4, nine out six of seven quarters; Groups 7 and 8 , three out of three quarters. Significant differences between groups using mean credits earned for Groups 1 and 2 were, once in fifteen quarters; Groups 3 and 4, nine of eleven quarters; Groups 5 and 6 , five of eight quarters; Groups 7 and 8 , two out of three quarters. The results of the two-way analysis of variance indicate that significant differences between matched groups on the dependent variables are present. Differences on the variable mean MSU GPA between groups existed twentysix times out of thirty-six quarters. On the variable of mean credits earned, differences were present in seventeen quarters out of thirty-six. 42 The results of the analysis also Indicates that differences on the variables tested were not consistently significant for sex within groups or on interaction between sex and group. Therefore, the effect of these variables will not be considered further in this study. I One-way Analysis of Variance The one-way analysis of variance was the statistical procedure used to determine significant differences exist­ ing between matched groups using the variables of mean MSU GPA and mean credits earned. The results of testing this hypothesis with the one-way analysis of variance is illustrated in Table 4.2. In the table the mean MSU GPA is indicated along with standard deviations and significant differences between groups, each quarter, on mean MSU GPA. able was mean MSU He. The The dependent vari­ GPA, the independent variable was group. There is no significant difference in MSU gpa by quarter completed, fall quarter 1965 through spring quarter 1969, between Groups 1 and 2, 3 and 4, 5 and 6 , 7 and 8 . hypothesis for Groups 1 and 2 was rejected in quarters 1, 5, 6 , 7, 8 , 9, 10, 11 and accepted in quarters 2, 3, 4, 12, 13, 14, 15. The hypothesis for Groups 3 and 4 was quarters 5, 6 , 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, in quarters 8 and 12. rejected in 15 and was accepted TABLE 4.2.— A comparison of mean MSU GPA between STA and regular admit groups using a one-way analysis of variance. Alpha level .05. Group 1 5f 2 £2 X s2 Sign. Level Comment 3 4 X Sj r s2 Sign. Level Consent 5 6 5? S, r S2 Sign. Level Comment 7 8 F65 W66 SP66 S66 F66 W67 SP67 S67 F67 .1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1.91 0.59 2.00 0.81 1.99 0.65 2.10 0.79 1.83 0.90 2.25 1.26 1.93 0.67 2.18 0.82 1.95 0.74 2.15 0.79 2.04 0.78 2.38 0.69 1.77 0.81 2.57 1.04 2.05 0.65 2.32 0.76 2.06 0.70 2.30 0.82 W68 S68 F68 W69 11 12 13 14 15 2.12 0.74 2.33 0.65 1.87 1.81 2.35 1.32 2.17 0.87 2.21 0.95 2.17 0.95 2.36 0.95 2.38 0.76 2.23 1.06 SP68 SP69 Item sr S2 X s2 Sign. Level Comment 1.84 0.63 2.11 0.77 .001 + .241 - .157 - .366 - 1.94 0.84 .024 .004 .027 .0005 .012 .004 + + ■f ■ + f + 1.76 0.67 2.14 0.69 .0005 ♦ 1.80 0.68 2.14 0.74 1.88 0.69 2.21 0.70 1.79 1.05 2.03 0.97 1.84 0.72 2.22 0.71 .0005 .0005 .0005 .375 + + + 2.13 0.70 1.76 0.71 2.21 0.76 .0005 + 1.95 0.66 2.33 0.72 .0005 + 1.92 0.68 2.21 0.76 .0005 .031 ♦ 1.89 0.70 2.32 0.71 .161 .0005 .157 .247 - - - 2.25 0.96 2.37 0.77 2.04 0.75 2.38 0.80 2.20 0.76 2.49 0.78 2.22 0.83 2.59 0.78 .0005 .629 ♦ 1.93 0.67 2.26 0.73 .789 - 1.96 0.97 2.54 1.04 .070 2.11 0.68 .0005 + 1.99 0.74 2.36 0.73 .0005 + 1.98 0.65 2.44 0.68 .001 + 2.21 0.65 2.57 0.67 .0005 + 2.04 0.67 2.46 0.68 .0005 .0005 + + .0005 + 2.14 0.73 2.56 0.70 .0005 + 2.03 0.77 2.54 0.61 .0005 + 44 The hypothesis for Groups 5 and 6 was rejected in quarters 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15 and was accepted in quarter 12 . The hypothesis for Groups 7 and 8 was rejected in all quarters tested. The mean MSU GPA for STA Group 1 was lower than the matched regular admit Group 2 in every quarter except the final one. In eight of the fifteen quarters there were significant differences between groups using the variable, mean MSU GPA. The differences occurred consistently in the fifth through the eleventh quarters of the study. In the last four quarters there was no significant difference be­ tween Groups 1 and 2. In the last quarter, and for that quarter only. Group 1 (STA) had a higher mean MSU GPA than the regular admit Group 2. STA Group 3 and its match, the regular admit Group 4, shows a more consistent pattern of significant differ­ ence per quarter on mean MSU GPA. The mean MSU GPA in the STA Group 3 was lower in every quarter compared to the mean of the regular admit Group 4. Significant differences were present in nine of eleven quarters between Groups 3 and 4. The two summer quarters analyses indicated no significant differences on mean MSU GPA. Between Groups 5 (STA) and 6 (regular admit) a significant difference in mean MSU GPA was present in six of seven quarters. Each mean MSU GPA in the STA 45 Group 5 was lower than the corresponding quarter mean for regular admit Group 6 . The same trend was present with mean MSU GPA between Groups 7 and 8 . In three of three quarters there were significant differences indicated between STA Group 7 I and the regular admit Group 8 . In every quarter the STA group had a lower mean than the matched regular admit Group 8 . The mean MSU GPA for both STA and regular admit groups improved over the course of the study. All groups had above a two point grade average at the conclusion of spring quarter 1969. The results of the one-way analysis of variance indicating significant differences between groups using mean credits earned per quarter is presented in Table 4.3, page 46. The dependent variable was mean credits earned, the independent variable was group. Ho_ There is no significant difference in credits earned by quarter completed, fall quarter 1965 through spring quarter 1969, between Groups 1 and 2, 3 and 4, 5 and 6 , 7 and 8 . The hypothesis for Groups 1 and 2 was rejected in quarter 7 and accepted in quarters 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 , 8 , 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15. TABLE 4.3.— A comparison of mean credits earned between STA and regular admit groups using a one-way analysis of variance. Alpha level .05. Group F65 W66 SP66 S66 F66 W67 SP67 S67 F67 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11.80 3.17 12.35 3.23 13.58 2.98 13.45 3.72 13.70 2.97 13.32 3.69 7.62 4.56 7.90 3.59 13.S3 3.73 13.81 3.63 13.59 4.16 13.79 3.38 13.47 4.00 14.47 3.18 7.85 5.26 7.15 4.52 13.34 3.26 13.55 3.57 13.42 4.20 13.14 3.78 Item 1 X 2 ¥ s2 Sign. Level Comment X §2 X s2 Sign. Level Comment X §2 X S2 Sign. Level Comment A £2 A s2 Sign. Level Comment .099 - .718 - .300 - .872 9.59 3.48 .525 12.47 3.77 12.95 2.94 .090 - .674 12.77 4.23 13.85 3.54 .002 ♦ .030 ♦ 12.56 4.23 13.57 3.07 .0005 + .688 7.61 4.80 7.13 3.85 .687 - 10.13 2.11 .642 13.13 3.73 13.97 3.21 .012 + 12.19 3.82 12.63 3.12 .139 W68 S68 F68 W69 11 12 13 14 15 13.00 3.85 13.74 2.84 6.44 3.99 7.37 5.22 13.86 3.93 13.34 4.70 14.03 3.71 13.16 4.74 SP68 .610 12.98 3.93 14.24 3.22 .119 12.63 3.91 13.92 3.25 .0005 + 13.00 3.59 13.92 3.73 .005 .001 + 12.17 3.59 13.71 3.12 .0005 12.30 4.37 12.66 4.61 .467 8.00 3.79 7.70 3.33 .750 8.09 5.05 7.60 3.96 .741 + 10.14 2.44 .551 11.75 4.06 12.98 4.11 . .379 13.00 4.03 13.80 3.54 .005 + 12.36 4.25 13.95 3.51 SP69 .136 12.47 4.18 13.93 3.39 .001 + .048 + 13.44 3.46 14.83 3.10 12.90 4.20 14.54 3.13 .0005 .0005 .0005 + + + 12.39 3.56 12.50 3.11 .698 12.68 12.28 3.76 4.13 14.03 14.34 3.04 2.54 .0005 .0005 + + a\ 47 The hypothesis for Groups 3 and 4 was rejected in quarters 6 , 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and accepted in quarters 5, 8 , 12. The hypothesis for Groups 5 and 6 was rejected in quarters 10, 11, 13, 14, 15 and accepted in quarters 9 and l 12 . The hypothesis for Groups 7 and 8 was rejected in quarters 14, 15 and accepted in quarter 13. Between Groups 1 and 2 there was only one quarter in fifteen indicating a significant difference in mean credits earned. Groups 3 and 4 had eight of eleven quarters with a significant difference. The other matched groups continued to show a significant difference per quarter for mean credits earned. Groups 5 and 6 had significant differences occurring in five of seven quarters. The analyses for Groups 7 and 8 indicate significant differences in two out of three quarters. The STA Group 1 had six quarters with a higher mean of credits earned, compared to the regular admit Group 2 having nine quarters with a higher mean. There were significant differences in mean credits earned in eight of eleven quarters between Groups 3 and 4. Significant differences were computed for matched Groups 5 and 6 in five of seven quarters. Groups 48 7 and 8 show two of three quarters significantly different in mean credits earned per quarters of the study. There was a pattern in the quarter of occurrence of significant differences in mean credits earned for Groups 3 and 4, 5 and 6 , 7 and 8 . , Two out of the first three quarters indicated significances and three of the next four quarters were significantly different. In most quarters of the study the mean credits earned per group, both STA and regular admit, were above the twelve credit minimum the university required for a full-time undergraduate student. The exceptions occurred in the summer quarter mean and the first quarter mean credits earned for Group 1. The statistical procedure used to compare the groups at each school year completed was a one-way ANOVA. The dependent variable used was mean MSU GPA. The independent variable used was the STA or regular admit group. Ho_ There is no significant difference in mean accumulated MSU GPA for school years completed, fall quarter 1965 through spring quarter 1969, between Groups 1 and 2, 3 and 4, 5 and 6 , 7 and 8 . The hypothesis for Groups 1 and 2 was rejected for the first, second and third year-end analyses. pothesis was accepted for the fourth year. The hy­ 49 The hypothesis for matched Groups 3 and 4, 5 and 6 , 7 and 8 was rejected in the analysis for school years com­ pleted (see Table 4.4, page 50). The mean accumulative MSU GPA for the STA Groups 1, 3, 5, 7 was lower than the matched regular admit Groups 2, 4, 6 , 8 in every school year completed. Significant differences were fourth school year completed between not found in the Groups 1 and 2. All other year-end analyses indicated significant differences between matched groups on the variable tested, i.e., mean accumulative MSU GPA. The results of the one-way ANOVA using the variable mean accumulative credits earned for each school year com­ pleted is illustrated in Table 4.5, page 51. The dependent variable used was mean credits earned; the independent variable, group. Ho, There is no significant difference in mean accumulative credits earned for school years completed, fall quarter 1965 through spring quarter 1969, between Groups 1 and 2, 3 and 4, 5 and 6 , 7 and 8 . The hypothesis for Groups 1 and 2 was rejected in all cases tested. The hypothesis for Groups 3 and 4 was rejected in the first and third year and accepted in the second year. The hypothesis for Groups 5 and 6 was rejected in the first school year completed and accepted in the second. TABLE 4.4.— Comparison of mean accumulative MSU GPA for school year completed between STA and regular admit groups using a one-way analysis of variance. Alpha level .05. Group Item F65 W66 1 2 SP66 3 GPA 1 X S, 2 ST S2 Sign. Level Comment 3 4 5 6 7 X £2 X s2 Sign. Level Comment X S3 X s2 Sign. Level Comment X §2 8 X S2 Sign. Level Connent 1.95 0.45 2.11 0.64 .009 + S66 F66 W67 4 5 6 SP67 7 GPA 1.99 0.43 2.11 0.63 .028 + 1.92 0.49 2.19 0.58 .0005 + S67 F67 8 9 W68 10 SP68 11 GPA 1.99 0.42 2.12 0.62 .022 + 1.90 0.48 2.22 0.56 .0005 + 1.95 0.51 2.28 0.59 .0005 + S68 F68 W69 12 13 14 SP69 15 GPA 2.04 0.42 2.14 0.61 .084 1.93 0.48 2.27 0.56 .0005 + 1.99 0.50 2.35 0.57 .0005 + 2.10 0.46 2.50 0.53 .0005 + TABLE 4.5.— A comparison of mean accumulative HSU credits earned for school years completed between STA and regular admit groups using a one-way analysis of variance. Alpha level .05. Group item F65 W66 SP66 S66 F66 W67 SP67 S67 F67 W68 SP68 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 X £2 X S2 Sign. Level Comment X £2 X , S2 Sign. Level Consent £2 X* c 52 Sign. Level Comment S68 F68 W69 12 13 14 SP69 15 CE* CE* CE* CE* 39.08 5.87 37.21 10.90 76.32 17.44 66.16 28.08 104.44 33.46 89.55 45.15 132.96 49.28 111.71 63.14 .044 .0005 .001 .001 + + 43.66 13.91 39.24 9.08 .0005 71.38 28.47 72.63 24.52 .583 92.53 43.70 101.32 41.30 .014 + 43.80 12.60 39.67 8.20 .0005 72.13 28.31 75.96 23.50 .080 + X 43.99 £2 12.21 x2 Sign. Level Comment 39.79 8.62 .0005 + •Credits Earned Ol H 52 The hypothesis for Groups 7 and 8 was rejected in the first and only year of comparison. The mean accumulative credits earned for STA 1 was lower for each school year completed compared to the regular admit Group 2. I The mean accumulative credits earned for matched Groups 3 and 4 presented a different pattern. The STA mean, 43.66 credits earned, was higher than the regular admit group, 39.24, in the first year completed. In the second school year completed the STA mean, 71.38, was lower than the regular admit group mean of 72.63. In the third year the STA mean credits earned, 92.53, was lower than the regular admit group mean of 101.32. The mean accumulative credits earned in the first and second year for Groups 5 and 6 indicated the same pattern as Groups 3 and 4. The STA mean was higher in the first year, 43.80, compared to the regular admit group mean of 39.67. In the second completed school year the mean accumulative credits earned were higher for the regular admit Group 6 , 75.96. The STA mean accumulative credits earned for the same period of time was 72.13. Between Groups 7 and 8 the mean accumulative credits earned was higher for the STA group, 43.99, com­ pared to 39.79 mean credits earned for the regular admits. Significant differences were indicated between Groups 1 and 2 in each of the four school years completed. Between Groups 3 and 4 significant differences were present 53 for the first and third years, but not for the second year. Groups 5 and 6 , had significant difference in mean accumu­ lative credits earned the first year tested, but not the second year. The comparison between Groups 7 and 8 , the first year, indicated there was a significant difference t using the variable, mean accumulative credits earned. Chi-square Test of Significance The Chi-square test was the statistical measure used to test for significant difference per quarter between the matched STA and regular admit groups. The dependent variable used was absence and the independent variable was group. The Chi-square critical value at the .05 alpha level is 3.84.^ Ho5 There is no significant difference in absence by quarter completed, fall quarter 1965 through spring quarter 1969, between Group 1 and 2, 3 and 4, 5 and 6 , 7 and 8 . The hypothesis for Groups quarters 2, 3, 5, 6 , 7, 8 , 1 and 2 was rejected in 9, 13,14, 15 and accepted in quarters 4, 10, 11, 12. The hypothesis for Groups quarters 6 , 7, 11, 13, 14, 15 and 3 and 4 was rejected in accepted in quarters 8 , 9, 10, 12. The hypothesis for Groups 5 and 6 , 7 and 8 was rejected in all quarters tested. ^Siegel, op. cit., p. 249. 54 There were significant differences occurring be­ tween the groups in twenty-four of the thirty-two quarters tested (see Table 4.6, page 55). Between STA Group 1 and regular admit Group 2 there were significant differences indicated in ten of fourteen quarters. I Groups 3 and 4 had significant differ­ ences in six out of ten quarters. In comparing Groups 5 and 6 there were six of six quarters showing significant differences. Groups 7 and 8 indicated two of two quarters having significant differences using the variable, absence. The absence and presence rates by group are shown in Tables 4.7 and 4.8, pages 56 and 57. Comparing STA Group 1 and regular admit Group 2, the regular admits had a higher rate of absence in all but one quarter. A different result was present with the other matched groups. STA Group 3 had a higher rate of absence in ten of eleven quarters compared to regular admit Group 4. For Groups 5 and 6 the STA absence rate again was greater in six of seven quarters. Between STA Group 7 and regular admit Group 8 the same trend continued with the STA group having a higher absence rate in three of three quarters. The highest rate of absence for both STA and regular admit groups occurred during the summer quarters. Absence for either the STA or regular admit groups did not exceed 49 per cent. the exception. The summer quarters would be TABU * ceaparisoa of absanca rata. botvaan STA and ragular admit groups using tha chi-squara tost. rts Group a Ml SPSS S4« m W*7 * W SST m W6B SPSS S6S F6S W69 SP69 1________J________ 3________ 4________ S________t________ 7________ «________ »_______ 10_______ U ________ 12_______ 13______ 14_______ 15 AM X2 AM ,2 0 7 .1 0 9 ♦ AM AB \2 0 1 8 . 0 ) 163 0 .1 9 19 2 ♦ 1 66 AB (2 2 4 5 .9 0 47 AM K2 AM .2 AM 2 AB y2 AB \2 AB y2 AB y2 AB ,2 AB .2 AB y2 4 .1 5 49 7 .2 0 59 3 .0 8 62 3 .8 2 149 0 .0 0 53 7 .0 0 55 B .0 8 58 8 .5 7 111 1 2 .2 6 262 1 .2 8 133 1 1 .7 2 134 1 0 .5 2 95 ♦ 9C 1 2 .1 9 90 8 .2 4 53 59 ♦ 65 2 2 .7 3 18 2 6 .6 0 31 1 6 .4 5 ISO 59 66 163 ♦ 33 1 5 .1 3 61 8 .6 2 2 53 * 1 .2 5 74 77 ♦ 2.79 76 86 3 .6 0 1 29 1 1 .2 7 U1 tn 8 ♦ 25 ♦ 262 59 65 71 26 1 0 .4 4 58 1 9 .1 1 2 47 21 264 ♦ * ♦ 2 53 - 5 .9 5 * 89 68 42 ♦ 7 .0 8 * 92 27 * ♦ 5 .4 1 TABLE 4.7.— Absence ratas for STA and regular admit groups. Group 1 2 N 176 176 4 5 6 7 3 286 286 279 279 276 276 W66 SP66 S66 F66 H67 SP67 S67 F67 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 SP68 S68 F68 W69 11 12 13 14 15 SP69 Absence 0 0 0 163 2 18 31 150 49 59 62 149 53 55 58 * of N 0 0 0 93 2 11 18 85 28 34 35 85 30 32 33 Absence 0 9 19 166 47 59 66 163 74 76 81 149 78 82 86 5 11 94 27 34 38 93 42 43 46 85 44 47 49 Absence 0 15 33 61 253 77 86 111 262 129 133 134 t of N 0 5 12 21 88 27 30 39 92 45 47 47 Absence 0 8 25 262 59 65 71 253 89 92 95 t of N 0 3 9 92 21 23 25 88 31 32 33 Absence 0 6 26 58 247 68 90 90 t of N 0 2 9 21 89 24 32 32 Absence 1 7 21 264 42 53 59 « of N 1 3 8 95 15 19 21 Absence 6 13 27 65 t of N 2 5 10 24 Absence 0 12 23 « of N 0 4 8 t of N 3 W68 F65 tn TABLE 4.8.— 'Presence rates for STA and regular admit groups. Group X 2 3 4 5 6 7 F65 H66 SP66 S66 F66 W67 SP67 S67 F67 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Present 176 176 176 13 174 158 145 26 t of N 100 100 100 7 98 89 82 Present 176 167 157 10 129 117 t of N 100 95 89 6 73 Present 286 t Of N 100 SP68 S68 F68 'W69 SP69 176 176 286 286 279 279 276 10 11 12 13 14 15 127 117 114 27 123 121 118 15 72 66 65 15 70 69 67 110 13 102 100 95 27 98 94 90 66 62 7 58 57 54 15 56 53 51 271 253 225 33 209 200 175 24 157 153 152 95 88 79 12 73 70 61 8 55 53 53 Present 286 278 261 24 227 221 215 33 197 194 191 t of N 100 97 91 8 79 77 75 12 69 67 67 Present 279 293 253 221 32 211 189 189 * of N 100 98 91 79 11 76 69 69 Present 278 272 258 15 237 226 220 % of N 99 97 92 5 85 81 79 270 263 249 211 98 95 90 76 Present 276 264 253 % of N 100 96 92 Present % of N 8 W68 N 276 tn -Sl 58 Absence per quarter in all groups increased each quarter over the course of the study. In the final quarter of the study, 67 per cent of STA Group 1 was enrolled, and 51 per cent of the matched regular admit Group 2. STA Group 3 had 53 per cent enrolled compared to Group 4 with 66 per cent.STA Group 5 and regular admit Group 6 had 67 and 78 per cent enrolled respectively. Group 7 had 76 per cent ofthe starting total number en­ STA rolled compared to regular admit Group 8 which had 91 per cent enrolled (see Table 4.8). Credits Repeated, Withdrawal, and Graduation The mean credits repeated per quarter for each group in the study is illustrated in Table 4.9, page 59. The total mean credits repeated per group was higher for every STA population compared to the matched sample of regular admits. The STA Groups 1, 3, 5, and 7 had a greater mean credits repeated per quarter in almost every case than Groups 2, 4, 6 , 8 . The exceptions being the beginning quarter for each group. In these cases there were no credits repeated for either STA or regular admit students. The summer quarter 1968 was the other exception with the regular admit group having 4.93 mean credits repeated to the STA's mean of 4.56. In thirty-one of thirty-two compared TABLE 4.9.--Mean credits repeated for STA and regular admit groups. Group F65 ■ ■■ 1 W66 SP66 S66 2 3 4 F66 '" 5 N67 SP67 S67 F67 6 7 8 9 H68 — 10 SP68 S68 F68 W69 SP69 11 12 13 14 15 Totals 1 0.00 1.35 2.54 6.69 4.52 4.88 5.90 8.46 7.05 7.56 7.65 8.22 10.88 11.83 12.15 99.68 2 0.00 0.75 1.85 2.00 2.82 3.59 4.73 2.23 4.65 5.00 5.85 4.89 8.36 8.97 9.60 65.22 3 4 0.00 0.73 1.80 2.78 3.36 4.00 5.34 6.36 7.92 8.57 8.95 9.54 59.35 0.00 0.80 1.42 2.04 2.18 2.90 3.82 3.39 4.53 4.99 5.42 31.49 0.00 0.58 1.55 2.75 4.56 4.65 5.15 6.06 25.30 0.00 0.76 1.26 4.93 2.16 2.75 2.98 14.84 0.00 0.38 1.03 2.24 3.65 0.00 0.18 0.49 .67 Ul 5 6 7 8 VO 60 quarters the STA groups had higher mean repeated credits per quarter. The number of withdrawals per quarter by group is illustrated in Table 4.10, page 61. STA Group 1 had a total of nine withdrawals. The I regular admit Group 2 had fourteen withdrawals. In all other comparisons between the STA and regular admit groups on total withdrawals, the STA's had at least twice as many withdrawals as the regular admits, STA Group 3, twenty-two, regular admit Group 4, eleven; STA Group 5, five, regular admit Group 6 , two; STA Group 7, three regular admit Group 8 , one. The graduation information or degrees granted per group was available only for Groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 due to the time limits of the study. STA Group 1 had thirty students receive degrees. One student graduated in the fall of 1968 and twenty-nine graduated in the spring of 1969. Three of the twenty-nine STA spring 1969 graduates received degree honors. The regular admit Group 2 had one student graduate in the fall 1968, one winter 1969, and twenty-eight receive degrees in the spring of 1969. Of the thirty students receiving degrees in this group, ten received degrees with honor. TABLE 4.10.— Withdrawal rates for STA and regular admit groups. F65 W66 1 2 SP66 S66 F 66 W67 4 5 6 SP67 S67 F67 8 9 W68 SP68 S68 F68 W69 11 12 13 14 1 1 1 SP69 Group 3 1 2 1 1 5 10 2 1 1 3 4 1 7 2 2 1 4 2 1 2 3 2 8 2 4 1 2 5 2 3 2 3 1 2 6 7 15 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 . New Douglas, M. R. The Relation of High School Preparation and Certain Other Factors to Academic Success at the University of Oregon. University of Oregon Publications, Educational Service 3, N o . 1. Eugene: University of Oregon Publications, 1931. Downie, N. M . , and Heath, R. W. Basic Statistical Methods. New York: Harper and Row, 1§<>5. Dressel, Paul L . , and Associates. Evaluation in Higher Education. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, wsr.--Dunn, Albert H. "Admissions as a Public Relation Function." The Journal of the Association of College Admissions Counselors, XII, No. 3 (1967). Edwards, Allen L. Experimental Design in Psychological Research. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1968. Fine, Benjamin. Admission to American Colleges. Harper & Brothers, 1946. New York: Fishman, Joshua. "Student Selection and Guidance." College and Character. Edited by Nevitt Sanford. New York: John Wiley 6 Sons, 1964. 84 Garrett, Thomas A., and Rich, Catherine R. Philosophy and Problems of College Admissions. Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University, 1963. Good, Carter V., ed. Dictionary of Education. MpGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., id 4 5. New York: Goslin, David A. The Search for Ability: Standardized Testing in Social Perspective. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1963. Hays, William L. Statistics for Psychologists. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1965. New York: Henry, Erwin R . , and Fryer, Douglas, ed. "Predicting Success in College and University." Handbook of Applied Psychology. New York: Rinehart & Co., 1950, Howes, Raymond, ed. Higher Education and the Society it Serves. Washington, D .C .: American Council on Education, 1957. Hoyt, Donald P. "Forecasting Academic Success in Specific Colleges." American College Testing Program, No. 27. ACT Research Report. Iowa City: American College Testing Program, August, 1968. Hoyt, Donald P., and Munday, Leo A. Your College Freshmen. Iowa City: The American College Testing Program, Inc., 1968-69. Hull, Clark L. Aptitude Testing. Company, 1928. New York: World Book Improving Undergraduate Education. Report of the Committee on Undergraduage Education, Michigan State Uni­ versity, 1967. Johnston, John B. Scholarship and Democracy. D. Appleton, Century, 1937. New York: Juola, Arvo E. "Selection, Classification and Placement of Students." Evaluation in Higher Education. Edited by P. Dressel. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1961. Kuhn, Madison. Michigan State: The First Hundred Years. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1955. Kurani, Habib Amin. Selecting the College Student in America. New York: Columbia University, Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, 1931. 85 Lavin, David. The Prediction of Academic Performance. Science Editions. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1965. Logsdon, James D. "A Case for the Junior College." The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals (December, 1968). Michigan State University Catalog of Courses and Academic Programs’! Michigan State University Publication,* Vol. LXIII, No. 7. East Lansing: University Editor's Office, Michigan State University, December, 1968. Michigan State University Tests (Orientation). East Lansing: Michigan State University Office of Evaluation Services. Millet, John D. The Academic Community. McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1962! New York: Perry, Richard R. The Admissions Officer. University of Toledo, 1963-64. Toledo: The Rivlin, Harry N ., e d . The First Years in College: Pre­ paring Students for a Successful College Career. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1965. Sanford, Nevitt. College and Character. Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1964. New York: John Siegel, Sidney. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc."7 T 9 5 6 . Swensen, Clifford H., Jr. "College Performance of Students with High and Low High School Grades When Academic Aptitude Is Controlled." Journal of Educational Research, L (1957). Testing Bulletin No. 3 (revised). The Office of Evaluation Services, University College. East Lansing: Michigan State University, May 1965. Thresher, B. Alden. College and University Admissions and the Public Interest. New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1966. Travers, Robert M. W. "Significant Research on the Pre­ diction of Academic Success." The Measurement of Student Adjustment and Achievement. Edited by W. T. Donanue and Associates. Ann Arbor: Uni­ versity of Michigan Press, 1949. 86 U.S. Department of Interior. U.S. Office of Education. Prediction of Success in College, by David Segal. Bulletin No. 15. Washington, D . C .: Government Printing Office, 1934.