AN INVESTIGATION OF SELECTED FACTORS THAT MAY INFLUENCE PUPIL ACHIEVEMENT IN MICHIGAN SCHOOLS By Donald W illiam Burns A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan S tate U niversity in p a rtia l f u lfillm e n t of the requirements fo r the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department o f School Adm inistration and Higher Education 1972 PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have in d is tin c t p r in t. Filmed as re c e iv e d . U n i v e r s i t y M i c r o f i l m s , A Xerox Education Company ABSTRACT AN INVESTIGATION OF SELECTED FACTORS THAT MAY INFLUENCE PUPIL ACHIEVEMENT IN MICHIGAN SCHOOLS By Donald W illiam Burns Purpose o f the Study The purpose o f th is study was to determine the degree to which ce rta in selected factors are associated w ith high and low educational i achievement as measured by the Michigan Educational Assessment Program received by seventh graders in selected Michigan schools. S p e c ific a lly , the study investigated th irty -o n e facto rs which may be re la te d to a student's level of academic achievement. Procedure The study was conducted in sm all, medium, and large school d is t r ic t s in Michigan. The sample consisted o f a group o f nine high achieving d is tr ic ts whose seventh grade pupils scored one or more standard deviatio n above the mean and a lik e number o f low achieving d is tr ic ts whose seventh grade pupils scored one or more standard deviatio n below the mean. The mean fo r the 1970 s ta te assessment was (50.79) and the standard deviation was (2 .5 5 ). The high achieving group had a mean standard deviation above the mean score o f (5 5 .1 ) and the low achieving group had a mean standard deviatio n below the mean score o f (4 6 .4 ). Data concerning the study's th irty -o n e factors were gathered by the use o f nine instruments. The instruments used in the study had mainly s ta tis t ic a l or experimental v a lid it y . Th eir v a lid it y is based on (standard te s ts ) c o rre la tio n with various independent c r it e r i a . exceptions to th is were the instruments: Sheet Survey. Two A Rating Schedule and Fact These two instruments have content or apparent v a lid it y . Their v a lid it y is based on the apparent lo g ic a l re la tio n s h ip between the factors under in v e s tig a tio n , the question asked, and the subjects who responded to the questions. Major Findings S ta tis tic a l analyses o f the re la tio n s h ip between facto rs specified in the hypotheses provided the follow ing findings: 1. In s tru c tio n expenditure, current operating expenses, general fund expenditures and in s tru c tio n s a la rie s per pupil do not seem to exert a s ig n ific a n t influence on pupil achievement. 2. High and low d is t r ic t s were found to have l i t t l e d iffe re n c e in the amount.of s ta te equalized valuatio n behind each c h ild . 3. The size o f a school d i s t r ic t was found to have no influence on pupil achievement. 4. Fathers o f pupils in the high achieving d is tr ic ts were found to have a higher occupational status than fathers in the low achieving d is t r ic t s . 5. Teachers o f high achieving d is t r ic t s were perceived by th e ir students as being more considerate and helpful toward le arn in g . 6. No s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e was found between the high and low achieving d is t r ic t s in the number o f teachers with fiv e or more years o f experience. Low achieving d is tr ic ts were found to have more teachers w ith three or less years of teaching experience than the high d is t r ic t s . 7. Students from high achieving d is t r ic t s were found to have a b e tte r a ttitu d e toward school and education, and greater educational aspirations and expectations than students of low achieving d is t r ic t s . 8. No s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e was found between the high and low achieving students in th e ir study h a b its , self-concept o f a b il it y and involvement w ith learn in g . 9. Students of high achieving d is tr ic ts were found to have b e tte r fe e lin g s about themselves, th e ir school, and a more extensive vocabulary than students o f the low achieving d is t r ic t s . 10. High achieving d is t r ic t s have less teacher turnover, more favorable organizational c lim a te , more teachers who reside in the d i s t r i c t , and teachers with a more p o sitiv e a ttitu d e toward th e ir students, school and community than teachers of low achieving d is t r ic t s . A number of conclusions were made regarding the factors which d iffe r e n tia te d or fa ile d to d if fe r e n t ia t e the high and low achieving subjects. Im plications of the findings fo r education, and suggestions fo r fu tu re research were developed. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The completion o f th is d is s e rta tio n required the cooperation and assistance o f more persons than i t would be reasonable to mention in d iv id u a lly . The doctoral committee provided much appreciated assistance and d ire c tio n . The committee was composed of Professors Louis Romano, David Smith, Ernest Mel by, Dale A lan, and James McKee. Dr. David Smith, who began as chairman o f my committee and who l e f t to assume his new professional position a t Northern I l l i n o i s U n iv e rs ity , provided in valuable counsel. To Dr. Louis Romano, present chairman, I extend my deepest and most sincere thanks fo r his guidance as well as warm frie n d s h ip . In a d d itio n , the w rite r wishes to thank Dr. Loyal Joos and Dr. Rodney Roth o f Oakland Schools fo r t h e ir time and assistance in the computer processing of data and s t a t is t ic a l procedure. I wish to thank the superintendents, p rin c ip a ls , teachers and students of eighteen school d is t r ic t s in Michigan, fo r without t h e ir outstanding cooperation th is study could not nave been made. Special recognition is given to my w ife Barbara, my daughter Donna and two young sons Stacy and Donnie, who have been very cooperative and understanding in order th a t I could complete th is study. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ....................................................................................... LIST OF TABLES . . . . . ii .............................................................. v .............................................................. 1 Statement o f the Problem .................................................. Purpose of the Study . . Importance to Education . D elim itations of the Study . . . . . . . . . D e fin itio n of Terms ........................................................ Hypothesis and Questions .................................................. ............................... Assumptions Underlying This Study Organization of D issertatio n . . . . . . . . 1 4 5 7 8 9 11 12 Chapter I. II. THE PROBLEM REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ........................................... 13 Financial Factors Related to Pupil Achievement . . 15 D is tr ic t Size and It s Relationship to S ta ff and . Pupil A c h ie v e m e n t................................................. 24 Organization Size and S tructural C h a racteristics . 25 Organization Size and it s R elationship to A ttitu d es and Job S a tis fa c tio n ............................... 27 A dm inistrative Theory, Leadership, Job S a tis fa c tio n and School Climate ............................... 34 Teacher Influence . . . . 41 Superintendent Influence ............................................ 47 Environmental Factors Related to Achievement . . . 49 Mental A b ilit y ..................................................................... 49 Social Class Differences and T h eir Relationship to In te lle c tu a l Performance and Home E n v ir o n m e n t ............................................................... 56 Socioeconomic Relationships . . . . . . . . 61 V a r ia b ilit y of Students and It s R elationship to Achievement ................................................. . 65 Student Self-Concept and Feelings About S e lf . . 70 Student Educational A spiration and Educational Expectation . . . . . . 76 Study Habits and Involvement w ith Learning . . . 80 Student A ttitu d e s Toward School and Education . . 87 Summary ........................................... . 89 iii Chapter III. IV. V. Page DESIGN OF. THE STUDY ...................................... 98 Selection of S a m p le .............................................................. Teacher Pupil Sample .............................................................. Description of the Research Instruments . . . . P r o c e d u r e s ................................................................................. S um m ary.................................................................... 101 102 106 121 124 ANALYSIS OF THE D A T A .............................................................. 125 S ta tis tic a l Methods Used .................................................. Presentation and Analysis of Results in Terms of the H y p o th e s e s .................................................................... Sum m ary....................................................................................... 125 125 159 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 161 Sum m ary....................................................................................... Purposes of the S tu d y ........................................................ Lim itations of the S tu d y .................................................. Review o f L ite ra tu re ........................................................ Design o f the S t u d y ........................................................ Findings and Conclusions .................................................. Conclusions ........................................................................... Im plications ........................................................................... Suggestions fo r Future Research ............................... . R e f le c t io n s ................................................................................. 161 161 163 164 167 169 188 188 196 199 BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDICES . ............................................................................................. 203 ....................................................................................... 218 iv LIST OF TABLES Table Page 3.1 Geographic location o f d is tr ic ts in th is study . 3 .2 Background data on the high and low p a rtic ip a tin g d is t r ic t s in the sample ......................................................... 103 Background inform ation on the high and low p a rtic ip a tin g d is t r ic t s in the sample ................................ 104 3 .3 4 .1 A 4 . IB 4 .2 4 .3 4 .4 4 .5 4 .6 . . 100 High d is t r ic t s ' per pupil expenditure fo r: to ta l in s tru c tio n expenditure, current operating expenses, to ta l general fund expenditures and in s t r u c t io n ............................................................................ 128 Low d is t r ic t s ' per pupil expenditure fo r: to ta l in s tru c tio n expenditure, current operating expenses, to ta l general fund expenditures and in s t r u c t io n ...................................................................................... Mean, standard deviation and f - r a t i o fo r per pupil in s tru c tio n expenditure, current operating expenses, general fund expenditures and in s tru c tio n s a la rie s fo r high and low d is t r ic t s 128 . 129 Comparison o f high and low d is t r ic t s with m ills levied fo r debt and operation, s ta te equalized valuation per p u p il, and community support fo r operation and bonding programs ...................................... 130 Mean, standard deviation and f - r a t i o fo r high and low d is t r ic t s with m ills levied fo r debt and op eration, s ta te equalized valuation per p u p il, and com­ munity support fo r operation and bonding programs .................................................. 131 Comparison of high and low d is t r ic t s in sample with s ize of d i s t r i c t , s ize of school and teacherad m in is tra tiv e r a t i o ............................................................ Mean, standard deviation and f - r a t i o of high and low d i s t r ic t s ' s iz e , s ize o f school and teachera d m in istrative r a t i o ............................................................... v . 132 132 Table 4.7 4.8 4.9 4.10 4.11 4.12 4.13 4.14 4.15 4.16 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.20 Page Number, mean, standard d eviatio n and f - r a t i o o f the study habits between students of high and low achieving d is t r ic t s .............................................................. 133 Number, mean, standard d eviatio n and f - r a t i o o f high and low d is t r ic t s ' student educational aspiration s and e x p e c t a t io n s ..................................................................... 134 Socioeconomic categories of fa th e rs or other head of the fam ily in high and low d i s t r i c t s ......................... 135 Mean, standard deviation and f - r a t i o fo r high and low d is tr ic ts whose parents' income is under or over $10,000 ........................................................ 136 Mean, standard d eviatio n and f - r a t i o o f high and low achieving d is t r ic t s ' a ttitu d e toward school and e d u c a t io n ........................................................................... 137 Comparison of self-concept of a b il it y between high and low achieving d i s t r i c t s ............................... 138 Comparison of involvement with learning between high and low achieving d i s t r i c t s ...................................... 139 Comparison of high and low d is t r ic t s w ith teacher influence on pupils ........................................................ 140 Comparison of high and low d is t r ic t s w ith students' feelin g s about themselves andschool ................................ 141 Per cent of teachers having three years and f iv e or more years of teaching experience (K-8 only) . . . 142 Mean, standard d eviatio n and f - r a t i o fo r three and fiv e years' or more o f teaching experience (K-8 o n l y ) ................................................................................. 143 Mean, standard deviatio n and f - r a t i o fo r teacher s trik e s , h a lf days, and student s it - in s . . 144 . . Comparison between high and low d is t r ic t s in per cent o f teacher turnover and teacher residence in the d i s t r i c t .......................................................................... Mean, standard deviatio n and f - r a t i o fo r per cent of teacher turnover and per cent o f teacher residence in the "high and low d is t r ic t s . . . . • K vi 145 145 Table 4.21 4.22 4.23 4.24 4.25 4.26 4.27 4.28 4.29 4.30 Page Comparison of p u p ils' vocabularies between high and low achieving d is t r ic t s ....................................................... Mean, standard d e v ia tio n , and f - r a t i o of p u p ils' vocabularies between high and low achieving d is t r ic t s . . . . . . . . 146 147 Mean, standard deviation and f - r a t i o fo r s ta ffs ' a ttitu d e toward students, school and community of high and low school d i s t r i c t s ......................................... 148 Mean, standard deviation and f - r a t i o fo r teacher and p rin cip al job s a tis fa c tio n of high and low d i s t r i c t s ...................................................................................... 149 Mean, standard deviatio n and f - r a t i o fo r age of school b u ild ings, hours o f pupil in s tru c tio n per day and days o f in s tru c tio n in school year between high and low d i s t r i c t s ..................................... 150 Ratings o f facto rs th at may a ffe c t pupil achievement by eighteen superintendents of high and low achieving school d is t r ic t s ............................................ 152 Mean, standard deviation and f - r a t i o o f high and low d is tr ic ts superintendents' opinions of facto rs th a t may a ffe c t pupil achievement . . . 153 . Mean, standard deviation and f - r a t i o of high and low achieving d is t r ic t s ' school organizational clim ate . . . . ' .............................................................. 154 High and low d is t r ic t p ro file s or subtest per­ centages on questionnaire to assess the d is t r ic t s ' organizational c lim a te , spring, 1971 155 Id e n tific a tio n of the clim ate types w ith in the high and low d i s t r ic t s e t t i n g s ...................................... 156 v ii CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Statement o f the Problem "Our kind o f society c a lls fo r the maximum development o f in d iv id u a l's p o te n tia litie s a t a ll le v e ls ." 1 This statement expresses concern o f many educators, public o f f ic i a l s , parents, and researchers today, perhaps more so than ever before, over the kind and q u a lity o f education a v a ila b le in our natio n 's schools. Since the United States is committed to an educa­ tio n a l philosophy th a t recognizes the r ig h t of every c h ild to a public school education, i t follow s th a t each c h ild should have the opportunity to develop to the extent of his a b i l i t i e s , both fo r him­ s e lf, th a t his l i f e may be enriched, and fo r his country, th a t he may be equipped to give in t e llig e n t ly and productively in response to the great demands being made upon him in our society in the world today. The awakening o f people a ll over the world has brought fo rth new problems whose solutions require o f our people th a t we recognize present-day problems and fo rc e s, th a t we be able to think through to new facets and s a tis fa c to ry approaches. P ro sp ect fo r America, The R ockefeller Panel Reports (Garden C ity , N .Y .: Doubleday and Co., In c . , 1961), p. 362. 1 2 Since people of a ll nations, classes, and groups are involved in demands fo r progress, i t is e s p e cia lly incumbent upon us in our educational system to give assurance th a t a ll students of a ll back­ grounds are o ffered q u a lity education and are receptive to the oppor­ tu n itie s offered them, in order th a t they may f u l f i l l th e ir individual p o te n tia l and assume t h e ir re s p o n s ib ilitie s as c itiz e n s in a c r it ic a l period, in world h is to ry . Q u ality education has always been a major goal and ideal of American Pedagogy, but i t has gained precedence slowly and only a fte r q u a n tita tiv e objectives were reasonably s a tis fie d . In recent years, professional educators have been joined by the informed public and many enlightened members of governmental, economic and social in s t it u ­ tio n s , in demanding excellence in the education of our youth. Lyndon B. Johnson, w hile president, remarked th a t he would lik e to go down in h is to ry as the president who provided every American c h ild with "A ll o f the education o f the highest q u a lity , which his or her ambition demands and his or her mind can absorb."^ Americans have tr a d it io n a lly depended upon the schools to prepare.us fo r solving most of our s o c ia l, economic, and educational problems. In today's world o f unprecedented and accelerated change, the s k ills and understanding th a t enabled c itiz e n s to successfully manage th e ir a f f a ir s a decade or two ago are no longer adequate; th e re fo re , the schools have come in fo r increased a tte n tio n as f a c ilit a t o r s o f th is adjustment. P rio r to the 1950's, a major ^President Lyndon B. Johnson, in an address to the National Education Association, July 2 , 1965, New York Times, July 3, 1965, p. 8. 3 educational goal of the American people was universal education, an ob jective th a t has la rg e ly been re a liz e d . Today, however, an emphasis on q u a lity education fc'r every youth has emerged as a major concern. I f the goal of "maximum development of in d iv id u a l p o te n tia l­ i t i e s , " 1 is accepted, our educators must be asked, "Are students achieving in school in accord with th e ir in d iv id u a l capacity to achieve?" Teachers, counselors and p rin cip a ls are aware o f students who seem to perform below the le v e l of th a t which they are capable. Parents also are conscious o f t h is . A rtic le s stressing the need fo r higher achievement, p a r tic u la r ly among the academically poor and low income fa m ilie s , by educators, by s c ie n tis ts , by statesmen, and reports by foundations, a tte s t to an increasing awareness of the need fo r higher achievement by students. In the spring o f 1970 the Michigan Department o f Education took a giant step toward the maximum development o f in divid ual poten­ t i a l i t i e s fo r Michigan's children by in s titu tin g "State Assessment." S tate assessment in Michigan is designed p rim a rily to provide basic information not c u rre n tly a v a ila b le . H opefully, such information w ill improve educational decision making o f professional educators, boards of education members and a l l others v i t a l l y concerned with improving pupil achievement. However, the sta te assessment program is not designed to seek re la tio n s h ip s between the inform ation gathered and other c h a ra c te ris tic s o f school d is tr ic ts in Michigan, nor is i t 1Prospect fo r America, op. c i t . designed to in vestig ate p o ten tial reasons fo r the re s u lts .^ In v e s ti­ gations of educational lit e r a t u r e in past research in d icate th at c e rta in school factors seem to assure q u a lity education and greater pupil achievement. Some o f the school fa c to rs presumed to a ffe c t student achievement are: per-pupil expenditure, teacher-pupil r a t io , and teacher education. Studies by M c D ill, 2 Brookover, 3 and others show th a t i t is apparent th a t there are v a ria tio n s in achievement among individual schools and communities which are re la ted to factors as y e t la rg e ly u n id e n tifie d . From t h is , one can conclude th a t additional yet ignored or uncovered facto rs might influence achieve­ ment. Therefore, i t is proposed th a t other facto rs not so p la c id ly assumed to a ffe c t pupil achievement be explored along with a few presumed fa c to rs . Purpose o f the Study The purpose of th is study is to determine the degree to which ce rta in selected factors are associated w ith high and low educational achievement as measured by the Michigan Educational Assessment Program received by seventh graders in selected Michigan schools. "Levels of Educational Performance and Related Factors in Michigan, 1970," Assessment Report Number 4 , Michigan Department of Education, Bureau of Research, Evaluation and Assessment. 2 E.L. M c D ill, J.C . Meyers and L.C. Rigsby, " In s titu tio n a l Effects in the Academic Behavior o f High School Youths," Sociology o f Education, XL (Summer, 1967), 181-191. 3 Wilbur B. Brookover, Edsel Erickson and Lee J o in er, S e lfConcept of A b ility and School Achievement, 111 (East Lansing: Michigan State U n iv e rs ity , Educational Publications Services, 1967). 5 Importance to Education There can be no doubt as to the importance of id e n tify in g factors most commonly re la te d or associated with pupil achievement. For the past ten years or more, Michigan educators have become in creasingly aware of the need fo r major changes in our educational system. There have been many attempts to improve the educational program which hopefully would improve pupil achievement. This has been attempted by d r a s tic a lly revising s p e c ific courses, by in s t it u ­ tin g ungraded schools and increasing the provisions fo r independent study by developing programmed learning m aterials and re la ted teaching machines, and by introducing many new audio-visual a id s, including language la b o ra to rie s , educational te le v is io n , and computer based in s tru c tio n . During th is period o f tim e, school boards and adm inistrators have worked hard at tryin g to determine which of the many innovations should be included in th e ir local educational programs in order to insure greater learning or educational achievement fo r th e ir students. The kinds of programs and other factors responsible fo r the character of education in the various school d is tr ic ts o f Michigan are so numerous th a t i t has been impossible to sing le out constant factors which could always assure high pupil achievement. This phenomenon has found it s expression in Michigan as each group concerned with education has sought to examine the educational programs of the s ta te 's elementary, secondary and higher education in s titu tio n s . This can be seen by the recent in te re s t in educational ac co u n ta b ility a t every level of education from concerned c itiz e n s 6 who want e x ce lle n t educational opportunities fo r t h e ir c h ild re n , through s ta te o f f ic ia ls who seek assurance th a t educational monies are properly being spent, to educators who c o n tin u a lly seek ways of improving education fo r students. Since most people would agree th a t a l l students have an equal r ig h t to develop to the best o f t h e ir a b i l i t y , and th a t i t is the re s p o n s ib ility of educators to help make th is possible, there is need fo r a study which attempts to fin d some o f the factors asso­ ciated with achievement. When they are known, i t may be possible to arrange situ a tio n s in such a way th a t an acceptable level of achieve­ ment may be maintained where i t has been lacking . So the question remains: What school facto rs should be considered o f primary importance in any e f f o r t to equalize educa­ tio n a l opportunities fo r pupils of a ll kinds and conditions in a ll parts of Michigan and the Unitec States? Mollenkopf and M e lv ille 2 The Coleman^ study, the 3 4 study, the Goodman study, and the Shaycoft findings th a t precede Coleman's study have helped to illu m in a te the question, but they have hardly supplied d e fin ite answers. ^James S. Coleman, e t a l ■, Equality o f Educational Oppor­ tu n ity (Washington: U.S. Government P rin tin g O ffic e , 1966). 2Wi11iam G. Mollenkopf and S. Donald M e lv ille , "A Study of Secondary School C haracteristics as Related to Test Scores," Research B u lle tin 56-6 (P rinceton, N .J .: Educational Testing Service, 1956), (Mimeographed). o Samuel M. Goodman, The Assessment o f School Q u ality (Albany, N .Y .: New York S tate Educational Department, March, 1959). 4 Marion F. Shaycoft, The High School Years: Growth in Cognitive S k ills (P ittsbu rg : American In s titu te s fo r Research in Schools o f Education, U niversity of P itts b u rg , 1967). 7 Low achievement among students of any level o f a b i l i t y , in any school d i s t r i c t , and in any socioeconomic group is a negative force and prevents to a degree the in d iv id u a l's possible attainm ent and his f u l l contrib ution to his n a tio n 's advancement and world progress. I t would seem reasonable to expect th a t a study concerned w ith factors associated w ith high and low educational achievement among students o f a ll le v e ls o f a b i l i t y , not re s tric te d to any socio­ economic group w ith in the school, and on a ju n io r high school level would be o f value. Because of th is need, th is study has been under­ taken. D elim itation s of the Study The v a lid it y o f th is study is a ffected by the follow ing fa c to rs : 1. The 18 selected schools used in th is study were selected on achievement re su lts th a t were one or more standard deviation above or below the mean based on the i n i t i a l 1969-70 Michigan Educational Assessment Program. The assessment program was given to a ll children in grades four and seven in the public schools, except those enrolled in remedial classes in reading, mathematics, and English. 2. The Michigan Assessment Educational Program in it s i n i t i a l year does not supply school d is t r ic t s with a comprehensive assessment o f t h e ir students, but provides group inform ation about students' performance in reading, mathematics, and English. 3. Though the study seeks to discern a re la tio n s h ip between school d is t r ic t s who score high and those d is tr ic ts who score low on student achievement and to discover the common fa c to rs among both high and low d i s t r ic t s , i t does not purport to be an intensive sociological study o f the d i s t r i c t . 4. The findings o f th is in v e s tig a tio n are based on seventh grade pupils only. 8 5. The in v e s tig a tio n is meant only to be an exploratory study in the f ie ld o f fa c to rs th a t may a ffe c t pupil achievement w ith in school d is t r ic t s in Michigan. 6. The 18 d is t r ic t s under study adhered to a philosophy "which promotes the p rin c ip le s of s p i r i t o f American Democracy" which the author in te rp re ts to mean having f a it h in e d u c a b ility o f a ll young people, and a desire to o ffe r educational op portunities to every in divid ual youngster to develop to his f u l le s t e x ten t. 7. The findings of a re la tio n s h ip between pupil achievement and educational fa c to rs are viewed as associational and not causal. 8. The selected school adm inistrators w i ll cooperate in granting interview s and furnish ing data concerning t h e ir s p e c ific d is t r ic t s . D e fin itio n o f Terms High Achievement: By high achievement is meant those school d is t r ic t s who were judged by t h e ir p u p ils ' performance on the Michigan Educational Assessment Program te s ts to have e x p e ri­ enced scores o f one standard d eviatio n or more above the mean. Low Achievement: By low achievement is meant those school d is t r ic ts who were judged by t h e ir p u p ils ' performance on the Michigan Educational Assessment Program te s ts to have experienced scores o f one standard d eviatio n or more below the mean. Factors: The educational c h a ra c te ris tic s perceived by educational experts and/or those presumed to be responsible fo r the character of education in the various public school d is t r ic t s . School D is t r i c t : The term school d i s t r ic t shall be in t e r ­ preted as meaning a tax supported public school in the S tate of Michigan. 9 Curriculum: The courses, both credited and non-credited, offered by the d i s t r i c t , including the m aterial taught in them and the methods by which they are taught. S elf-co n cep t: Self-concept is "those perceptions, b e lie fs , fe e lin g s , a ttitu d e s , and values which the in d ivid u al used as describing h im s e lf," according to P erkin s J School Organizational C lim ate: The c h a ra c te ris tic s o f the teachers as a group and the behavior of the p rin cip a l which provides each school with a "personality" o f i t s own. I t is g e n e ra lly spoken o f as atmosphere w ith in an organization th a t is produced by the in te ra c tio n s of many facto rs and interpersonal relationsh ips e x is tin g between in divid ual p e rs o n a litie s and the group as a whole. Educational A spirations and Educational Expectations: An in d iv id u a l' s goal or expectatiori in regard to the goodness of his own fu tu re performance in a givep task. Hypothesis and Questions This study w ill in ve s tig ate the general hypothesis th a t there are recognizable facto rs th a t a ffe c t high and low pupil achievement. The study w ill attempt to answer the follow ing questions: 1. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between the high and low achieving d is t r ic t s in regard to per pupil to ta l general fund expenditure, to ta l in s tru c tio n expenditure per p u p il, current operating expenditure, and in s tru c tio n s a la rie s per pupil? ^Hugh V. Perkins, "Teachers' and Peers' Perceptions of C hildrens' S elf-concept," Maladjusted Child Development, XXIX (1 9 58 ), 217-218. 10 2. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between the high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to m ills levied fo r debt and operation, the S.E.V. per p u p il, and the support given the d i s t r ic t on m illage fo r operation and bonding programs? 3. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between the high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to size of d i s t r i c t , school, and teach er-ad m in istrative ra tio ? 4. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d ifferen ce between high and low achieving d is t r ic t s in regard to students' study habits? 5. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d ifferen ce between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to students' educational aspiration s and educational expectations? 6. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is t r ic t s in regard to the economic status o f students' fathers and socioeconomic background of students? 7. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is t r ic t s in regard to students' a ttitu d e toward school and education? 8. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d ifferen ce between high and low achieving d is t r ic t s in regard to s tu d e n ts ', self-concept o f a b ility ? 9. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d ifferen ce between high and low achieving d is t r ic t s in involvement with learning? 10. Is there a s ig n ific a n t pupil d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts and teacher influence on pupils' feelings? 11. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is t r ic t s and a p u p il's fe e lin g s about him self and school? 12. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d ifferen ce between high and low achieving d is t r ic t s in regard to teachers' experience? 13. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is t r ic t s in regard to teacher s trik e s , h a lf days, and student s it-in s ? i n 14. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between the high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to teacher turnover and teacher residence in the d is tr ic t? 15. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to students' vocabulary? 16. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts and the s t a f f 's a ttitu d e toward students, school and community? 17. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to teacher job s a tis fa c tio n ? 18. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to p rin c ip a l's job s a tis fa c tio n ? 19. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to age o f bu ild ings, hours of pupil in stru c tio n per day, and days of in stru c tio n in the school year? 20. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to the super­ intendent's opinion of facto rs th a t may a ffe c t pupil achievement? 21. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in school organizational climate? Assumptions Underlying This Study The planning o f a research study o f th is nature must encompass some assumptions which are evident to the researcher, the reader, u t i l i z e r o f the re s u lts , and which carry with them im plica­ tions fo r more precise d e lin e a tio n of some variab les fo r fu tu re study. The important assumptions include: 1. Though the f i r s t Michigan Educational Assessment Program was believed to have obvious erro rs in the 1969-70 versio n , they did not appreciably a ffe c t the student achievement scores. 12 2. The adm inistrators, teachers, and students w ill react to the measuring instrument honestly, accurately r e fle c tin g th e ir perceptions and responses and s p e c ific in q u irie s . 3. I t is assumed th a t the self-concept, level of a s p ira tio n s , a ttitu d e s and opinions about school are environmentally bound and th a t the school is a s ig n ific a n t aspect o f the to ta l environment th at a ffe c ts these v a ria b le s . 4. The organizational clim ate as perceived by the p rin cip al and teachers re fle c ts the organizational clim ate o f the school and th a t whatever bias may a ffe c t the measure is equally d is trib u te d among the d iffe r e n t school s ta ffs . 5. The differences in the findings received in d iffe r e n t settings and from d iffe r e n t in divid uals and groups represent d ifferences in behavior and a ttitu d e s rath er than a r e fle c tio n of any fa lla c ie s in the system o f acquiring the data. Organization o f D issertation The d is s e rta tio n comprises fiv e chapters. Chapter I is an introductory chapter which states the problem and gives the need f o r , purpose, and general procedures o f the study. Chapter I I surveys the lit e r a t u r e re la te d to facto rs under consideration in the study. Chapter I I I discusses in d e ta il the instruments and procedures used. Chapter IV contains a report of the findings obtained from the study. Chapter V includes a summary of the findings of the study, conclusions and im p lic a tio n s , and recommendations fo r fu tu re research re la te d to the study. CHAPTER I I REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE In recent years a great deal o f research has been conducted concerning the e ffe c t o f n o n in te lle ctu al factors on low achievement. The impetus appears to be due to Terman's^ work, based on a lo n g i­ tudinal study o f g ifte d c h ild re n , th a t nothing presents a greater contrast between the le a s t and most successful g ifte d student than t h e ir drive to achieve and t h e ir a ll around social adjustment. Many research studies conducted since th a t time have been concerned about the non-gifted as well as the g ifte d students, and the goal of these in vestig atio n s has been to explain the wide d is p a rity in academic performance among students who have comparable in te llig e n c e . Low achievement studies were f i r s t concerned w ith the college and high school students. Low achievement a t these le v e ls leads to questions as to why low achieving students have not been discovered and helped before high school or college. Some research has been done on the elementary and ju n io r high school le v e ls in recent years, enough to raise the question of whether research should not be in s titu te d e a r lie r than i t has here­ to fo re been, fo r i t has been discovered th a t low achievement can be ^Louis M. Terman, The G ifted Child Grows Up (Palo A lto: Stanford U niversity Press, 1947). 13 i 14 id e n tifie d in the elementary school and appears to in te n s ify in the ju n io r high school, p a r tic u la r ly about the ninth grade. Research on low achievement has been p rim a rily concerned over the years w ith students variously designated as g ifte d , m entally su p e rio r, of high a b i l i t y , or of an IQ ra tin g above 120. Along with research there has been much emphasis on the development o f curriculum and counseling fo r the g ifte d low achiever. There is now a great awakening to the existence o f low achievement a t a b i l i t y levels other than th a t of a student with 120 IQ or more and i t has now been recognized th a t to a considerable extent low achievement is not confined to the high a b i l i t y group. A basic concern of researchers is the id e n tific a tio n of causes o f low achievement. However, causal re la tio n s h ip s have not been c le a rly established and there is some c o n flic tin g evidence. Attempts are being made to discover and describe facto rs th at can be id e n tifie d as being re la te d to low achievement. Areas o f possible s ig n ific a n c e are being designated. An in te re s tin g development of recent research is the considera­ tio n o f combinations o f facto rs or sets o f patterns or circumstances which appear to be c h a ra c te ris tic of the high achieving and low achieving student. Many fa c to rs have been investigated in research. This study accepts the premise th a t no one fa c to r may be dominate and that m u ltip le factors should be in vestig ated . F u rther, since low achievement is an in d iv id u a l m atter as well as an educational problem, 15 i t could w ell be th a t the same facto rs or the same combination of facto rs do not necessarily operate fo r each low achieving student even w ith in the same school. From a survey of the various facto rs considered in other stu d ies, c e rta in ones have been selected fo r th is study and the research in these areas w ill be reviewed. This review w ill include studies rep resentative o f the various areas under consideration and findings p e rtin e n t to these areas. Four areas o f research are d ir e c tly relevan t to th is study. The chapter is th e re fo re divided in to four sections as follow s: 1. Financial factors re la te d to pupil achievement. 2. D is t r ic t s ize and s t a ff facto rs re la te d to pupil achievement. 3. Environmental facto rs re la te d to pupil achievement. 4. V a r ia b ilit y of students and it s re la tio n s h ip to achievement. Financial Factors Related to Pupil Achievement How to obtain adequate fin a n c ia l support is perhaps the most serious problem of the public schools in the United S ta te s, and a problem th at needs more a tte n tio n on the part of school adm inistrators and school board members.^ Though d o lla rs spent on education alone cannot guarantee pupil achievement, i t is generally accepted th a t i t is one o f the most ^George G allup, Second Annual Survey of the P u b lic 's A ttitu d e Toward the Public Schools (P rinceton, N .J .: Gallup In te rn a tio n a l, 1970), p. 101. “ 16 recognized fa c to rs associated with pupil achievement. A review o f the lit e r a t u r e re la te d to school finances thus becomes an important fa c to r. A major in ve s tig atio n to determine those c h a ra c te ris tic s which were present in high achieving school d is t r ic t s was conducted by Mort and Cornell in 1941J They used the c r ite r io n of a d a p ta b ility as an in d ic a to r of d i s t r ic t achievement. 344 school d is t r ic t s . Questionnaires were sent to From th is o rig in a l group, t h ir t y - s ix d is tr ic ts were chosen fo r more in ten sive study. Nine innovations were chosen even tually to be studied in depth in each of the t h ir t y - s ix repre­ sentative d is t r ic t s . These were: (1) the kindergarten, (2 ) high schools, (3) special classes fo r the m entally handicapped, (4 ) homemaking fo r boys, (5) a d u lt le is u re a c t iv it ie s , (6) in te g ra tio n of e x tra c u rric u la r a c t iv it ie s , (7) elim ination o f elementary fin a l p examinations, (8) integrated c u rric u la , and (9) supplementary reading. U tiliz in g c o e ffic ie n ts o f c o rre la tio n s , Mort and Cornell found th a t from the sixty-seven variab les examined, current expense per W.E.P.U. 3 was the v a riab le or fa c to r which accounted fo r the most amount o f v a ria tio n in a d a p ta b ility . Other facto rs th a t showed high s ig n ific a n t c o rre la tio n s with ra te o f adoption were: (1) to ta l V a u l R. Mort and Francis G. C o rn ell, American Schools in T ra n s itio n (New York: Bureau o f P ub licatio n s, Teachers Col 1ege, Columbia U n iv e rs ity , 1941). ^Ib id . , pp. 27-29. 3 W.E.P.U. re fe rs to weighted elementary pupil u n it—a parameter derived from average d a ily attendance corrected by a weighting to take account o f higher secondary school costs and small system s iz e . Ib id . , p. 396. 5 17 expenditure fo r a ll educational. purposes, .4 4 , and current expense as found in the to ta l operating budget, .4 0 .1 M ort's and C o rn e ll's general findings showed th a t money or wealth made a d iffe re n c e in a d a p ta b ility , and th a t wealthy communities are more inventive and 2 tend to be pioneers. A d a p ta b ility in th is study was measured with an instrument which the authors developed. The device used to measure a school d i s t r ic t 's innovativeness was c a lle d , "Guide fo r S elf-A ppraisal of School Systems." Home ownership was a s ig n ific a n t fa c to r in the Pennsylvania study by Mort and C ornell. Ross suggests, however, th a t i t is more lik e ly th a t th is fa c to r has more v a lid it y when conceptualized as only p a rt of the to ta l fin a n c ia l a b il it y of the school district-com m unity. 3 In order to assess the effectiveness o f a d m in istrative p o licies in re la tio n to school achievement, Mort and Furno4 in 1955 developed the Sequential Simplex, Model B 55 which sought to conceptualize and define various classes of causative influences upon schools. The Model is based upon the follow ing series o f fin a n c ia l measures: (1 ) wealth or equalized value of taxable property per pupil which is a community c h a ra c te ris tic , (2) expenditure or k in e tic wealth which is Ib id . , pp. 465-466. ^ Ib id . , pp. 53-54. 3 Donald H. Ross, e d ., Adm inistration fo r A d a p ta b ility (New York: M etropolitan School Study Council, Teachers C ollege, Columbia U n iv e rs ity , 1958). 4 Paul R. Mort and Orlando F. Furno, Theory and Synthesis of a Sequential Simplex (New York: In s titu te of A dm inistrative Research, Teachers College, Columbia U n iv e rs ity , 1960), pp. 1-50. 18 a c h a ra c te ris tic o f school board p o lic y , and (3) professional sa la rie s which are a c h a ra c te ris tic o f the educational en te rp ris e or the school its e lf. The Sequential Simplex Model conceptualizes an educational system as a series of four concentric spheres s itu a te d a t various poisitions of remoteness from the c r ite rio n of school q u a lity which is located a t the core or cen ter. The innermost sphere surrounding and influencing the q u a lity c r ite rio n to the g reatest extent is the school consisting of the s t a f f and student personnel. The next sphere or le v e l o f influence is the school system p o licy which includes such increments as s a la rie s , numbers o f s t a f f , and supplies. The th ird ring o f influence is the "educational clim ate" which is determined by the expenditure level fo r education in the community. The encompassing sphere or fourth layer located a t the greatest distance from the c r ite r io n of q u a lity is the "community" which includes wealth and other socioeconomic and physical c h a ra c te ris tic s . In summary, the Sequential Simplex Model 55 designed by Mort and Furno has made the follow ing s ig n ific a n t contrib ution s: (1 ) pro­ vided a r e lia b le pred icto r o f school d i s t r ic t achievement, (2 ) pro­ vided a m atrix of factors fo r systematic analysis o f the relationsh ips o f school achievement to school and community fa c to rs , and (3) in tr o ­ duced model designing and system analysis processes to the area o f achievement education assessment.^ In continuing M ort's work, the M etropolitan School Study Council formed in 1942, has spent two decades studying why and how v 1 Ib id . 19 schools improve. The major re su lts o f the Council's work has been compiled in a source book, A dm inistration fo r A d a p ta b ility , which includes research conducted in over 150 studies. The te x t reveals s p e c ific findings in these and other areas; i . e . , community function and s iz e , population fa c to rs , fin a n c ia l p o te n tia l and performance, the adm inistration and s t a f f fa c to rs . The Council has continued to use a d a p ta b ility as the c r ite r io n fo r achievement in the large number of studies undertaken.^ The M etropolitan School Study Council (1955) measured the a d a p ta b ility of 70 member schools located in m etropolitan New York C ity , by applying the "Growing Edge," a process-type measuring in s tru ­ ment developed by Mort, Vincent, and Newell. In c o rre la tin g the c r ite r io n , a d a p ta b ility , with the follow ing fa c to rs , the Council found the subsequent Pearson c o rre la tio n s : with per pupil expendi­ tu re s , .60; w ith percentages o f business and professional workers residing in the community, .44; with percentages o f s t a f f with f iv e years or more tr a in in g , .30; and with the average salary o f s t a f f , .57. 3 Kumpf showed th a t a high achieving school system has a high percentage o f w h ite -c o lla r or professional workers; income is higher, i there is a higher a d u lt educational le v e l, and a s ig n ific a n tly higher than average per pupil expenditure fo r education. ^Ross, loc. c i t . 2Paul R. Mort, W illiam S. Vincent and Clarence A. Newell, The Growing Edge (New York: M etropolitan School Study C ouncil, Teachers College, Columbia U n iv e rs ity , 1954), c ite d by Donald H. Ross, e d ., Adm inistration fo r A d a p ta b ility , . op. c i t . , p. 26. ^Carl H. Kumpf, The Adaptable School (New York: Co., 1952), pp. 12-14. The Macmillan 2 Burkhead^ concludes th a t even i f a l l the schools in America had the same per pupil expenditure level there would be s t i l l vast d ifferences in the q u a lity o f educational programs. He believes th a t perhaps only on e-third of the factors a ffe c tin g pupil achievement are re la te d to expenditure le v e ls . In addition there are f a r too many fa c to rs which are independent o f each other while others have some very d i f f i c u l t to measure re la tio n s h ip s . The author fu rth e r concludes Good teachers tend to be a ttra c te d to good schools. Good supervision, good adm inistratio n, and high expenditure levels are associated with good schools. Strong community in te re s t and good schools go together. In surveying studies done on a d a p ta b ility and q u a lity , Jones o found th a t the one fa c to r which consistently e x h ib its a high p o s itiv e c o rre la tio n is the expenditure o f money per pupil fo r education. He fu rth e r states th a t high achieving students do require cor­ respondingly high expenditure, with p a rtic u la r school d is t r ic t s , but th a t i t does not necessarily insure high achievement. does, however, mean mediocre school d is t r ic t s . Low investment Another important conclusion is th a t schools of high achievement in v a ria b ly rank high in expenditures, and school d is tr ic ts of low achievement rank lowest in expenditure. ^Jesse Burkhead, Public School Finance Economics and P o litic s (Syracuse, N .Y .: Syracuse U niversity Press, 1964), pp. 86-87. 2 Howard R. Jones, Financing Public Elementary and Secondary Education (New York: The Center fo r Applied Research in Education, In c ., 1966), pp. 17-18. B r ic k e ll1 reported th a t the s ig n ifican ce o f c e rta in budget items in re la tio n to achievement were current expenditure and the s a la rie s of personnel. The Q u ality Measurement Project o f the S tate of New York made a comparative study between twelve school systems id e n tifie d as being almost u n iv e rs a lly good in t h e ir effectiveness in teaching basic s k ills and twelve other schools id e n tifie d as being almost u n iv e rs a lly poor. Certain adm in istrative data, expenditures, and s t a f f c h a ra c te ris tic s were examined fo r these 24 d is t r ic t s to determine i f important d i f ­ ferences might be determined. Some o f the more in te re s tin g findings o f th is special study were: 1. E xcellent schools were tw o-thirds the s ize o f the poor schools, nearly twice as w ealthy, and spent about 25 percent rrjore per p u p il. 2. B etter schools averaged about f iv e more professionals per 1000 students (53.2% to 48.5%). 3. A la rg e r percentage o f the s t a f f o f the good schools received higher s a la rie s (80% to 60%). 4. Poor schools had a la rg e r percentage o f hometown teachers (52.5% to 29%) and kept them longer. 5. B etter schools had a la rg e r percentage of teachers with masters' degrees (53% to 22.5% ).2 A Massachusetts study examined the condition of education in the sta te and submitted a report to the Massachusetts Education Conference. The group found no measure o f educational achievement ^Henry M. B r ic k e ll, Organizing New York S tate fo r Educa­ tio n a l Change (Albany: State Education Department, 1961), p. 398. 2W illiam D. Firman, "Which Schools are Better?" NEA Research B u lle tin (October, 1963), pp. 88-89. 22 acceptable as a c r ite r io n ; th e re fo re , a comparison o f s ta te 's school d is tr ic ts was made with national averages in such re la te d areas as: p e r-p u p il-s ta ff r a tio s , teacher q u a lific a tio n s , fin a n c ia l support, and expenditures fo r lib r a r ie s and textbooks. The study concluded th a t Massachusetts was d e fic ie n t in the above achievement essentials and compared unfavorably with national averages in other areas such as necessary space and supplies fo r schools.^ A somewhat s im ila r s t a tis t ic a l survey (1961-62) by the Ohio L e g is la tiv e Commission was undertaken to determine the resources a v a ila b le in the high schools of Ohio. The study, based on an inventory of many o f the a v a ila b le c u rric u la , class enrollm ent, teacher preparation, and teaching methods in secondary schools, found: (1) an inadequate curriculum fo r both college-bound and work-bound students, (2) a lack o f opportunity fo r students to study the basic d is c ip lin e s or general education courses, and (3 ) large schools enjoyed an enormous advantage over small schools in measures re la te d to the adequacy o f the curriculum and to q u a lity in s tru c tio n . The Project Talent 3 2 data in d ic a te th a t four of the most impor­ ta n t factors found to be closely associated with achievement are: ^New England School Development Council, State Aid to Education in Massachusetts, A NESDC Research Report (Cambridge: The Council, 1962), c ite d by Leonard M. B ritto n , Operation Yardstick (Cleveland: The Martha Holden Jennings Foundation, 1964), pp. 19-20. ^Ohio L e g is la tiv e Service Commission, Ohio High Schools a S ta tis tic a l P r o file (Columbus: The S tate o f Ohio, S ta ff Research B u lle tin No. 56, January, 1963), p. 14, c ite d by B ritto n , Operation Yardstick, op. c i t . , pp. 14-16. 3john C. Flanagan, the in te n s ity of disapproval varied in versely with size of tpe organization. I t is d i f f i c u l t to fin d studies dealing d ir e c tly with school size and teachers' a ttitu d e s . Furthermore the a v a ila b le evidence is ^Hans H. Gerth and C. Wright M ills , Character and Social Structure (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1953), pp. 55-61. 2 E. Dale, "Planning and Developing the Company Organization S tru c tu re ," Research Report No. 20, American Management A ssociation, (New York: American Management Association, 1952), pp. 219-235. 3 Thomas and Fink, op. c i t . , p. 378. 4 E. 0. Smigel, "Public A ttitudes Towards S tealing as Related to the Size o f the Victim O rganization," American Sociological Review, XXI (1 9 66 ), 320-327. 32 rath er controversial and fa r from s a tis fa c to ry . Murdy's^ study emphasized the importance of interpersonal re la tio n sh ip s in the school, and indicated th a t fa c e -to -fa c e methods o f communication are viewed by teachers and p rin c ip a ls as the most e ffe c tiv e way of achieving good interpersonal re la tio n s h ip s . One can add here th a t th is kind of communication is more li k e l y to occur in small schools 2 than large ones. Strong has reported th a t elementary teachers in 3 general have a d e fin ite preference fo r medium sized schools. Bosler reported th a t elementary p rin c ip a ls in Iowa favored sm aller schools. Hall 4 reported s im ila r findings on high school p rin c ip a ls in F lo rid a . 5 Ryans reported th a t when the s iz e of a school was considered, the mean scores of teachers in la rg e r schools were low er, d iffe r in g Leonard L. Murdy, "Perception o f Interpersonal Relationships Among Secondary School Adm inistrators" (unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta ­ tio n , U niversity of Southern C a lifo r n ia , 1962), pp. 113-117. 2 W ill R. Strong, "An A n a ly tic a l Comparison of Large and Small Schools w ith Respect to Achievement of Pupil A ttitu d e s of Teachers" (unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , Indiana U n iv e rs ity , 1964), pp. 94-105. 3 David D. Bosler, "An In ve s tig atio n of C ertain Factors Influencing the Optimum Size fo r Elementary School Attendance Units" (unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , State U niversity of Iowa, 1960), pp. 137-138. 4 M orril L. H a ll, "A Study fo r Some of the Relationships Between Size o f School and Selected C haracteristics o f Students, Teachers, and P rin cip als" (unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , Florida State U n iv e rs ity , 1956), pp. 96-107. 5David G. Ryans, C h a ra c te ris tic s o f Teachers (Washington: American Council on Education, i9 6 0 ), p. 395. 33 a t the 5 percent level o f s t a t is t ic a l s ig n ifican ce on fiv e c h a ra c te ris tic s : a. b. c. d. understanding fr ie n d ly classroom behavior stim ulating im aginative classroom behavior favorable a ttitu d e s toward adm inistrators and other school personnel e. verbal understanding f . emotional s t a b ilit y . A group of studies attempted to explain the e ffe c t o f organiza­ tio n a l size upon members' a ttitu d e s and p a rtic ip a tio n by emphasizing one aspect of the organization s tru c tu re th a t is a ffected by growth in s iz e . T e rrin 's ^ study is a good example fo r such studies. analysis is based on in te ra c tio n . His He pointed out th a t fo r an individual to maintain the same level of in te ra c tio n with a ll other members of a la rg e r system requires much more in te ra c tio n and th a t, th e re fo re , f a m ilia r it y with others tends to decrease in la rg e r systems. Morgenstern 2 conjectured th a t as the size o f the organization increased, adequate communication became more d i f f i c u l t . cluded th at in organizational systems, s ize may not fa c to r, but there are mediating facto rs which the s iz e stru ctu re tends to a ffe c t. 3 Guion emphasized another aspect. He con­ be a c o n tro llin g of the Leadership, fo r him, is the key fa c to r in explaining the e ffe c t of s ize on members' a ttitu d e s V e r r in and M ills , op. c i t . , pp. 11-13. 2 Morgenstern, op. c i t . 3 R. M. Guion, "The Employee Load o f F irs t Supervisors," Personnel Psychology, VI (1 9 53 ), 17-22. 34 and p a rtic ip a tio n . He has noted some fa c to rs re la te d to u n it size which influence the a b il it y o f the leader to supervise adequately. These facto rs include such aspects o f the s itu a tio n s as the nature o f the task supervised, the amount o f flo o r space covered, the number o f d iffe r e n t kinds of jobs supervised, and others which would I a ffe c t the optimum s ize o f the group in question. March and Simon^ speculated th a t s ize of organization is only one fa c to r which seems to be present in the complex systems of variab les th a t have been found to r e la te to the members' tendency to p a rtic ip a te . T a lla c h i 2 postulated th a t organization s ize or other s tru c tu ra l c h a ra c te ris tic s of large organizations a ffe c t employee modes of in te ra c tio n , which in turn a ffe c t t h e ir a ttitu d e s and consequently t h e ir behavior a t work. In other words, s iz e , per se, has no d ire c t influence upon employee a ttitu d e s or performance, but through c e rta in intervening fa c to rs , caused by s tru c tu ra l changes, employee a ttitu d e s , and consequently behavior on the jo b , changes as organizations grow in s ize . A dm inistrative Theory, Leadership, Job S a tis fa c tio n and School Climate The e ffe c t o f the p rin cip a l o f the school as the most potent 3 in d iv id u a l, determiner o f what Halpin re fe rs to as the personality o f the school has been researched ex ten siv ely. Many of the ^March and Simon, op. c i t . , pp. 110-111. 2 T a lla c h i, op. c i t . , pp. 179-191. 3 Andrew W. H alpin, Theory and Research in A dm inistration (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1966). 35 a d m in istrative theories by several a u th o ritie s in education have many im plications regarding the nature o f the clim ate o f the school. Lewin'' examined the c h a ra c te ris tic s of sty le s o f group leadership and th e ir re la tio n s h ip to the c h a ra c te ris tic s o f groups they led . They found th a t dem ocratically led groups were s ig n ific a n tly more s e lf-d ir e c tin g in the d ire c tio n of the in s titu tio n a l goals than la is s e z -fa ir e and a u th o rita ria n groups. Members were less aggressive, less dependent on group leaders, and in it ia t e d and engaged in pro­ ductive work. Spain, et a l . , 2 re fe rs to the elementary p rin cip a l as the key to the improvement o f the profession, as status leader on whom the basic school atmosphere depends by the leadership he gives. Marburgar 3 also maintains th a t a p rin c ip a l's s ty le holds great relevance fo r the teachers' job s a tis fa c tio n . He points out th a t a p rin c ip a l's s ty le may e ith e r s t i f f l e or encourage c r e a tiv ity and is very in flu e n c ia l in teachers' job s a tis fa c tio n . The so -called per­ s o n a lity o f the school, th e re fo re , is g re a tly influenced by the nature of the leadership provided by it s adm in istrato r. ^K. Lewin, R. L ip p itt and R. White, "Patterns o f Aggressive Behavior in Experimentally Created 'Social C lim a te s .'" Journal of Social Psychology, X (1 9 39 ), 271-299. 2 Charles Spain, Harold Dv Drummond and John I . Goodlad, Educational Leadership in the Elementary School (New York: Rinehart and Company, 1956), pp. 69-70. 3 Carl L. Marburgar, "Consideration f o r Educational Planning," in Education in Depressed Areas, ed. by A. Harry Passow (New York: Teachers College, Columbia U n iv e rs ity , 1963). i 36 Getzels^ describes perhaps one o f the most often used references o f a th e o re tic a l framework which gives consideration to both the in divid ual and the system in working to a tta in a goal. This theory of adm inistration was described by Jacob G etzels, Egon Gerba, and Charles Bidwell a t the Midwest Adm inistration Center, The U niversity of Chicago. The cooperative study under which th is theory was developed reveals th a t the dimensions o f adm inistration consist o f (1) "Nomothetic" leadership as leadership from lin e a u th o rity , (2) transactional leadership as th a t which a tta in s it s a u th o rity from the lin e or legal sources and a t the same time is viewed as functional leadership which a tta in s respect and cooperation of the s t a f f , and (3) ideographic leadership as th a t which is viewed to meet the needs of the teachers and supports s t a f f members. Sw eitzer, e t a l . , 2 in a study of perception of the p rin c ip a l, teachers, and superintendents o ffe rs some cautioning advice about u n ila te ra l perception of ones ro le as a school p rin c ip a l. The ro le o f the p rin cip al as perceived by teachers, p rin cip a ls and super­ intendents is often d is s im ila r. I t is important fo r the p rin c ip a l to know the s t a ff and the superintendent's perception o f his ro le in harmonizing in his leadership a c t iv it ie s . The research of Chesler, e t a l . provides support fo r considera tio n o f the perceptions of s t a ff members. They found th a t p rin cip a ls ^Jacob W. G etzels, "Adm inistration as a Social Process." A dm inistrative Theory in Education (Chicago: Midwest A dm inistration Center, 1958). 2 Robert E. Sw eitzer, e t a l ♦, Role Expectations and Per­ ceptions o f School P rin c ip a ls , U.S. O ffice o f Education Research P roject No. 1329 (S tillw a te r : Research Foundation, Oklahoma State U n iv e rs ity , January, 1963). 37 with innovative s ta ffs were "in tune" w ith the fe e lin g s and values o f the teachers. This made fo r g re a ter teacher job s a tis fa c tio n . Likewise, "the s t a f f must be aware of the p r io r it y the prin cip al places on the improvement of classroom teaching." The p rin cip a ls with the innovative s ta ffs were supportive of the process of improving classroom teaching. The p rin c ip a ls with less innovative s ta ffs tend to be concerned with the mechanics of adm inistering the school and pleasing those in higher a d m in istrative po sition s. H e lle r* in ve s tig atin g the formal organization perceptions of the organizational clim ate o f the schools compared the perceptions of the e x is tin g and desired clim ate of a school held by members in an informal group with perceptions o f the to ta l membership of the formal organization. A to ta l o f 40 informal groups were found w ith in ten schools, w ith a number of groups in the school ranging from three to s ix . The re su lts o f th is study may best be summarized by H e lle r himself who consistently states them as follow s: Informal groups function w ith in the formal organization of elementary schools. While membership in such groups undoubtedly has many consequences, in the present study, the to ta l membership o f the formal organizations and the members of the informal groups perceived both the e x istin g and desired organizational clim ates in a s im ila r way. The open organizational clim ate was perceived by the to ta l membership o f the formal organizations and a ll but one of the informal groups as being the most desirable organiza­ tio n a l clim ate in which to work. The sig n ifican ce o f these findings may have great im plications fo r p rin cip a ls in th a t they in d icate a valuable tool fo r obtaining ^Robert W. H e lle r , "Informal Organization and Perceptions of the O rganizational Climate of School," The Journal of Educational Research, LX, No. 9 (May-June, 1968), 405-411. 5 38 d esirable information by becoming cognizant o f the perceptions of informal groups w ith in the school. This may enable the p rin cip a l to b e tte r communicate with his s t a f f , serve as guide fo r the p rin cip al in adjusting his benavior, improving relatio n sh ip s between him and the s t a ff in the best in te re s ts o f the students he serves. In a re la te d study Flagg1 examined the organizational clim ate of the school and it s re la tio n s h ip to pupil achievement, s ize of school, and teacher turnover and found among other things, (1) the c h a ra c te ris tic s o f the p rin c ip a ls as leaders la rg e ly determine the climates o f the schools over which they have c o n tro l, (2) a closed clim ate tends to increase the ra te of teacher turnover. These findings have im plications fo r the prin cipal as a leader and the re la tio n s h ip of his behavior, job s a tis fa c tio n to the school c lim a te , and it s e ffe c t on teacher and pupil behavior and s a tis fa c tio n . 2 Watson in "A Study o f the Relationship Among Selected Aspects of Adm inistrative Job S a tis fa c tio n and Teachers Group Cohesiveness in the Elementary School," concluded th at the cohesiveness of a teaching group tends to be p o s itiv e ly correlated w ith the p rin c ip a l's job s a tis fa c tio n and leadership behavior,, Joseph Thomas Flagg, J r . , "The Organizational Climate of Schools: It s Relationship to Pupil Achievement, Size o f School and Teacher Turnover" (unpublished Ed.D. d is s e rta tio n , Rutgers, The State U n iv e rs ity , 1965). 2 Betty J. Watson, "A Study of the Relationships Among Selected Aspects o f A dm inistrative Behavior and Teacher Group Cohesiveness in the Elementary School" (unpublished Ed.D. d is s e rta tio n , Michigan S tate U n iv e rs ity , 1965). Collins^ in a study of in d ivid u al p e rso n ality and organiza­ tio n al clim ate found th a t there were s ig n ific a n t differen ces in job s a tis fa c tio n levels among personality types. In tu itiv e s favored "open" clim ate and had lower job s a tis fa c tio n w ith "closed." Sensing types favored both open and closed clim ate while the in t u it iv e in tro v e rts most strongly favored "open" and re jected the "closed" c lim a te , and the sensing thinking types o f personality reported more teachers as highly s a tis fie d with closed climates than with open. Z ille r 2 proposed th a t: Democratic organizations are designed to perpetuate success, whereas au to c ra tic organizations are designed to adjust to f a ilu r e . He contended th a t when group action is shared by the members i t tends to perpetuate the outcome o f the group follow ing a change in formal leadership. The "open" clim ate tends to allow fo r more accurate and frequent occurrence of tran sfers which is healthy fo r the growth of the in s titu tio n under a democratic leader. B ills 3 in achievement. re fe rs to the clim ate as making important differen ces He c ite s several examples where placing children in a warm, perm issive, and accepting clim ate as having a psychological ^James A lb ert C o llin s , "Individual P ersonality and Organiza­ tio n a l Climate" (unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , Claremont Graduate School and U niversity Center, 1965). 2 Robert C. Z i l l e r , "Toward a Theory of Open and Closed Groups," Psychological B u lle tin , LXIV, No. 3 (1 9 6 5 ), 164-182. 3Robert E. B ill s , "About People and Teaching," B u lle tin , X X V III, No. 2 (Bureau o f School Service, College o f Education, U n iversity of Kentucky, Lexington, December, 1955). 40 impact on the c h ild 's development. The im p licatio n is th a t the clim ate has a therapeutic e ffe c t on students with problems of adjustment in school and fr u s tra tio n in general. Fox, e t a l . suggests th a t there is much to be gained by looking a t the p a re n t-p u p il, p u p il-p u p il, p u p il-teach er as the basis fo r understanding m otivation to learning a c t iv it y and developing mental health. They fu rth e r suggest looking a t the to ta l p a tte rn , e s p e c ia lly o f the re la tio n s h ip between p u p il-p u p il and p u p il-teach er as a gateway to a b e tte r understanding o f the learning environment. Nicholas, e t a l . , 2 and Creaser 3 a l l reveal negative c o rre la ­ tio n between the size o f the school and degree of openness w ith in the clim ate or the effectiveness of the leadership w ith in the school. Im plications are th a t the sm aller school tends to enhance openness. A closer and more e ffe c tiv e interpersonal re la tio n s h ip tends to e x is t in sm aller ra th e r than la rg e r organizations. 4 Robinson stressed th a t "no system can be successful in reducing school f a ilu r e unless a ll interpersonal re la tio n s h ip s are ^Robert S. Fox, M. B. Luszki and R. A. Schmuck, Diagnosing Classroom Learning Environment (Chicago: Science Research Associates, In c ., 1966). 2 Lynn N. Nicholas, Helen E. Virgo and W illiam W. Wattenburg, E ffe c t of Socioeconomic S etting and Organizational Climate in Problems Brought to School O ffic e s , Final Report o f Cooperative Research Project No. 2394, b .s. U ffic e of Education (D e tro it: Wayne S tate U n iv e rs ity , 1965). 3 Morira Creaser, "Parent-teacher Contacts as Related to School S ize , Number of Bussed Pupils and Organizational Climate" (unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , Wayne S tate U n iv e rs ity , 1966). 4 Helen F. Robinson, "School Practices th a t Cause F a ilu re ," Childhood Education, XLIV, No. 3 (November, 1967). 41 valued above objects and events." She fu rth e r states th a t children must perceive themselves as appreciated and valued, and teachers must also enjoy a sense o f s a tis fa c tio n f o r success. In the review o f the lit e r a t u r e as reported in th is section, references to the school clim ate in re la tio n s h ip to ad m in is tra tiv e theory, leadership, job s a tis fa c tio n and school clim ate are many. There appears to be a common element about the resu lts o f the overwhelming m a jo rity o f studies pertainin g to organizational clim ate: The commonality of these re s u lts strongly im plicates the sign ificance o f interpersonal re la tio n s h ip s , the ro le o f the human element in the determ ination of the level of the clim ate on the continuum from open to closed. An understanding o f the ro le leadership, the nature of the interpersonal behavior w ith in various school s e ttin g s , and a coordina­ tio n of c e rta in fa c to rs c ite d in the review may provide avenues fo r improved school practices in the best in te re s ts o f the students. Teacher Influence Teachers re in fo rc e student p a rtic ip a tio n in the teachinglearning process by giving p ra is e , and by making use o f , or develop­ in g , the ideas presented by students. Use of these techniques plus the use o f questions and verbal acceptance of student fe e lin g s can be said to c o n s titu te an in d ire c t pattern o f teacher in flu en ce. A ll of these teacher behaviors tend to encourage student p a rtic ip a tio n w hile lim itin g domination o f the teacher. Lecturing, giving d ire c tio n s , and c r it ic iz in g are behaviors which increase teacher i 42 domination and control while tending to lim it or discourage students' p a rtic ip a tio n . These teacher behaviors can be said to c o n s titu te a d ire c t pattern of in fluence. These concepts o f teacher behavior closely p a ra lle l the in te ­ grated pattern and dominative pattern developed by Anderson^ and democratic leadership and a u th o rita ria n leadership c h a ra c te ris tic s O used in the laboratory studies of L ip p itt and White to study the e ffe c ts of these types o f influence on small groups o f boys. Since the development o f these broad concepts o f teacher behavior, there have been a number of e ffo r ts to r e la te the propor­ tio n of time a teacher uses one pattern or the other to such educa­ tio n a l outcomes as student achievement, a ttitu d e s and c r e a t iv ity . In gen eral, researchers have fo^nd th a t the proportion of time spent with the teacher engaging in behavior th a t f a l l s w ith in the realms of in d ire c t influence is d ir e c tly re la te d to mean class scores on achievement te s ts ( a f t e r adjusting fo r i n i t i a l statu s) and a ttitu d e s of students toward the teacher and classroom s itu a tio n . th is contention can be found in studies by Flanders, York: 3 Support of Morrison, 4 ^Harold H. Anderson, C re a tiv ity and It s C u ltiv a tio n (New Harper and Brothers, 1959), pp. 29-31. 2R. L ip p itt and R. K. W hite, "The Social Climate o f C hildren's Groups," in Child Behavior and Development, ed. by R. G. Barker, J . S. Koremin, and H. F. Wright (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1943). 3 N. A. Flanders, Teacher In flu e n c e , Pupil A ttitu d e s , and Achievement, U.S. O ffic e of Education Cooperative Research Monograph, No. 12 (Washington: U.S,, Government P rin tin g O ffic e , 1965). 4 I B. M. Morrison, ,"The Reactions o f In tern a l and External Children to Patterns o f Teaching Behavior" (unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U n iv e rsity of Michigan, 1966). 43 Nelson, 1 Cogan, 2 M ille r , 3 and others who a ll used some method of q u a lify in g teacher verbal behavior to procure o b je ctiv e data to describe what takes place between the teacher and his students in the classroom. In d ire c t influence consists o f several behaviors which vary in terms o f a lis te n in g student p a rtic ip a tio n and in th e ir q u a lity of providing reinforcem ent. For instance, the effectiveness of praise as a reward to fo s te r more p o s itiv e a ttitu d e s or to encourage g reater achievement is not c le a r. Much of the praise th a t is heard in the classroom is s u p e r fic ia l, w h ile some is presented and explained in such a manner th a t students are ra re ly a ffected by i t . In any case, a teacher's praise is a valued judgment th a t can be construed by an extremely school oriented student as a reward fo r being lik e d , favored, e t c . , but not necessarily as a reward fo r something a student a c tu a lly did. A question about student's ideas or contrib u­ tions can be a more e ffe c tiv e means o f reinforcement in th is respect than most p ra is e . I f teacher behavior were an e ffe c tiv e re in fo rc e r o f a given type o f student behavior, one would expect th a t an increase in a \ . N. Nelson, "The E ffe c t o f Classroom In te ra c tio n on Pupil L in g u is tic Performance," D is s erta tio n A bstracts, XXV (1964), 789. 2 M. L. Cogan, "Research on the Behavior o f Teachers: A New Phase," Teacher Education, XIV (1 9 63 ), 238-243. 3 G. L. M ille r , "An In v e s tig a tio n of Teaching Behavior and Pupil Thinking." Department of Education, U niversity of Utah, 1964. 44 re in fo rc in g behavior by the teacher would be p a ra lle le d by a corre­ sponding increase in th a t student behavior. Emmer^ in vestig ated the e ffe c t o f increasing the teacher behavior th a t had been assumed to be an e ffe c tiv e re in fo rc in g technique. That behavior was the teacher's use and acceptance o f student ideas and student verbal behavior, he collected samples of the classroom inneraction w ith 16 teachers using Flanders' basic system o f inneraction analysis. He then in structed them to increase the proportion of time they spent using and accepting student ideas. He found th a t: . . . those students (M=9) who increased th e ir use o f student ideas e lic it e d an increase in student i n i t i a t i v e , whereas, those teachers (M=7) who remained stab le or decreased th e ir use o f student ideas from Period one to Period two did not obtain an increase in student in it ia t io n . . . . These re su lts support the contention th a t the use and acceptance o f student ideas (example, i . e . , re s ta tin g question, responding, and elab o ratin g ) is an e ffe c tiv e technique o f e lic it in g voluntary p a r t ic i­ pation in the classroom. In a d d itio n , to being an e ffe c tiv e re in ­ forcing techinque, i t c lo sely associates the reward (what the student said was o f such importance that} the teacher talked about i t ) with the student contrib u tio n in a r e la t iv e ly o b je ctiv e manner. 2 R otter has suggested th a t in d ivid u als behave not only in accordance w ith the r e la tiv e value o f goals and the nature o f the ^E. T. Emmer, "Tfie E ffe c t of Teacher Use and Acceptance of Student Ideas on Student;Verbal In it ia t io n " (unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U n iv e rsity of Michigan, 1967). 2 J. B. Rotter, Social Learning and Clinical Psychology (Englewood C liffs , N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1954). ■ f 45 reinforcement they re ce iv e , but also with the degree of expectation they have of achieving those goals. Phares1 studied the e ffe c t o f perceived reasons fo r success or the expectancies of fu tu re success. Using 77 female college students as subjects, two groups were given a ta s k , and each subject received an equal number o f reinforcements. To one group, Phares im plied th a t success on the task was due to s k i l l ; the other group was led to believe th a t success was due p rim a rily to chance. He found th a t the subjects in the group believing th a t success was based on s k ill changed t h e ir expectancies of success more freq u en tly and more often in the d ire c tio n of past experience than did the group led to believe th a t success was a m atter o f chance. Phares suggests th a t people who fe e l they have l i t t l e control over the s itu a tio n are less lik e ly to e x h ib it the behavior th a t w ill enable them to cope more successfully with p o te n tia lly threatening s itu a tio n s (re fe rre d to as external students) than those who fe e l they have substantial control over the s itu a tio n (re fe rre d to as in te rn a l students). ? Morrison examined the d if fe r e n t ia l e ffe c ts of in s tru c tio n in terms o f pupil a ttitu d e s toward the teacher and achievement in each group. This study involved 970 students and 30 teachers from the suburban D e tro it area. She found: ^E. J. Phares, "Expectancy Changes in S k ill and Chance S itu a tio n s ," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, LIV (1 9 57 ), 339-342. -------------------- !?--------------------------------------------- 2 Morrison, op. c i t . 46 1. In te rn a l students were found to have more p o s itiv e a ttitu d e s toward the teacher and learning environment than the external students. 2. In te rn a l students demonstrated g re a ter gains in achievement than did th e external students. When students perceive t h e ir e ffo rts as being e ffe c tiv e in reaching c e rta in go als.or rewards, they are lik e ly to have a more p o sitiv e a ttitu d e toward the person doing the rewarding and more lik e ly to do the things th a t w ill r e s u lt in the attainm ent o f th at reward. 3. External students became more in te rn a l in tim e, while in te rn a l students tended to remain the same. This fin d in g could be due to the nature of the d is trib u tio n of scores and regression. I t is a ls o possible th a t, as students spend more time in a given s itu a tio n , they begin to develop a more r e a lis t ic appraisal o f the e ffe c t o f th e ir behavior. 4. Students whose ideas were used more often by the teacher made greater achievement gains. 5. Students with p o sitiv e a ttitu d e s toward th e ir teacher had greater achievement gains on a ll but one o f the seven tests o f the M etropolitan Achievement Test than did students w ith less p o s itiv e a ttitu d e s . Morrison's conclusion that in t e r n a lit y -e x t e r n a lit y , or the degree to which a person accepts re s p o n s ib ility fo r what happens to him in the classroom, is strongly re la te d to achievement is fu rth e r supported by the findings of C o rn e ll, 1967. In a study involving f if te e n second grade teachers and 290 students, he found a s i g n i f i ­ cant p o s itiv e re la tio n s h ip between degree o f in t e r n a lit y and per­ formance in the Stanford Achievement Test. 47 The research c ite d in th is section indicates th a t in divid u als who perceive themselves as having considerable control over what b e fa lls them are more lik e ly to engage in a c t iv it ie s which w ill enable them to successfully cope with problems which confront them. I t also demonstrates a re la tio n s h ip between th is perception and the a ttitu d e s and achievement of students in school. I t appears lik e ly th a t the degree to which a student perceives him self as having an influence over what happens to him w ill a ffe c t both his a ttitu d e toward the teacher and the class and his achievement. I f a student's perception of his control over what b e fa lls him does a ffe c t his a ttitu d e and achievement in school, then i t would seem important to fin d methods of modifying th is perception so as to encourage the student to engage in a c t iv it ie s th a t are more lik e ly to re s u lt in the solution of problems, the attainm ent of goals, and the a b il it y to cope adequately with his environment. Furthermore, those methods o f encouraging students to assume more o f the responsi­ b i l i t y fo r what happens to them ( i . e . , becoming more in te rn a l) must be consistent with e x is tin g classroom conditions and goals. Superintendent Influence Mort and Cornell^ alluded to the importance of a competent school superintendent in th is statement: A competent school superintendent is of as great consequence to the public as a competent physician. The physician keeps us a liv e but the school superintendent is in the most s tra te g ic position in the vast educational mechanism which makes our liv e s more ric h and abundant, i Mort and C o rn e ll, op. c l t . , p. 392. 48 He fu rth e r stated th a t: Few facto rs o f local community, economics, social and professional circumstances cannot be o ffs e t by proper local professional leadership. Ross^ believes th a t the school superintendent is in a key po sition to influence achievement and create a clim ate f o r change. His professional competence and way of approaching problems set the tone of how people work together. Mason and Gross 2 studied the in tra-occupational prestige differences between school superintendents. They found th a t prestige re lie d more upon s a la ry , size of d i s t r i c t , than t h e ir opportunity to c o n trib u te; the percent o f teachers with four year degrees; or the pupil expenditure or per pupil valuatio n. B r ic k e ll's 3 study o f educational innovations in New York State found th a t the superintendent leadership is often the key ingredient in adoption of new innovations. Innovations have a d ire c t re la tio n s h ip to pupil achievement. These studies conclude th a t the superintendent does play an important ro le in pupil achievement. A s ig n ific a n t study on the d iffu s io n of educational practices among 53 school d is tr ic ts in Pennsylvania was conducted by Carlson. ^Ross, op. c i t . , p. 415. 2 Ward S. Mason and Neal Gross, "Intra-O ccupational Prestige D iffe re n tia tio n : The School Superintendent," American Sociological Review, XX (June, 1955), 415. 3 B r ic k e ll, op. c i t . , pp. 22-24. 49 The emphasis in his study was on the ro le o f the local school super­ intendent in the adoption o f new educational p ra c tic e s . 1 According to Carlson an overwhelming m a jo rity o f p rio r studies have been concerned with the way in which a d a p ta b ility is re la te d to fin a n c ia l support. He fu rth e r points out th a t they also la rg e ly ignored the research a v a ila b le in other d is c ip lin e s such as ru ra l sociology and anthropology. His study concluded th a t the c h a ra c te ris tic s o f a school superintendent and the social s tru c tu re in which school systems and superintendents operate have a bearing on the varying adoption rates of educational practices among local 3 school systems. 4 Harp contends th a t a most f e r t i l e f ie ld fo r research in d iffu s io n lie s in the personality v a ria b le s . He fe e ls th a t con­ tinued research and explanation of these variables such as c u ltu re , social class, social roles and group membership w ill y ie ld a more sophisticated understanding o f adoption behavior. Environmental Factors Related to Achievement Mental A b ilit y I t has been thought th a t mental a b il it y was the fa c to r th a t determined achievement and those of higher IQ would achieve on higher R ic h a rd 0. Carlson, Executive Succession and Organizational Change: Place-Bound and Career-Bound Superintendents of_Schools (Chicago: Midwest Adm inistration Center, U niversity of Chicago, 1962). 2 Richard 0. Carlson, Adoption of Educational Innovations (Eugene: The Center fo r the Advanced Study of Educational A dm inistratio n , U niversity o f Oregon, 1965). 3Ib id . , pp. 51-66. 4 John Harp, "A Note on Personality Variables in D iffu s io n Research," Rural Sociology, XXV (1 9 60 ), 347. 50 le v e l. This is not necessarily a correct assumption fo r there are several studies in which students o f equivalent IQ were achieving on a level denoted as high or over achievement and fo r others as low or under achievement. I t was the purpose of Nelson's study to discover, "The circumstances and conditions which apparently influence some high school pupils o f superior a b il it y to a high level o f academic accomplishment, w hile others of equal a b i l i t y fo r some reason or reasons f a i l to re a liz e proportionate accomplishments."^ Nason s ta te d , "The level o f academic achievement o f the pupils of th is superior group was not determined by the fa c to r or r e la tiv e in te llig e n c e w ith in the group. Pupils of both r e la t iv e ly high and low IQ 's were found in each q u ip tile of achievement." 2 In th is study there were 237 high school students o f superior a b i l i t y . This study did not attempt to discover cause-effect re la tio n s h ip s , but was p a r tic u la r ly in tere s ted in id e n tify in g associated circumstances. Roberts' study involved two groups o f students, one of achieving and one o f low achieving students with both groups composed of students of an IQ of 124 or above on the standard Benet t e s t . Students were from grades 10 to 12. The high achieving group had grade point averages of 3.60 or higher, w hile the low achieving group \ e s l i e James Nason, "Patterns and Circumstances Related to the Educational Achievement o f High School Pupils o f Superior A b ility " (unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U n iv e rsity o f Southern C a lifo r n ia , 1954), p. 157. 2 I b i d . , p. 167. 3 Helen Roberts, "Academic Achievement" (unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U niversity o f C a lifo r n ia , Los Angeles, 1960). 51 had averages o f 2.60 or lower. The purpose o f the study was to fin d out why there was such a d iffe re n c e in achievement between the students in the two high IQ groups. Mental a b i l i t y , th e re fo re , w ill not be considered in th is study as the cause of achievement, nor low a b i l i t y , necessarily, as the cause o f low achievement. There are now s u ffic ie n t studies with information s im ila r to the two given to in d ic a te th a t facto rs other than in te llig e n c e operate in low achievement. Therefore, facto rs in addition to mental a b i l i t y w ill be considered in th is study. Three studies have d e a lt comprehensively in to low pupil achievement. The Talent Preservation Project of New York C ity , the research re la te d to the Quincy P roject o f Quincy, I l l i n o i s , and the Talented Youth Project of the Horace Mann Lincoln In s t it u t e . The T alen t Preservation Project^ was set up fo r the purpose of studying "factors th a t a ffe c t the achievement in school of students who presumably have good basic in te llig e n c e ." The population fo r th is study consisted of students o f high in te llig e n c e who were divided in to achievers and non achievers. Differences between the two groups were to be located through analysis o f personal and s o c ia lm etric data. A p a rtic u la r emphasis in th is project was upon the addition of a program o f psychological and scholastic helps fo r the student. Instruments used were the Iowa Test of Educational Develop­ ment and group in te llig e n c e te s ts . Grades below 85 percent c la s s ifie d ^Interim Report, Talent Preservation Project (Bureau of Educational and Vocational Guidance, High School D iv is io n , Board of Education, C ity of New York, August, 1959). 2 Ib id . \ 52 a student as a non achiever. According to the fin d in g s , there were indications th a t low achievement was re la te d to four fa c to rs . These were ( 1 ) gaps in the in s tru c tio n a l process due to prolonged absence, many changes o f schools and teachers, and re la te d causes, ( 2 ) severe health conditions, (3) special fam ily problems which caused great stre s s , (4) disturbance a t any e a rly age in the p a re n t-c h ild re la tio n s h ip .^ I t was thought th a t the fourth fa c to r was of f i r s t importance because i t was basic to other facto rs associated with low achievement such as the in a b ilit y to postpone immediate self-ind ulg en ce fo r greater good a t a fu tu re time and lack o f self-confid en ce and f a it h in his own a b il it y to compete acequately by the student. I t was found th a t achievers had one common denominator, the evidence of ego strength. They were able to re la te e x c e lle n tly to r e a lit y problems which they e f f ic ie n t ly resolved. No single fa c to r was found fo r 244 non achievers which would account fo r th e ir f a ilu r e to achieve. in four groups: T h eir problems were c la s s ifie d ( 1 ) poor m otivation—30 percent, ( 2 ) acute s itu a ­ tio n a l reactions such as illn e s s , problems with teachers and d i f f i ­ c u ltie s during only one examination period--10 percent, (3 ) evidence of r e la t iv e ly serious chronic neurotic problems with which the learning disorder was associated— 50 percent, (4) need fo r immediate treatment fo r problems such as delinquent behavior - - 1 0 percent. 1 I b i d . , p. 16. *4 b id . , p. 18. 2 53 A special group was organized fo r underachievers whose a s p ira ­ tions were too low or who were unaccustomed to the e f f o r t needed fo r achievement. c ollege. Most o f these students intended to go to a fo u r-year I t was thought, th e re fo re , th a t they may have sensed th e ir a b il it y but had become careless because previous schooling had not called upon th e ir f u l l a b i l i t y , or they may have been re lu c ta n t to display an in te lle c tu a l in te re s t before t h e ir frie n d s , or they may have lacked the d is c ip lin e needed fo r e ffe c tiv e studying. A fte r th is group had been given the opportunity to c la r if y th e ir goals, to develop scholastic in te r e s t, and to acquire more e ffe c tiv e study h ab its, some improvement was reported as a re s u lt. At the Dewitt Clinton High School in New York C ity a program' was set up fo r working with g ifte d underachievers. Seventy students with an in te llig e n c e quotient of 120 or higher were chosen and paired on the basis of in te llig e n c e q u o tien t, reading scores and ninth grade marks. control group. group. Two groups were formed, one a study group and one a The students of lower performance were in the study The control group had higher composite scores on the Iowa Test of Educational Development. There were few differences between the two groups in occupational aspiration , occupational status of parents, parents' education, and working mothers. There were d i f ­ ferences in th a t in more fa m ilie s o f underachievers there was an ^Harry Passow, d ire c to r, and Miriam L. Goldberg, research associate, Talented Youth P ro je c t, Horace Mann, Lincoln In s titu te of School Experim entation, Teachers College, Columbia U n iv e rs ity , New York C ity , New York, in Educaition Leadership (November, 1958), 121-125 54 absence of the fa th e r through death or divorce. Low achievers did not a n tic ip a te high grades and resisted the e ffo r t needed to achieve on a high le v e l. A fte r two years of work, te s ts with these underachieving students revealed improvement fo r some students but not fo r others. Students who did not improve showed a greater discrepancy between th e ir perception of t h e ir a b il it ie s and th e ir wish fo r a b i l i t y statu s. I t was suggested th a t th is may be because the non improvers see t h e ir a b il it y to perform in various areas as too fa r from what they would lik e i t to be to warrant making an e f f o r t to improve. D ifferences th a t were not s t a t i s t ic a l ly s ig n ific a n t included g re a ter evidence o f divorce fo r the parents o f non improvers and fewer of these students had established vocational goals. I t was concluded th a t low academic achievement was a symptom of a v a rie ty o f basic personal and social problems and th a t some of these high school students are beyond p ro fitin g from the kind of d ire c t help which the schools can provide. For underachieving students who improved, id e n tific a tio n with a teacher who supported, was in te re s te d , and assisted in mastering study s k ills seemed to be the cru c ia l fa c to rs . As part o f the U niversity o f Chicago Quincey Youth P ro je c t, a research project 2 on educational m otivation and achievement was 1 Ib id . , p. 124. 2 James V. P ie rc e , "The Educational M otivation Patterns of Superior Students Who Do and Do Not Achieve in High School," Mimeographed Report of Research Performed Pursuant to a Contract with the United States O ffic e o f Education, Department of H ealth, Education, and W elfare (Chicago: U niversity of Chicago, 1959). 55 carried on in which students were compared on m otivation , achievement, adjustment, and fam ily fa c to rs . On the basis o f grades, the top 30 percent in a b il it y o f tenth and tw e lfth grade students in the Quincey, I l l i n o i s public schools were divided in to high and low achievers. Divisions were fu rth e r made by sex and grade. The purpose of the research was to fin d reasons which would help explain why some able achievers achieved w ell while others of s im ila r a b i l i t y achieved much below th e ir p o te n tia l. findings were the follow ing: Among the The high achievers placed a higher value on the concepts of school, work, and imagination which were considered necessary fo r academic success. They named th e ir fath ers more often as the one who had been an important influence in th e ir liv e s than did the low achievers. More o f the achievers had parents who were b e tte r educated and had attended college than did the low achievers. The hypothesis th a t mothers of high achievers w ill hold higher educational occupational aspirations fo r th e ir children than w ill mothers o f low achievers was supported. A follow -up study was made of the tw e lfth grade students who attended college. Of the high achievers 66 percent had attended c o lle g e , but only 39.6 percent of the low achievers had. High achieving students scored higher in m otivation than did the low achieving students and were b e tte r adjusted. Low achieving boys were more maladjusted than low achieving g ir ls . These studies have contributed evidence th a t some students of unfavorable circumstances achieve and some do not comes the im plica­ tio n th a t i t is not necessarily the negative s itu a tio n but the lack 56 o f a p o sitiv e approach or purpose th a t is associated with under­ achievement. This approach is p a r tic u la r ly expressed by MasonJ Social Class Differences and Their Relationship to In te lle c tu a l Per­ formance ana Home Environment An extensive body o f lit e r a t u r e shows th a t there are important differences between social class groups in in te llig e n c e . o by Havighurst, /I q E llis and Davis, Deutsch, Reports C Jones, £ and Riessman c le a rly in dicate th a t middle class in d iv id u a ls exceed lower class in divid uals on te s ts o f in te llig e n c e and achievement. by Lesser, et a l .J A recent study compared children of three social class levels Mason, op. c i t . , p. 168. 2 R. J. Havighurst, "Who are the S o c ia lly Disadvantaged," Journal of Negro Education, No. 1 (W inter, 1965). 3 K. E l l i s , e t a l . , In te llig e n c e and C ultural D ifferen ces: A Study of Cultural Learning and Problem Solving (Chicago: U niversity of Chicago Press, 1951). 4 N. Deutsch, "The Role of Social Class in Language Develop­ ment and Cognition," American Journal of O rthopsychiatry, XXV (January, 1965), 5 H. E. Jones, "The Environment and Mental Development," in Manual o f Child Psychology, ed. by L. Carmichael (New York: Wiley and Sons, 1964). 56-6T. 6 F. Riessman, The C u ltu ra lly Deprived Child (New York: Harper and Row, 1962). 7 G. S. Lesser; G. F ife r ; and J. H. C la rk , Mental A b ilit ie s o f Children from D iffe re n t S o c ia l-clas s and C ultural Groups. Monographs of the Society fo r Research in Child Development, XXX, No. 4, S erial No. 102 (Chicago: U niversity o f Chicago Press, 1967. 57 among four su bn ationality groups: Puerto Ricans, Chinese American, American Negroes, American Jews, on a number of in te lle c tu a l tasks. In a ll four sub groups the lower class in divid uals f e l l below the higher class in divid u als on tests of in te lle c tu a l s k ill s . This fin ding was not surprising in lig h t of the fa c t th a t d ifferences between lower and middle classes have consistently been found and have raised as high as 20 IQ points on standard te s ts o f in te llig e n c e J However, ra re ly have c o rrelatio n s between class status 2 and IQ exceeded the E e lls and Davis c o rre la tio n of .35: The usual range is between .10 and .40. 3 C orrelations of th is magnitude in d icate th a t there is considerable overlap between social classes and in te llig e n c e te s t performance. Social class remains no more than a moderate c o rre la te or predictor o f an in te lle c tu a l and educational success. Considerable speculation has gone into attempts to account fo r differences in social class in te lle c tu a l performances on the basis of differences in the home environments of middle and lower class in d iv id u a ls . I t has been demonstrated th a t, on the average, important differences do e x is t between the homes in d iffe r e n t social classes not only ph ysically but also in the psychological clim ates o f these homes. Kohn's 4 theories about differences in the ^Havighurst, op. c i t . 2 E e lls , e t a l . , op. c i t . 3 Jones, op. c i t . 4 M. Kohn, "Social, Class and Parent Child Relationship: In te rp re ta tio n ," American Journal of Sociology, L X V III (1964), 471-480. An 58 c h ild -re a rin g practices between the middle and lower class fa m ilie s ] and Reissman's descriptions o f the disadvantaged home environments substantiate th is p o sitio n . 2 Kohn pointed out th a t middle class parents d i f f e r from lower class parents in th a t the former emphasize techniques of s e lf d ire c tio n and psychological punishment rath er than techniques of conformity shaping and physical punishment used so often by lower class parents. The findings supporting th is position have been reported by Bronfenbrenner 3 and Sears, et a l . , 4 in dicating th a t middle class parents take a more psychological approach toward c h ild rearing as compared with lower class parents who emphasize physical c h ild -re a rin g p ractices. Findings by Radin and Glaser^ and Radin and Kamii,® in dicate th a t lower class mothers' c h ild -re a rin g practices a c tu a lly ^Riessman, op. c i t . 2 Kohn, op. c i t . 3 U. Bronfenbrenner, "S o c ia liza tio n and Social Class Through Time and Space," in Readings in Social Psychology, ed. by E. E. Maccoby, T. M. Newcomb and E. L. H artle y . 4 R. R. Sears; E. E. Maccoby, and H. Levin, Patterns of Child Rearing (New York: Row, Peterson, 1957). 5M. Rodin and P. Glasser, "The Use of Parental A ttitu d e Questionnaires with C u ltu ra lly Disadvantaged Fam ilies," Journal of Marriage and Fam ily, XXVII (1 9 65 ), 49-58. 6N. Rodin and C. Kamii, "The Child Rearing A ttitu d es of Disadvantaged Negro Mothers and Some Educational Im plicatio n s," Journal of Negro Education, XXII (1965), 138-146. 59 surpass in te lle c tu a l a c t iv it ie s as a re s u lt of th e ir over protection and f a ilu r e to in te ra c t v e rb a lly with the c h ild re n . Their findings go fu rth e r to point out th a t even in cases where lower class mothers hold many of the same c h ild -re a rin g goals as middle class mothers, e .g ., honesty, happiness, and good education fo r t h e ir c h ild re n , the c h ild -re a rin g practices of the two groups d i f f e r . The lower class mothers expected more conformity to external ru le s , in con­ t r a s t , the middle class mothers emphasized in tern a l q u a litie s such as considerateness and independence. The middle class mothers were very much more responsive and more often in it ia t e d in te ra c tio n s with th e ir child ren . Despite the number of in te re s tin g and important studies done in th is area, few studies have done more than present information th a t could be used to speculate what these differen ces in social class performance mean in terms of how they a ffe c t the children reared under them, em otionally, e d u c a tio n a lly , s o c ia lly , or in t e l­ le c tu a lly . Furthermore, Bronfenbrenner1 pointed o u t, social class differences in c h ild -re a rin g a ttitu d e s and practices have been s te a d ily diminishing during the la s t 25 years, as more c h ild -re a rin g information becomes a v a ila b le to the lower class through mass communication. bronfenbrenner, op. c i t . 60 To assess the re la tio n s h ip between home environmental variables and c h ild re n 's in te lle c tu a l behavior Wolf 1 and Dave 9 conducted a study in which 60 mothers o f f i f t h graders from one community were in t e r ­ viewed. The interview ers focused p rim a rily on home environmental variab les believed to be re la ted to in te lle c tu a l and achievement development. He found th a t the inform ation about parental expecta­ tio n s , opportunities provided fo r the c h ild , and reports o f assistance the parents gave the c h ild in learning s itu a tio n s correlated a t .69 3 with th e ir c h ild re n 's IQ scores, Dave found th a t the inform ation combined to form an Index of Educational Environment score correlated at the .80 level with c h ild re n 's achievement le v e ls based on s p e llin g , word knowledge, reading, and arith m e tic scores. Project T a le n t, an extensive research program operated by the American In s t it u t e fo r Research form erly located a t the U niversity of Pittsburgh, sampled 1353 secondary schools throughout America. These schools were c la s s ifie d into 17 homogeneous categories based upon a combination o f regional socioeconomic fa c to rs , rural-urban fa c to rs , and whether the school was a vocational or comprehensive high school. The data were analyzed to y ie ld information o f r e la tio n ­ ships and magnitude which permitted c e rta in conclusions. They found: ^R. Wolfe, "The Id e n tific a tio n and Measurement of Environ­ mental Process Variables Related to In te llig e n c e " (unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U n iv e rsity of Chicago, 1965). 2 R. Davej "The Id e n tific a tio n and Measurement of Environmental Process Variables Related to Achievement" (unpublished Ph.D. d is ­ s e rta tio n , U niversity o f Chicago, 1964). 3 Ib id . 61 ( 1 ) levels of achievement and performance in the schools vary markedly, ( 2 ) many high schools show a surprising degree of s im ila r ity in many important c h a ra c te ris tic s and th a t i t was possible to divide a ll the public high schools in to 17 homogeneous groups, (3) th a t the performance o f high school graduates is highly re la te d to the types of students entering each school, (4) th a t average student's p o te n tia l, as measured by a b il it y to learn using present in stru ctio n al m a te ria ls , is very closely associated with the average income of the fa m ilie s in the d is t r ic t served by the school, and (5) th a t, in so far as excellence is concerned, school size is less important than the type of students entering the school. 1 Socioeconomic Relationships The ro le socioeconomic status plays in influencing the c h ild 's perception of him self in re la tio n s h ip to his environment has been investigated by many researchers. Miner differences in parent occupational statu s. 2 re la te s achievement to She indicates th a t the occupational status of the parent is re la te d to class position and th a t the achievement level o f the c h ild is p a r t ia lly a function of th a t po sition . Her study revealed a p o sitive c o rre la tio n between in te llig e n c e , o b jective achievement, and educational a s p ira tio n . American In s titu te o f Research, Studies of the American High School, Project Talent (P ittsburgh: The In s t it u t e , 1962), pp. 1-6. 2 Betty Miner, "Sociological Background Variables A ffec tin g School Environment," The Journal of Education Research, LXI, No. 8 ( A p r il, 1968), 372-373: 7 Though few studies such as those of Nemzek i and Davis 2 reported negative re la tio n s h ip between parent occupational status and student achievement and in te llig e n c e q u o tie n t, the m a jo rity of the research I have reviewed reports a p o sitive c o rre la tio n . 3 Gould found the lower goal discrepancy scores were id e n tii fie d with low socioeconomic students. Fox, e t a l found th a t parents who are seen as supportive of school l i f e have more formal education than those who are in d iffe re n t or nonsupportive. Children whose mothers work f u l l time see th e ir mother as less supportive. Parents support of school, self-esteem , and a ttitu d e s toward school show th a t pupils who view t h e ir parents as supporting schools have higher self-esteem and more p o sitive a ttitu d e s toward school than pupils who view th e ir parents as less supportive of school. C. L. Nemzek, "The Value of C ertain N o n -In te lle c tu a l Factors fo r D ire c t and D iffe re n tia l P rediction of Academic Success," Journal of Social Psychology, X II (1 9 40 ), 21-30. 2 A llis o n Davis, "Child Training and Social Class," Child Behavior and Development (New York: McGraw-Hill Company, In c ., 1943), pp. 607-620. 3 R. Gould, "Some Sociological Determinants o f Goal S triv in g s ," Journal o f Social Psychology, X II (1941), 461-473. 4 Robert S. Fox, Ronald 0. L ip p it t , and Richard A. Schmuck, Pupil Teacher Adjustment and Mutual Adaptation in Creating Classroom Learning Environments, Final Report on Cooperative Research Project No. 1 1 6 /, O ffic e of Education, In s titu te fo r Social Research, U niversity of Michigan] 1964. Nicholas, e t a l . 1 c it e Wineman 2 who holds some hope fo r the school as an o ffs e ttin g e ffe c t in the continuous negative influence on a low socioeconomic c h ild 's development as he progresses through school when he im plicates the school as an in flu e n tia l contact fo r the c h ild . Wineman states th a t, "The school has more contact with the average c h ild than any other extra fa m ilia l n o n -in s titu tio n a l source." 3 Nicholas, e t a l . provides evidence which may ju s t i f y d i f ­ ferences in need f o r services, m aintaining school sizes e s p e cia lly in "low" socioeconomic settings not to exceed the range of 400 to 600 so th a t pupil enrollment may be kept sm all, and vigorous pre- and in service education fo r adm inistrators needed fo r establishing and maintaining an "open" type clim ate. Hamachek 4 found a p o sitiv e c o rre la tio n between "high status" children based on academic achievement, educational age and mental Lynn N. Nicholas, Helen E. Virgo, and W illiam W. Wattenburg, E ffe c t of Socioeconomic Setting $nd Organizational Climate on Problems Brought to School O ffic e s , Final Report of Cooperative Research Project No. 2394, U.S. O ffic e of Education (D e tro it: Wayne State U n iv e rs ity , 1965). 2 David Wineman, "Existing and Projected Research on In d i­ vidual and Group Approaches in the Treatment o f Juvenile Delinquency," in Role of the School in Prevention o f Juvenile Delinquency, ed. by W illiam R. C orriker (Washington: U.S. Government P rin tin g O ffic e , 1963. 3 Nicholas, op. c i t . 4 D. E. Hamachek, "A Study of the Relationships Between C ertain Measures of Growth and Self-Im age of Elementary School Children" (unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U n iversity of Michigan, 1960). 64 age. He summarized th a t there existed r e la t iv e ly higher s e lf - concept among children o f the "high status" group. Creaser^ found th a t school-parent communication increased as the socioeconomic level increased. He also found th a t the teachers themselves in itia t e d a s ig n ific a n tly higher number of contacts w ith parents in the higher socio-economic community. Socioeconomic sta tu s , p a rtic u la r ly occupation of fa th e r , is a fa c to r th a t appears in a number o f in ve s tig atio n s . Often only the occupation o f fa th e r is used because i t is considered q u ite r e lia b le fo r one measurement and i t is believed to be lik e ly to coincide with measures th a t include in a d d itio n , home and neighbor­ hood, salary and education of fa th e r. Further, i t is qu ite e a s ily obtainable. Various studies which use the occupation of fa th e r as a c r ite rio n fo r socio-economic status have found differences between low achieving and high achieving groups. Roberts' study on academic achievement had evidence th a t the occupational level of the fathers of the high achievers was s ig n ific a n tly higher than th a t of the fathers of the low achievers. Iri th is study i t is stated th a t o f the variab les considered, the occupational level of the fa th e r proved to be one of the most im portant, in the school achievement o f students. The Warner revised scale fo r ra tin g occupation was used in th is study with the re s u lt th a t a t the one percent level s ig n ific a n ts of fath ers ^Creaser, op. c i t . i 65 o f the high achieving students were found to be engaged in occupations of higher rank than the fath ers o f low achieving students. Westphal's study of academically ta len ted high school achieving and underachieving students, likew ise found th a t th e re were d is tin c t v a ria tio n s between the two groups and the parental occupa­ tio n s . Frankel found the existence of differen ces in the occupation o f the parents. More of the fath ers of the achievers than of the underachievers were in the top three occupational groups, consisting o f professional, sem i-professional, p ro p rie to rs , m anagerial, and o ffic ia l. The fa m ilie s o f the achievers rated higher on the socio­ economic scale. Frankel's research d e a lt w ith 50 pairs of boys o f the senior class who were o f high in te lle c tu a l a b i l i t y . Each p a ir consisted o f an achieving and underachieving student based on i n t e l ­ ligence q u o tie n t, score on extreme examination, and age. From the questionnaire, Zolner ascertained th a t most o f the fa th e rs o f both the achieving and underachieving groups were engaged in occupations in the professional and managerial f ie ld s . Since no re la tio n s h ip was established between achievement and the fa th e r's occupation, the re s u lts of th is study d i f f e r from those previously discussed. V a r ia b ilit y o f Students and It s Relationship to Achievement The differences th a t e x is t among children have long been recognized. From the moment of b irth these differences are re a d ily 66 apparent. Newborn in fan ts have been observed during t h e ir e a rly e ffo rts to adjust to th e ir new environment. "Some babies are almost three hundred times as a c tiv e as others," according to B ayleyJ 2 Bayley has emphasized th a t no two children grow a lik e ; th is is tru e of every developing function which can be evaluated and measured. Furthermore, children not only vary in th e ir r e la tiv e status a t a given age but also vary in the ways in which they progress toward m atu rity. Studies of American children have co nsistently revealed a wide range o f learning a b il it y in in s tru c tio n a l groups, whether 3 pupils are recognized in age groups or grade groups. H ild re th a fte r in te n s iv e ly surveying the lit e r a t u r e in the area of in divid ual d iffe re n c e s , indicated th a t any ty p ic a l school population with a narrow age range shows marked v a ria tio n in mental a b i l i t y ( i n t e l l i ­ gence, school achievements, motor s k i l l s , in te re s ts and personality tr a its ). 4 Cook comments th a t pupil ranges are so great th a t the d i f ­ ferences in subject achievement between the lowest pupils in any ^Nancy Bayley, "Child Development," Encyclopedia of Educa­ tio n a l Research, ed. by Walter S. Monroe, 2nd ed (New York: The Macmillan C o., 1950), p. 17. 2 Ib id . 3 Gertrude H ild re th , "In d ivid u al D ifferen ces," Encyclopedia of Education Research, ed. by W alter S. Monroe, 2nd ed (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1950). 4 W alter Cook, Grouping and Promotion in the Elementary Schools, No. 2 (Minneapolis: U niversity of Minnesota Press, 1941). 67 two or three successive grades is less than the d ifferences between the lowest pupil and the medium pupil o f a given grade. Goodlad and Anderson^ have provided elaborate data to document the fa c t th at pupils entering the f i r s t grade d i f f e r in mental age by approximately four f u l l years, and by the time pupils complete fourth grade, the range in readiness to learn (as suggested by the M.A.O.) and in most areas of achievement is approximately the same as the number designating the grade le v e l. A number of studies have been made th a t substantiate the facts th a t a wide range of differences is evident in the classroom. H ild re th using a ty p ic a l cross section of pupils who have been in the New York C ity Schools fo r seven semesters, revealed th a t the range in educational age was from 72 to 180 months or nine years. Although these students had entered school a t the same time and had had the same amount of schooling.. This is greater than the e n tire length of time th a t a pupil spends in a l l the elementary grades. 3 Cornell in an in vestig atio n involving seven-year-olds in New York S ta te , found th a t the middle 80 percent o f the group had a range in educational achievement of three semesters. Translating th is school achievement into grade le v e ls , the e n tir e population of seven-year-olds ranged from the f i r s t grade to the sixth grade. ^John I . Goodlad and Robert H. Anderson, The Non-Graded Elementary School (New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, I n c . , 1959). 2 H ild re th , op. c i t . 3 E. L. C o rn e ll, "The V a r ia b ilit y of Children of D iffe re n t Ages and It s R elation to School C la s s ific a tio n and Grouping," Educational Research Studies, B u lle tin 1101, No. 1 , U niversity of the State of New York, 1937, p. 98. 68 Apparently, pupils vary almost as much from subject to subject as they vary w ith in a class or between successive grades. O tto J 2 and Goodland and Anderson s im ila r ly pointed out th a t c h ild re n 's . achievement patterns d i f f e r markedly from learning area to learning area. Goodlad and Anderson s ta te th a t children who tend to be g enerally slow or rapid learners usually reveal a t le a s t one major inconsistency in scoring a f u l l grade above or below t h e ir general achievement p ro file s in a t le a s t one learning area. 3 Ketcham id e n tifie d a number of facto rs and the extent to which they influence individual d ifferen ces in achievement fo r pupils enrolled in school. to be as follow s: He stated the facto rs and percentages in te llig e n c e --7 0 percent; socioeconomic back­ ground--^ percent; perturbations, damage, mismanagement, and d e p riv a tio n --15 percent; and curriculum and teaching methods— 10 percent. Ketcham and L a f f it t e n analyzed the lo ngitu din al records of c h ild re n 's mental age and reading age accumulated over a quarter of a century. They indicated th a t the te s t data revealed th a t neith er ^Henry J. O tto, "Elementary E d u c a tio n --III: Organization and A dm inistration," Encyclopedia o f Educational Research, ed. by Walter S. Monroe, 2nd ed. (New York: The Macmillan C o., 1950), pp. 367-382. 2 Goodlad and Anderson, op. e f t . 3 Warren A. Ketcham, "Worries Teachers Should Forget," Ann Arbor: School of Education, U niversity o f Michigan, May, 1962 (mimeographed). 4 Warren A. Ketcham and Rondeau F. L a f f i t t e , J r . , "How Well Are They Learning?" Educational Leadership, XVI, No. 6 (March, 1959), 337-341. 69 a teach te s t procedure, remedial in s tru c tio n , a non promotion of pupils achieving below grade norms, nor adjustment rooms fo r the m entally retarded, sin g ly or in combination, had any demonstrable e ffe c t on the range of in divid ual d ifferences in le a rn in g . The authors concluded th a t each c h ild progresses w ith chronological age according to a unique p a tte rn . The problem o f d ifferen ces with which teachers had been w restlin g could be traced to the nature of children and were, th e re fo re , only p a r t ia lly amenable to teaching methods. Hughes^ came to s im ila r conslusions a f t e r analyzing the longitudinal growth record of 100 boys who were rep resentative of the male population o f the U n iversity of Michigan laboratory school a t Ann Arbor. Using geographic il lu s t r a t io n , Hughes discussed f iv e areas o f growth a ffe c tin g v a r ia b ilit y in the samples. These areas included h e re d ity , e ffe c tiv e nu rtu re, c u ltu ra l and social nurture, and educational nurture. Hughes concluded: The v a ria tio n is so great both in regard to d iffe re n c e of measure when age is held constant, and is so extensive in age when measure is held constant, and there are so many simultaneously operating important sources of v a ria tio n s , th a t no s im ila r technique o f management or ta c tic s of c o n tro l, or even groups of control w ill do much to a lt e r the s itu a tio n . Teachers and school adm inistrators should recognize the many factors th a t co ntrib ute to the uniqueness of each in d ivid u al when they attempt to plan and modify in s tru c tio n a l organizations to provide fo r the v a riab le needs of youth. I t appears evident th a t a remarkable ^Byron 0. Hughes,^ " V a r ia b ilit y Among and W ithin In divid uals in Relation to Educations" M e rrill-P a lm e r Q u arte rly , I I I , No. 3 (Spring, 1957), 167-187. 70 range of differences exists among pupils grouped fo r in s tru c tio n by chronological age, by grade, or by whatever single fa c to r is chosen. The lit e r a t u r e abounds with supporting evidence to document the fa c t of pupil v a r ia b ilit y . Cook^ took the follow ing point o f view: Let us accept the fa c t of in divid ual differences and, indeed, regard them as d esirable. Then we should proceed to develop methods fo r dealing with the heterogeneity found among our students. While differences e x is t among pupils and these d ifferen ces have long been recognized by educators, the best way of handling and providing fo r pupil v a r ia b ilit y has not been re a d ily apparent. Student Self-Concept and Feelings About S e lf L ite ra tu re in recent years has become concerned w ith the self-concept, with how the student fe e ls about him self. On the follow ing pages are summarized studies involving self-concept and achievement considered p e rtin e n t to the present study. Lumpkin 2 investigated self-concept in re la tio n to achievement in reading only with f i f t h grade students. There were two matched groups, one of over achievers and one o f underachievers w ith 25 students in each group. Psychological instruments were used to obtain self-concept responses from the p u p ils. I t was Lumpkin's b e lie f th a t, ^Cook, op. c i t . , p. 681. 2 Donovan D. Lumpkin, "The Relationship of Self-Concept to Achievement in Reading" (unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U niversity o f Southern C a lifo r n ia , 1.959), p. 11. 71 Self-concept may provide one basis fo r understanding why a c h ild 's level o f achievement freq u e n tly is not in agreement with his apparent a b i l i t y , i . e . , th is may be a fa c to r influencing high or low achievement. He fu rth e r s ta te s , Forces w ithin the classroom, c u ltu ra l pressures, and adult approval freq u en tly operate to demand achievement to the best o f the c h ild 's a b i l i t y , but i f the self-concept of the in divid ual is such th a t rapport with th is educational concept is impossible, academic performance s u ffe rs . As a re s u lt of his fin d in g s , Lumpkin concluded th a t self-concept is re la te d to achievement in reading. Over achievers m anifest in more adequate, p o sitiv e concept of s e lf and underachievers perceive themselves more negatively. Lowther^ was concerned with the area o f self-concept. How­ ever, he used the word self-esteem and defined i t as “o p era tio n ally as a sense of personal worth or s e lf-re s p e c t," and he explained th a t, ". . . i t is believed th a t the s ig n ifican ce attached to educational a c t iv it ie s by society is such th a t school success or f a ilu r e w ill be re fle c te d in self-esteem ." He hypothesized th a t, "In each a b i l i t y group, high achieving subjects w ill possess high self-esteem more freq u en tly than low achieving subjects." His findings supported the high achieving subjects in th is hypothesis fo r he stated th a t each group did possess higher s e lf ­ esteem than the low achieving students. Malcolm A lfred Lowther, "A Comparison o f the Educational M otivatio n, S e lf-E valu atio n and Classroom Conduct of High and Low Achieving Eighth Grade Students" (unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U niversity o f Michigan, 961). i 72 B utler's^ study investigated self-concept of ninth grade students who were placed in three groups, over-achieving, under­ achieving, and expected achieving. One hundred and f i f t y students, boys and g i r l s , were matched in grade, sex, and in te llig e n c e . mean in te llig e n c e quotient was 105.7. Their The aspects selected fo r study were the real s e lf , ideal s e lf , teacher s e lf and parent s e lf . Adjustment, self-esteem , and stress were used as indices fo r purposes of comparison. Some s ig n ific a n t d ifferen ces between over-achieving and under-achieving boys and g ir ls were found. On the C a lifo rn ia Psychological Inventory, d ifferences were found in ten of the eighteen scales fo r the boys, and seven fo r the g ir ls . Among the conclusions reached were the follow ing: (1) Over­ achieving boys had a more adequate concept of present s e lf , a higher level of a s p ira tio n , g reater s e lf acceptance and freedom from s tre s s , and a s ig n ific a n tly b e tte r general adjustment than under-achieving boys. (2) Expected-achieving boys, in comparison with under­ achieving boys, had a s ig n ific a n tly b e tte r concept of present s e lf , less stress in re la tio n to the re fle c te d parental s e lf , and a more favorable general adjustment. (3) Among boys, the decreasing gradient of achievement seemed to be re la te d to a decreasing credence o f self-concept and adjustment. Underachievers had the lowest le v e l o f s e lf adjustment and the poorest s e lf description and were the most i John Joseph B u tle r, " D iffe r e n tia l Factors in the S e lfConcepts of Overachieving, Underachieving, and Expected-Achieving Adolescents" (unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U n iversity of Southern C a lifo r n ia , 1959). , 7 3 negatively deviant group of boys.1 Differences among the g ir ls were not as d is tin c t as among the boys. The major hypothesis in Roberts' in ve s tig atio n of low achievers and high achievers was, "Underachievement in school is caused by the c h ild 's fe e lin g about him self and his environment." p To te s t th is hypothesis, the C a lifo rn ia Psychological Inventory was used. Results were tabulated separately fo r boys and g ir ls . I t was concluded th a t re s u lts were such as to substantiate the hypothesis fo r both g ir ls and boys. The high achieving g ir ls had much higher scores on a ll the scales except the one fo r achievement via inde­ pendence than the low achieving g ir ls had. I t was concluded t h a t , "Although the low achieving g ir ls had the in te lle c tu a l capacity to get good marks in school, problems associated with th e ir personality 3 development had prevented them from doing so." In his study o f eleventh grade students, Stoner^ mentioned th a t the achievers were d iffe r e n t from the underachievers in s e lf e v alu atio n , and perceptions of what others expected of them. A b s tra c ts of D is s e rta tio n s , U niversity o f Southern C a lifo r n ia , 1957, p. 189. 2 Helen Roberts, "Academic Achievement" (unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U n iv e rsity of C a lifo rn ia , Los Angeles, 1960). 3Ib id . , p. 136. 4 W illiam Gerald Stoner, "Factors Related to Underachievement o f High School Students" (unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , Stanford U n iv e rs ity , 1956). 74 In his study of eighth grade students, Richmond^ found t h a t , using three le v e ls o f comparison, the under-achieving students ranked in the lowest le v e l of self-confid en ce. In the study of eleventh grade students, Payne 2 found th a t under-achieving and over-achieving students had s ig n ific a n tly d i f ­ fe re n t academic self-concepts. His studies assumed th a t self-concept was a fu n c tio n a lly lim itin g fa c to r in school achievement. In The High School P rincipal and S ta ff Study Youth the importance of the teachers' understanding o f the students' s e lf concept is emphasized. I t is stated: They, teachers, can however, grow in a b i l i t y to conceptualize the " s e lf" and to understand the sign ificance of the s e lf concept in th e ir appraisal of the p ersonality and the a b il it y of the p u p il. As teachers do th is they are b e tte r able to re la te to the p u p il, and th erefo re to help him in such ways th a t w ill best help him to draw on his own inner resources . . . teachers can grow in understanding of how the "s e lf" develops and whqt facto rs contrib ute to the development o f adequate selfhood . . . .3 In an a r t ic le on defining and id e n tify in g underachievers 4 Shaw states d e fin ite ly th a t "one o f the most promising aspects of Charles Henry Richmond, "A Study o f Predicted and Measured Achievement and Some Possible Causative Factors of Differences" (unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U n iv e rsity of Oklahmoa, 1959). 2 David A. Payne, "A Dimension Analysis of the Academic S e lfConcept of Eleventh Grade Under- and Over-Achieving Students" (unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , Michigan S tate U n iv e rs ity , 1961). 3 Glyn M orris, The High School P rincipal and S ta ff Study Youth (New York: Teachers Colleqe, Columbia U n iv e rsity, 1958), p7T2. 4 M e rv ille C. Shaw, "D e fin itio n and Id e n tific a tio n of Academic Underachievers," in Guidance fo r the Underachiever With Superior A b il it y , ed. by Leonard M. M ille r (Washington: U.S. Department of H ealth, Education and W elfare, 1961). 75 the p e rs o n a lity of underachievers she had studied has been th a t of s e lf-c o n c e p t." According to th is a r t i c le there is ra th e r general agreement th a t underachievers are more negative in t h e ir a ttitu d e s towards themselves than achievers, th a t they have stronger fe e lin g s of in f e r io r i t y and th a t they are more h o s tile towards others. In a report on c u ltu r a lly deprived c h ild re n , Marburgar^ stated th a t, these children often have a b il it y le v e ls which in d ic a te they could perform w e ll, i f they were reached and in terested in what the schools o ffe re d . However, they appear in d iffe r e n t and purposeless and do not respond to normal teaching methods and subject m atter. These p o s itiv e facto rs essential to learning success are absent: acceptable s e lf image . . . and the self-confid en ce and m otivation th a t c h ild ren from b e tte r homes appear to possess. 2 Havighurst and Taba concluded th a t in regard to lower class c h ild re n , the goals and self-concepts of the students them­ selves were stumbling blocks to the continuing of t h e ir education. Added to these were also a ttitu d e s of classmates, parents, teachers and school adm inistrators. Brookover, e t a l . , 3 summarized among other things in a study of the re la tio n o f self-im age to achievement in ju n io r high school students th a t: ^Carl Marburgar, Great C itie s P ro je c t, Report to the Board of Education, D e tr o it, Michigan, 1961. 2 Robert J . Havighurst and Hilda Taba, Adolescent Character and P ersonality (New York: John Wiley and Sons, In c ., 1949). 3 Wilbur B. Brookover, Ann Paterson and Thomas S h a ile r, S e lfConcept o f A b ilit y and School Achievement, Final Report of Cooperative Research F ro jec t No. 849 e n title d The R elationship of Self-Images to Achievement in Junior _TOh School Subjects (East Lansing: O ffic e of Research and PublicaticjWs, Michigan S tate U n iv e rs ity , 1962). 76 1. Self-concept o f a b i l i t y is p o s itiv e ly re la te d to school achievement in seventh grade when measured in te llig e n c e is c o n tro lle d . 2. A student's self-concept of a b i l i t y in a s p e c ific school subject may d i f f e r from his general self-concept of a b il it y . 3. A student's self-concept of a b il it y is p o s itiv e ly re la te d to the image he perceives th a t s ig n ific a n t others hold o f him when parents, teachers, and peers are id e n tifie d as s ig n ific a n t others. 4. The fam ily socioeconomic status is p o s itiv e ly re la te d to seventh grade students' self-concept of a b i l i t y . . . . Brookover, e t a l J reported th a t socioeconomic status has a low re la tio n s h ip to self-concept of a b il it y and achievement. major fin ding was: Th eir "That academic achievement can be enhanced by self-concept enhancement." From the conclusion of th is and other studies, one may surmise th a t tne school and it s clim ate may hold some untapped resources th a t influence the c h ild 's perception of him self and fu tu re development. Student Educational A spiration and Educational Expectation Combs and Snygg 2 discuss the e ffe c ts of e a rly expectancies established by the fa m ily . From the way in which the c h ild is tre a te d , he learns what is expected of him. He learns many kinds of Wilbur B. Brookover, e t a l . , Self-Concept of A b ilit y and Achievement, Final Report on Cooperative Research Rroject No. 1636 e n title d Improving Academic Achievement Through Students' S e lfConcept Enhancement (East Lansing: Bureau o f Educational Research Services, Michigan S tate U n iv e rs ity , 1965). 2 Arthur W. Combs and Donald Snygg, In divid ual Behavior (New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 195971 j 77 expectancies which afffect his behavior. As the expectancies become closely associated with the concepts of the in d iv id u a l, according to Combs and Snygg, they become the in d iv id u a l's le v e l of a s p ira tio n . They present re la tio n s h ip ra th e r concisely in the follow ing statement: The things toward which people aspire w ill in the f in a l an alysis, depend upon the degree to which they perceive goals as contrib uting to the maintenance and the enhancement o f the s e lf . Lewin^ describes level o f a sp iratio n as the degree of d i f f i ­ c u lty in s triv in g fo r a goal. The success in achievement, to a great e x te n t, depends on e f f o r t . He expressed the fa c to r of the level o f a s p ira tio n as being very s ig n ific a n t fo r le a rn in g . The in te lle c tu a l processes are re la te d to the goal o f the in d iv id u a l and depend upon the emotional tension and to some degree, l i f e as a whole, according to Lewin. Does the school clim ate influence the c h ild 's l i f e or his goal in school? This appears to be a question fo r in v e s tig a tio n . Sears 2 in an extensive study involving reading and a rith m e tic le v e l o f a s p ira tio n fo r fo u rth , f i f t h , and sixth grade children found: 1. F a ilu re experiences of the past had a negative influence on the level of a s p ira tio n . 2. Higher achievers had a high level of a s p ira tio n . ^Kurt Lewin, F ie ld Theory in Social Science. Selected Theoretical Papers, ed. by Darwin Cartwright (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1951). 2 P. Sears, "Level o f A spiration in Academically Successful and Unsuccessful C hildren ," Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, XXXV (1 9 40 ), 498-536. 78 3. Low achievers in many cases set t h e ir goals below th e ir performance le v e l or a t le v e ls which were u n re a lis tic or exceedingly high a f t e r a f a ilu r e experience. According to Richmond,^ eighth grade over-achieving students expected to go fu rth e r in school. Of students in th is study, 21 percent more of the over-achievers expected to fin is h two years of c o lle g e . He concluded th a t th e re was a re la tio n s h ip between the educational expectations of the student and his comprehensive achievement. Lowther found th a t in each of the a b i l i t y groups in his study, the educational a s p ira tio n of high achieving and low achieving students were s im ila r. However, the reason fo r th is fin d in g may be th a t the students of his study were of a p a rtic u la r r a c ia l group which t r a d itio n a lly values education highly and in which students are expected to aspire to as much education as possible. In th is study i t was predicted and found th a t, in each a b il it y group, high and low achieving students w ill in d ic a te no d iffe re n c e in educational a s p ira tio n . The hypothesis th a t, in each a b i l i t y group, high achieving subjects w ill have higher educational expectations more freq u e n tly than low achieving subjects had somewhat d iffe r e n t re s u lts . In the average group of students, the educational expectations o f the high achieving students were higher than those of the low achieving students which was s ig n ific a n t a t the one percent le v e l. However, there was no s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e fo r the students in the ^Richmond, op. c i t . 2 Lowther, op. c i t . , p. 104. 79 superior group. Therefore, i t was concluded th a t the hypothesis was supported fo r the average but not the superior group. Nason^ was in terested in the discovery of behavior patterns on consistency. He found th a t one circumstance in his pattern fo r achievers was the inclusion of college in th e ir plans. He also stated th a t the achievement of students o f superior in te llig e n c e was influenced by academic and vocational planning. Roberts 2 attempted to fin d out i f high and low achieving students d iffe re d in vocational a s p ira tio n s . From choice of vocations given by high achievers, she concluded th a t they had higher a s p ira ­ tio n s . Most of them hoped to do something in the science mathematic areas. The high achievers were also more certain about s p e c ific vocational choice than were the low achievers. The low achievers tended to be somewhat surer ra th e r than c e rta in about th e ir voca­ tio n a l choice. Roberts also found th at the vocational goals of low achievers were iess r e a lis t ic than those of the high achievers. B u tler 3 found th a t over-achieving boys had a higher level of as p ira tio n than did under-achieving boys. of over-achieving g ir ls . IQ o f 105.7. ^Mason, op. c i t . 2 3 Roberts, op. c i t . B u tle r, op. c i t . This was tru e also These were ninth grade students of a mean 80 In Symond's^ study of ninth and tenth grade students, an hypothesis was th a t achievers would tend to have vocational plans requirin g fu rth e r education, w hile underachievers would e ith e r not have vocational plans or would have vocational plans th a t would not req u ire fu rth e r education. He found d ifferen ces did not e x is t fo r the ninth grade students, but th a t in the tenth grade d ifferences between achievers and underachievers were as stated in the hypothesis. In th is study there were 88 underachievers and 92 achievers. The underachievers were composed o f the 25 percent having the greatest discrepancy between the in te llig e n c e te s t rank and achievement te s t rank. The achievers were the 25 percent centering around zero discrepancy between in te llig e n c e te s t rank and achievement te s t rank. Study Habits and Involvement w ith Learning In a monograph by Symond, 2 What Education Has to Learn from Psychology, the point was made tn a t methods o f study need to be learned by students. Symond states: Students need to be helped to learn the most e f f ic ie n t method of study, use of m aterials and s k ills th a t w i ll help them in th e ir learn in g . They need to be given d e tailed guidance in how to use a book, the lib r a r y , m aterials in the labo ratory. They need help in learning how to concentrate, to avoid d is tra c tio n , to plan, to take re s p o n s ib ility . Percival M. Symond, What Education Has to Learn from Psychology (New York: Teachers College, Columbia U n iv e rs ity , n .d .) . A rtic le s reprinted from Teachers College Record from February, 1955 through November, 1959. 2 Ib id . , p. 78. 81 Results of several studies in which study habits or study s k ills were a consideration do in d ic a te th a t students c la s s ifie d as under­ achievers and low-achievers have less d esirab le work habits and less e ffe c tiv e study s k ills than students achieving on a higher le v e l. In the study e n title d “Personal Values and Achievement in C ollege," Agnes G. Rezler studied the value system o f under­ achievers as compared to th a t of achievers. There were three groups o f students matched in a b il it y and comparable in race, r e lig io n , fa th e rs ' occupations, parents' educational background, and the number of children in the fa m ily . Although te s ts of s ig n ifican ce were not performed because o f the small sample, i t was found th a t great differences existed between the groups in values. I t was fu rth e r found of the under-achieving group of boys: A ll these boys were already underachievers in high school and they stated th a t they had no study habits to speak of when they entered c o lle g e . They f e l t th a t grades as such are not im portant. One ought to get ju s t good enough grades to pass to get the degree, but they f e l t th a t many of the required courses would be useless to them in business and a lib e ra l education fo r it s own sake had l i t t l e value. Upon entering c o lleg e, they re a liz e d th a t they would have to develop some s e lf-d is c ip lin e , and a c o n flic t developed between th e ir values and th e ir desires . . . the personal s a c rific e involved in s e ttlin g down to study instead o f having a good time was not to t h e ir 1 ik in g . 1 In Stoner's 2 study on "Factors Related to Underachievement of High School Students," he stated th a t the achievers were d iffe r e n t ^Agnes G. R e zle r, "Personal Values and Achievements in College," The Personnel and Guidance Jo u rn al, XXXIX (1 9 60 ), 139. 2 Stoner, op. c i t . 82 from the underachievers in the area o f study h a b its . Under­ achievers in his study f e l t th a t t h e ir method of study, work h a b its , and reading were detrim ental to t h e ir school work. He im plied th a t in stru ctio n s in reading s k ills and study methods were problems th a t should receive consideration in high school. The purpose o f his study was to explore variab les other than in te llig e n c e which might be re la te d to the underachievement o f students o f high a b i l i t y . The Iowa High School Content Examination was used as the measure fo r achievement. From 275 eleventh grade students who were o f an IQ o f 120 or higher an under-achieving group composed of 35 students who ranked a t the bottom of the p e rc e n tile ranking of to ta l scores in achieve­ ment was selected. The control group was composed o f 35 students who scored a t the top o f the p e rc e n tile ranking o f to ta l scores in achievement. Students were then matched with 19 pairs re s u ltin g . The matched pairs were tested in reading s k ills and i t was found th a t the underachievers had more handicaps than the achievers. However, when the two groups o f students were compared there was no s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between the average time spent in home study fo r the week fo r which data was kept. A number o f studies have suggested th a t in t e lle c t u a lly able high achieving students are more highly motivated than in t e lle c t u a lly able low achieving students, although the findings are not in complete agreement. McDavid 1 tested the hypothesis th a t overachievement and underachievement are d ir e c tly related to the reward value o f high grade marks. The assumption was made th a t scholastic marks are per­ ceived by the students as being a form o f interpersonal evaluation by the teacher. A high scholastic ra tin g would then be considered a form o f approval or social reinforcement. A sample 23 "over-achieving" and 21 "under-achieving" in te lle c tu a lly able ju n io r high school boys were used in the study. The S itu a tio n a l In te rp re ta tio n Test was administered which, according to McDavid, has been demonstrated to be a s a tis fa c to ry technique fo r determining the e ffe c tiv e value of p o s itiv e (approval) and negative (disapproval) interpersonal events as re in fo rc e rs fo r an in d iv id u a l. The mean score fo r the overachievers was 5.78 and fo r the underachievers a 3 .6 2 , s ig n ific a n t a t the .001 le v e l. McDavid concluded, on the basis o f th is fin d in g , th a t m otivational d i f f e r ­ ences assume to account fo r academic overachievement and under­ achievement may be due in part to differences in the in centive of m otivational reinforcement value of p o s itiv e evaluation by the teacher. In one o f the more complete studies of m otivation fa c to rs underlying achievement, Farquhar 2 studied groups o f 80 male and 80 ^J. McDavid, J r . , "Some M elationships Between Social Reinforcement and Scholastic Achievement," Journal o f Consultant Psychology, X X III (1 9 59 ), 151-154. 2 W. W. Farquhar, A Comprehensive Study of the In s tru c tio n a l Factors Underlying Achievement o f Eleventh^Grade Hiqh_Schoo1 Students. Cooperative Research P roject No. 646 (Washington: U.S. Department o f Health, Education and W elfare, 1963). 84 female overachievers and underachievers on a number of non- in te lle c tu a l v a ria b le s , and then cross va lid ate d the re s u lts . Hypotheses centered around McClelland, Atkinson, Clark and Lowell's^ "need fo r achievement" concept. The la t t e r included the student's need fo r a long term involvement versus short term involvement, unique versus common accomplishment, and competition with a maximum versus a minimal standard of excellence. The fin ding s gave support; to the conclusion th a t, p a r tic u la r ly fo r boys, high self-concept students tend to have high p ro d u c tiv ity w hile low self-concept students have low p ro d u c tiv ity . F u rth er, highly motivated students were able to channel th e ir a n x ieties toward academic p u rs u its, while those w ith low m otivation channeled t h e ir a n x ie tie s in to h o s t ilit ie s or became withdrawn. The highly motivated student had a high tolerance fo r a n tic ip a tin g fu tu re rewards w hile the student with low m otivation had a low capacity fo r time delay. Highly motivated in d iv id u a ls tended to r e je c t his group by standing out in a way valued by the teacher w hile the lower motivated in divid ual tended to place negative value on being d iffe r e n t from his peer group. No d iffe re n c e was found in the area of competition with a maximum versus a minimum standard of excellence. O v e ra ll, Farquhar's findings were supported by McClelland, Atkinson, Clark and Low ell's "need fo r achievement concept." ^D. C. McClelland, J. W. Atkinson, R. A. C la rk, and E. L. Low ell, The Achievement Motive (New York: A ppleton-Century-C rofts, 1953). 85 In one of the few studies a t the elementary le v e l, Haggard^ studied a group o f 76 f i f t h grade boys and g ir ls with in te llig e n c e in the b rig h t to superior range as they progressed from the th ir d grade through the ninth grade. on each c h ild . The follow ing inform ation was collected Measures of parental pressure to achieve academ ically, projected te s ts , behavioral observations, mental a b i l i t y te s ts , achievement te s ts , and teacher ra tin g s . The high achievers, in contrast to the low achievers, were found to be more s e n s itiv e to a d u lt pressure, accepting o f a d u lt standards and were s triv in g to liv e up to a d u lt expectations. parents of high achievers were somewhat more The o v e rp ro tective, pressuring fo r achievement and lacking in emotional warmth. High achievers got along b e tte r with th e ir parents, peers, and teachers, and showed b e tte r o v e rall adjustment than did low achievers. By the seventh grade, i t was found th a t the high achievers continued to show somewhat the previous patterns but had developed strong antagonistic a ttitu d e s toward t h e ir parents. such an a ttitu d e . The low achievers did not disp lay Fu rther, the high achievers showed a marked increase in t h e ir anxiety level arid a corresponding decrease in o r ig in a lit y and c r e a t iv ity . They were a b le , however, to control and channel th e ir anxiety in various ways, becoming more aggressive, p e rs is te n t, hard-driving and com petitive. No sex d ifferences were found between the boys and g ir ls on the variab les under consideration. ^E. T. Haggard, " S o c ia liz a tio n , P ersonality and Academic Achievement in G ifted C hildren ," School Review, LXV (1 9 5 7 ), 388-414. 86 Passow and Goldberg^ in a study a t the ju n io r high school le v e l, used one hundred paired high a b i l i t y achieving and low achieving students, found s ig n ific a n t lack in emotional s t a b ilit y and control in low achievers in contrast to high achievers. Brookover, Patterson and Thomas studied the re la tio n s h ip between self-concept of a b il it y and achievement among a population of approximately 100 high achieving and 100 low achieving boys. They found th a t a student's score on his self-concept of a b i l i t y te s t could s ig n ific a n tly (.0 1 le v e l) d if fe r e n t ia t e students w ith a high or low grade point average. Wilson and Morrow, 2 using a sample of low (N=49) and high (N=49) achieving b rig h t high school boys, found th a t the high achieving students had s ig n ific a n tly higher educational and occupa­ tio n a l aspirations as well as s ig n ific a n tly b e tte r (.001 le v e l) study habits when compared with th e ir low achieving peers. This fin ding regarding the educational and occupational a s p ira tio n , however, was not confirmed in the study conducted a t the 3 ju n io r high level by Brookover, Patterson, and Thomas. Therefore, the influence of these two variables is in doubt. I t is possible ^A. H. Passow and Miriam Goldberg, "Study o f Underachieving G ifte d ," Educational Leadership, XVI (1 9 5 9 ), 121-125. 2 R. C. Wilson and R. W. Morrow, "School and Career Adjustment of B right High-Achieving and Under-Achieving High School Boys," Journal of General Psychology, Cl (1963), 91-103. 3 Brookover, Paterson, and Thomas, op. c i t . 87 th a t these variables are in flu e n c ia l when a student reaches high school age but not when he is of ju n io r high school age. Student A ttitu d e s Toward School and Education The findings o f the Flanders and Havumaki1 study showed th a t most learning w ill occur in classes in which the pupils view the s itu a tio n con stru ctively and agree in th e ir perceptions. In contrast to these classes, groups in which the members agree that they do not lik e what is happening in the classroom should learn the le a s t. A number of studies by Cogan, 2 Flanders, 3 4 and Fox concerned w ith teacher e ffec tiven ess, teacher behavior, and pupil perceptions lend support to the idea th a t pupils with constructive perceptions o f a classroom s itu a tio n w ill be li k e l y to learn more than w ill pupils w ith less constructive perceptions. Ned A. Flanders and S iclo Havumaki, "Group Compliance to Dominative Teacher In flu en ce," Bureau of Educational Research, Reprint BER 60-2, College of Education, U n iv e rsity o f Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1960. 2 Morris L. Cogan, "The Behavior o f Teachers and the Productive Behavior o f Their Pupils: I , Perception A nalysis," Journal of Experimental Education, XXVII (December, 1958), 89-105. 3 Flanders, op. c i t . 4 Fox, L ip p itt and Schmuck, op. c i t . 88 The findings o f Fox, L ip p it t , and Schmuck's study, in d ic a tin g th at pupil perceptions of the teacher f a r outweigh a l l other influences on the level of u t iliz a t io n of in te llig e n c e , accompanied by th e ir evidence th a t pupils w ith more compatible e ffe c tiv e re la tio n s with teachers b e tte r u t i l i z e th e ir in te llig e n c e , support the ideas th a t there is a p o sitiv e re la tio n s h ip between constructive pupil percep­ tions o f the learning s itu a tio n and the amount of pupil learnin g. The key to the Negro's negative a ttitu d e toward the school may w ell be his r e fle c tio n of the teacher's a ttitu d e toward him. Clark^ suggests th a t even though other fa c to rs are im portant, there must be capable, interested teachers in the ghetto schools. In reference to the teach er's a ttitu d e s toward the students and how these a ttitu d e s a ffe c t the student, Clark says: This is not to say th a t the teacher's a ffirm a tio n toward the c h ild is the only re levan t fa c to r influencing the performance of the c h ild in the ghetto schools and th a t overcrowded classrooms, inadequate p la n ts , and f a c i l i t i e s , unimaginative c u rric u la and the lik e are ir r e le v a n t. A ll of these influence a c h ild 's educational growth. The point is ra th e r th a t these facto rs cannot be given equal importance; in the lig h t o f the a v a ila b le evidence the c o n tro llin g fa c to r which determines the academic performance of pupils and which establishes the le v e l of educational e ffic ie n c y and the o v e r-a ll q u a lity of the schools is the competence of the teachers and t h e ir a ttitu d e of acceptance or re je c tio n of th e ir students. Competent teachers who have confidence in children s triv e to achieve the other dimension o f good education also. Kenneth C la rk, "Defeatism in the Ghetto School," in School Children in the Urban Slums, ed. by John I . Roberts (New York: The Free Press, 1967), p p . 599-610. i 89 There can be l i t t l e question of where Clark places the emphasis in obtaining good education fo r the Negro student—d ir e c tly in the lap of the teacher. RobersonJ in the review of the lit e r a t u r e found th a t the Negro has high aspiration s but r e a l is t ic a lly does not have equally high expectations. Roberson 2 reported in his study th a t both w hite and Negro pupils fe e l more p o s itiv e ly about education than they do about school. Sjjmmary I t is d i f f i c u l t to generalize on or to summarize research th a t covers as many facets as does achievement. I t is agreed by most in vestig ato rs th a t low achievement ex is ts but they are not y e t sure what the fa c to rs or combination of facto rs are that produce i t . Several points do stand out: 1. Studies have extended from college to the elementary grades. From the e a r lie r work th a t was f i r s t done w ith college students, i t is now recognized th a t low achievement needs to be id e n tifie d e a r lie r so th at the experimentation may proceed in order to fin d approaches to overcome i t . 2. Low achievement is o f great com plexity. There would probably be agreement th a t i t cannot be a ttrib u te d e n tir e ly to separate or isolated fa c to rs . A develop­ ment worth fu rth e r in v e s tig a tio n appears to be the concept of complex of facto rs or pattern of circumstances. Marvin J. Roberson, "Negro and White Eighth Graders' A ttitu d e Toward the In s titu tio n o f Education and the Schools as Related to T h e ir Academic Achievement" (unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta ­ tio n , U n iversity o f Michigan, 1970), p. 57. ^ Ib id . , p. 8 8 . 90 3. From the fa c t th a t some students o f unfavorable circumstances achieve and some do not comes the im plication th a t i t is not necessarily the negative s itu a tio n but the lack o f p o s itiv e approach or purpose th a t is associated w ith low achievement. , This approach is p a r tic u la r ly expressed by Nason. 4. Much a tte n tio n has been paid to low achievement of the g ifte d students. This is understandable when i t is considered th a t the loss to society may be greater from the student of g reater p o te n tia l. W riters admit th a t many such students consume a place in a d u lt l i f e th a t is s a tis fa c to ry even i f not a t a high le v e l of p ro d u c tiv ity . During the s ix tie s much concern has been evoked fo r the low achiever who is of average a b i l i t y or below average a b i l i t y . When such students become low:achievers they may become problems not only to themselves but fo r the community i f they cannot s a tis fa c to r ily assume t h e ir o b lig a tio n s . Therefore, i t is important th a t th is type o f low achiever be continued to be investigated along w ith the g ifte d student. 5. Socioeconomic facto rs have been given considerable a tte n tio n . Research a tte s ts to it s importance, but research may be suggesting th a t i t should not be given importance out o f proportion to it s re la tio n s h ip to low achievement, 6. Studies in addition to t h e ir c o n trib u tio n to research go fu rth e r in suggesting and recommending new approaches, programs and counseling fo r the low achieving students. The generalizatio n s th a t fo llo w w ill serve to summarize in greater d e ta il the re su lts o f research reported in th is chapter. They also provide the basis fo r the conceptual framework of th is study. In addition these generalizatio n s w ill aid in developing a ra tio n a le from which to review the fin ding s o f th is study. The summary statements w ill fo llo w a s im ila r order to th at used in reviewing lit e r a t u r e on high and low achievement in th is ^Nason, op. c i t . , p. 168. 91 chapter. In quick review the main topics th is chapter were: re la tin g to the research in Financial Factors Related to Pupil Achievement, D is tr ic t Size and S ta ff Factors Related to Achievement, Environmental Factors Related to Achievement, and V a r ia b ilit y of Students and it s Relationship to Achievement. Some generalizatio n s from the review of the lit e r a t u r e on Financial Factors Related to Pupil Achievement are here stated. 1. A large number of fin a n c ia l facto rs re la te d to achievement have been id e n tifie d by researchers and in v e s tig a to rs . A to ta l of 23 facto rs are id e n tifie d in the 20 studies reviewed in the survey o f the lit e r a t u r e . 2. Studies re la te d to fin a n c ia l facto rs have emphasized three fa c to rs : ( 1 ) those id e n tifie d as school system v a ria b le s , ( 2 ) those id e n tifie d as community v a ria b le s , and (3 ) those th a t are products or re su lts of in t e r ­ re la tio n sh ip s between various community and school system v a ria b le s . 3. A combination o f school system ("process") variables haye been used in achievement studies. The most r e lia b le , according to the lit e r a t u r e reviewed, are c e rta in fin a n c ia l facto rs such as per-pupil expendi­ tu re s , local tax e f f o r t s , enrichment expenditures, teachers w ith f iv e years or more of preparation, teacher and adm inistrator s a la rie s , and wealthy school d is t r ic t s . Among other school fa c to rs are p u pil-teacher r a tio s , s t a f f s iz e , school s iz e , educational clim ate o f the school, community in te re s t in the schools, number o f business and professional workers, a d u lt educa­ tio n a l le v e l, and to ta l expenditure. A review of the lit e r a t u r e on D is t r ic t Size and it s R elation­ ship to SJaff and Pupil Achievement reveals several gen eralizatio n s: 1. Organization s iz e tends to a ffe c t in te rn a l s tru c tu re . 92 2. Larger organizations are more lik e ly to have more le v e ls of hierarchy, la rg e r adm in istrative components, less close interpersonal re la tio n s among members, more c e n tra liz a tio n of formal a u th o rity , and more d i f f i c u lt i e s with communication. 3. Research is not in agreement on th is point but most studies report th a t the la rg er the o rg an izatio n , the lower the level o f employee s a tis fa c tio n and the less lik e ly i t is th a t the individual w ill be s a tis fie d with his ro le in the organization. 4. Studies dealing d ir e c tly with school size and teachers' a ttitu d e s and job s a tis fa c tio n are few and c o n tro v e rs ia l. The lit e r a t u r e does emphasize the importance o f fa c e -to face methods of communication and interpersonal re la tio n s h ip s . One can add th a t th is is more lik e ly to occur in small schools than la rg e r ones. 5. Employee f a m ilia r it y with others tends to decrease in la rg e r systems, which in turn a ffe c ts th e ir a ttitu d e s and consequently t h e ir behavior a t work. 6. L ite ra tu re as reported in references to the school clim ate in re la tio n s h ip to ad m inistrative theory, leadership, job s a tis fa c tio n and school clim ate are many. There appears to be a common element about the re su lts of the overwhelming m ajo rity of studies per­ ta in in g to organizational clim ate: The commonality of these re su lts strongly im plicates the s ig n ifican ce of interpersonal re la tio n s h ip s , the ro le of the human element in the determination of the level o f the clim ate on the continuum from open to closed. 7. Though there are references in research concerning the organizational c lim a te , the value of relatio n sh ip s between p u p il, teacher, p r in c ip a l, and parent, the references which deal with interpersonal re la tio n s h ip as re la te d to the c h ild 's perception appear to be lim ite d . An understanding of the ro le leadership, the nature o f interpersonal behavior w ith in various school s e ttin g s , and a coordination of c e rta in factors c ite d in the review may provide avenues fo r improved school practices in the best in tere s ts of the students. 8. The m a jo rity of school organizational clim ate studies reviewed were comparative studies of clim ate types and a d u lt behavior. The research d e a lt mainly w ith the status of clim ate in re la tio n s h ip to school personnel. The w rite r fe e ls very strongly th a t the u ltim ate value of studies re la te d to schools should be measured in terms o f it s sign ificance to the students and th e ir i 93 development. Since there appears to be lim ited research which investigates school organizational clim ate in re la tio n s h ip to the c h ild in school, the research undertaken in th is study seems germane in an attempt to make a s ig n ific a n t contribution to education. 9. Many fa c to rs associated with the school have been given which v a rio u s .in v e stig a to rs fe e l are related to underachievement. Some of these facto rs appear to be due to the student's own fe e lin g s . For a number, however, the re s p o n s ib ility appears to be placed upon the school and the teachers. This raises the p o s s ib ility th a t the curriculum of the schools and a ttitu d e s of the teachers are possible factors and could be considered a subject fo r research. 10. The research on teacher influence consistently in d i­ cates a re la tio n s h ip between the way a teacher behaves in the classroom and the achievement and a ttitu d e s o f students. Students tend to learn more and have more p o sitive a ttitu d e s in classes taught by teachers who use and accept students' ideas more, while lecturing and c r it ic iz in g less. More p re c is e ly , students tend to achieve more and have more p o sitiv e a ttitu d e s in classes taught by teachers who, to a greater exten t, employ techniques th a t generate an atmosphere in which students fe e l fre e to express t h e ir own ideas. This does not imply th a t the most learning takes place in classes in which teachers spend a l l th e ir time f a c i l i ­ ta tin g and re in fo rc in g student ideas. Students do need some guidance, factual knowledge and d ire c tio n which the teacher provides even though these techniques do not necessarily e l i c i t student p a rtic ip a tio n . Perhaps more important than the amount of time a teacher encourages student p a rtic ip a tio n is the nature o f th e ir reinforcement and the frequency of times he switches from dominating to in te g ra tin g types of behavior. 11. The behavior of each student in a given learning s itu a ­ tio n is a product of the influences of his peers, physical environment, and his teacher in te ra c tin g w ith the a ttitu d e s , t r a i t s , goals, and s k ills th at comprise his perso n ality. An in flu e n c ia l force on student behavior in the classroom is the teacher. The teachers strongly influence the educational demands and expectations o f students. The teacher makes use o f his knowledge of learning theory and social s k ills to help students develop p o s itiv e a ttitu d e s , to develop 94 important s k ills and to in te g ra te t h e ir a c t iv it ie s in the classroom. The lit e r a t u r e dealing with the superintendent tends to support th a t he does play a key in d ire c t ro le regarding pupil achievement. Summary statements from the review o f the lit e r a t u r e pertaining to Environmental Factors Related to Achievement are here lis te d . 1. The research work covered in th is review of the lit e r a t u r e indicated th a t environmental factors are re la te d to pu pils' in te lle c tu a l and personality behaviors. 2. In te lle c tu a l performances are re la te d to social class v a ria b le s , the c h ild -re a rin g practices are re la te d to social class le v e ls , th a t personality variab les are re la te d to c h ild -re a rin g practices and th a t in t e l­ le c tu a l and achievement behavior are re la ted to fam ily v a ria b le s . However, most relationsh ips reported ranged from s lig h t to moderate and are based on verbal report data or general measurement, e .g ., social class. Research is needed to examine more closely some o f the variab les already id e n tifie d as meaningful through the use of behavioral measures. 3. Although there has been emphasis upon the e ffe c ts of social c la s s , a l l research does not support its importance as a fa c t re la te d to achievement. One can conclude from the review of the lit e r a t u r e in th is chapter th a t: Social class remains no more than a moderate c o rre la te or p red icto r of an in te lle c tu a l and educational success. 4. The socioeconomic ra tin g is determined usually by the occupation o f the fa th e r. Results tend to show th a t the higher the occupation o f the fa th e r, the higher the level of achievement. However, th is is not co n s is te n tly proven. Regardless of the variance in the re su lts o f s tu d ies , the re s u lts do in dicate the socioeconomic status m erits consideration as a fa c to r. 5. A number of studies which have explored discrepancies in academic achievement have been c ite d . Because of wide d iv e r s ity in areas such as the composition o f the groups, variab les studied, methods used in id e n tify in g high and low achievers, grade le v e ls a t which the studies were conducted and variance in term inology, i t is d i f f i c u l t to compare and in te g ra te the re s u lts . i 95 A number of general observations do appear to be warranted. Considerable evidence, although a t times c o n tro v e rs ia l, has been cited which supports the contention th a t r e la tiv e achievement is not merely the product of a b il it y alone, but is influenced by a number of n o n -in te lle c tu a l fa c to rs . At tim es, the research regarding a number of variables (need fo r achievement, educational a s p ira tio n , influence o f fam ily s iz e , e tc .) were in c o n f lic t . I t seems th at fu rth e r research is necessary to determine i f these differences are due to fa u lty research design, as was implied in some instances, or perhaps due to other fa c to rs . A ll the research examined was concerned w ith the influence of individual v a riab le s . I t would appear to be of equal importance to attempt to determine how variables function in combinations to influence a c h ild toward high or low achievement. This, then, is an area in need of study. The generalizatio n s of the review of the lit e r a t u r e on V a r ia b ility of Students and it s Relationship to Achievement are here stated. 1. A remarkable range of differences ex is ts among students. These differences p e rs is t and are in evidence in every measurable t r a i t . A typ ical school population with a narrow age range shows marked v a ria tio n in mental a b i l i t y , school achieve­ ments, motor s k i l l s , in te re s ts , and personality tr a its . Further, wide differences e x is t not only from one class group to another class group, but wide t r a i t differences e x is t w ith in a sing le p u p il. The lit e r a t u r e suggests th a t these differences are la rg e ly unchangeable and can be a lte re d only s lig h t ly by innovations such as in s tru c tio n a l and a d m in istrative school organizations. i 96 2. From the studies dealing with pupil self-concept of a b i l i t y , one may surmise th a t the school and it s clim ate may hold some untapped resources th a t influence the c h ild 's perception of himself and fu tu re development. 3. Educational expectations and aspiration s o f students, as well as th e ir plans, vo c a tio n a lly and educatio n ally, a fte r high school appear to be re la te d to school achieve­ ment. According to several stu d ies, the achiever aims fo r more education and is more lik e ly to include college in his plans. The low achiever aims fo r less education and is not as inclined to include college in his plans. The achiever is more c e rta in of his purposes and decides sooner, while the underachiever is in clin ed to be uncertain and vague about his educational and vocational in ten tio n s. ’ The student who has e a rly s e ttle d upon the amount of education and a purpose fo r i t appears to be the b e tte r achiever academ ically. 4. To summarize the research re la te d to study habits and involvement w ith le a rn in g , i t appears th a t high achievers excel low achievers in self-esteem , the desire to succeed, perseverance, emotional s t a b ili t y , com petitive­ ness, peer acceptance, seriousness, and purposefulness of in te n t, overall involvement, and study habits. The influence of a student's level o f educational as p ira ­ tio n , educational expectation, and occupational a s p ira tio n on his achievement level appears to be in question. 5. The research cited in the section pertaining to Student A ttitu d es Toward School and Education indicates th a t in divid uals who perceive themselves as having con­ siderable control over what b e fa lls them are more lik e ly to engage in a c t iv it ie s which w ill enable them ’ to successfully cope w ith problems which confront them. I t also demonstrates a re la tio n s h ip between the per­ ception and the a ttitu d e s and achievement of students in school. I t appears lik e ly th a t the degree to which a student perceives him self as having an influence over what happens to him w ill a ffe c t both his a ttitu d e toward the teacher and the class and his achievement. I f a student's perception o f his control over what b e fa lls him does a ffe c t his a ttitu d e and achievement in school, then i t would seem important to fin d methods of modifying th is perception so as to i 97 encourage the student to engage in a c t iv it ie s th a t are more lik e ly to re s u lt in the solution of problems, attainm ent of goals, and the a b il it y to cope adequately with his environment. CHAPTER I I I DESIGN OF THE STUDY The study design was one in which selected facto rs and th e ir degree of re la tio n s h ip were investigated between high and low achieving school d is tr ic ts in Michigan. The facto rs are: 1. Total general fund expenditure per pu pil. 2. Total in stru c tio n expenditure per pu pil. ' 3. Operating expenditure per p u p il. 4. In stru c tio n s a la rie s per p u p il. 5. M ills levied fo r debt and operation. 6. S tate equalized valuation per p u p il. 7. Local tax support or e ffo r ts . 8. Size of d i s t r ic t and s ize o f school. 9. Teacher-adm inistrative r a tio . 10. Pupil study habits. 11. Educational aspirations and educational expectations. 12. Economic status of students’ fathers and socio­ economic background of students. 13. Students’ a ttitu d e toward school and education. 14. Students' self-concept of a b i l i t y . 15. Pupil involvement with learnin g. 16. Teacher influence on pupils. 17. P u p il's fe e lin g s about himself and school. 98 99 18. Teachers' experience. 19. Teacher s trik e s . 20. H alf days fo r students. 21. Student s it - in s . 22. Teacher turnover. 23. Teacher residence in the d i s t r ic t . 24. Students' vocabulary. 25. S ta ff's a ttitu d e toward students, school and community. 26. Teacher job s a tis fa c tio n . 27. P rin c ip a l's job s a tis fa c tio n . 28. Age of school buildings. 29. Hours of pupil in stru c tio n per day and days of in stru c tio n in the school year. 30. Superintendent's opinion of facto rs th a t may a ffe c t pupil achievement. 31. School organizational clim ate. The parameters of a high and low achievement d is t r ic t were fu rth e r delineated by other c r it e r ia including s ize of community, number of students, and geographical location w ith in the State o f Michigan (see Table 1 ). This study attempts to determine the degree to which the above selected facto rs are associated with pupil achievement in both high and low achievement d is tr ic ts which make up the sample. U tiliz in g the achievement measures o f the Michigan Educational Assessment Program fo r the 1969-70 school y e a r, several school d is tr ic ts in Michigan were id e n tifie d which met the c r it e r ia of e ith e r a high or low achievement d i s t r ic t . The Local D is t r ic t TOO TABLE 3.1 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION OF DISTRICTS IN THIS STUDY 101 Report^ (provided by the Michigan Department of Education) was used as an aid in re fin in g the id e n tific a tio n of school d is t r ic t s fo r study. An attempt was made to include schools that represented a cross section of the population of schools in the S tate of Michigan which also met the c r it e r ia fo r th is study. A fter an i n i t i a l contact, p a rtic ip a tio n in the p ro ject was to be voluntary on the part of the d i s t r ic t 's superintendent, ju n io r high p rin cipals and t h e ir s ta ffs . The names o f students, teachers, p rin c ip a ls , and superintendents were not needed in th is in vestig atio n since the perceptions were to be analyzed as a group. Since the main o b jective of th is study is re la ted to one of the major focuses of the Michigan Educational Assessment Program, the cooperation of the Michigan Department of Education was s o lic ite d and secured. Selection o f Sample The schools included in th is study were three-year ju n io r high schools consisting o f grades seven, e ig h t, and nine: and two-year ju n io r high schools consisting of grades seven and e ig h t. The schools of th is study were located in both the lower and upper peninsula of the State o f Michigan. seven were ty p ic a lly o f a ru ra l nature. urban areas. Of the sample of 18 schools, There were six schools in The remaining f iv e schools were in in d u s tria l r e s i­ dential or re s id e n tia l areas in which many persons work in the sin g le industry in the community, but receive th e ir services and purchase ^Local D is t r ic t Report: Explanatory M aterials (Lansing: Michigan Department o f Education, Assessment Report No. 6 , 1970). 102 the m ajo rity of th e ir necessities from la rg e r neighboring communi­ tie s . The schools selected represented a cross section of Michigan's public schools. Some d iv e r s ific a tio n geographically and r a c ia lly w ith in the framework of the c r it e r ia was solved and a tta in e d . The sample includes schools which represent a geographic and ra c ia l cross section from inner c ity to outer suburbia, and the low and high socioeconomic group. Though the ra c ia l composition of the schools was not a s ig n if i­ cant v a riab le fo r th is study, the w rite r is cognizant of the im p li­ cations of comparing schools with s ig n ific a n tly d iffe r e n t ra c ia l compositions, and kept th is in mind while selecting the schools to be used in the study. Because of the assured anonymity o f each d is t r ic t and school w ith in a d i s t r i c t , the data was treated in a group analysis rath er than by a specified school or d i s t r ic t . Information on Tables 2 and 3 is presented in order to show background information about the nine high and nine low achievement d is t r ic t s which are included in the sample. Teacher Pupil Sample The sample fo r th is study was seventh grade boys and g ir ls of twenty d iffe r e n t school d is t r ic t s in Michigan. Ten of the d is tr ic ts selected were d is t r ic t s whose fourth and seventh grade pupils had scored one or more standard deviations below the mean on the Michigan 1970 assessment program. The other ten d is t r ic t s were selected on 103 TABLE 3 .2 BACKGROUND DATA ON THE HIGH AND LOW PARTICIPATING DISTRICTS IN THE SAMPLE Factors Reported by Means of School D is tric ts High D is tr ic ts Low D is tric ts 1. Enrollment of School D is tric ts 4,917 6,169 2. Enrollment of School Buildings 740 553 3. Teacher-adm inistrative Ratio (Junior High) 22-1 23-1 4. Enrollment of Smallest D is t r ic t 550 383 5. Enrollment of Smallest School 270 233 6. Enrollment o f Largest D is t r ic t 16,773 23,714 7. Enrollment of Largest School 1,900 876 Source: Fact Sheet Survey (see Appendix H). the basis th a t t h e ir fourth and seventh grade pupils had scored one or more standard deviations above the mean on the same s ta te assessment program. The mean fo r the 1970 s ta te assessment was (50.79) and the standard deviation was (2 .5 5 ), Of the 20 d is t r ic t s selected , two d is tr ic ts were unable to take p art in the study. Nonacademic classes such as physical education, shop, and choir had requirements th at were t o t a lly unrelated to the more academic structured s itu a tio n such as language a r ts , mathematics and science. In order to control as closely as possible these d i f ­ ferences, i t was decided th a t only those teachers teaching academic classes were to be included in the study. TABLE 3 .3 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE HIGH AND LOW PARTICIPATING DISTRICTS IN THE SAMPLE Pupil-Teacher Ratio High Achievement D is tric ts 25 #1 #2 20 #3 24 #4 19 #5 24 #6 21 #7 18 #8 20 #9 20 Achievement D is tric ts : 24 #1 #2 22 #3 25 #4 26 #5 24 #6 23 22 #7 25 #8 #9 24 Source: Average Years Teaching Experience 9 Vocabulary Mean Number of 7th Graders in Sample Number o f 7th Graders in D is t r ic t 16 7 g 10 7 54.1 54.5 54.6 57.3 54.0 52.6 52.1 55.8 54.9 94 83 85 127 56 54 40 49 58 518 315 546 1425 174 243 41 81 61 9 15 6 8 9 11 8 5 8 45.7 46.8 48.1 44.7 47.0 44.1 45.3 46.6 46.7 25 91 52 59 119 82 105 44 52 27 311 105 234 1720 827 511 103 231 12 11 8 Local D is tr ic t Report: Explanatory M aterials (Lansing: Assessment Report No. 6 , 1970). Fact Sheet Survey (see Appendix H). Michigan Department of Education. 105 A fu rth e r r e s tr ic tio n was in s titu te d in to the lim ita tio n s concerning the makeup o f the teacher's sample. the numbers of classes assigned to each teacher. This was in terms of To have included a ll of the classes assigned to each teacher would have created a d e fin ite problem fo r the researcher. The cost of procuring te s ts fo r such a large number of pupils and teachers would have e n ta ile d considerable expense. In the opinion of Dr. Loyal Joos, s ta tis t ic ia n a t Oakland Schools, no substantial b e n e fit would have been gained by including a ll of the seventh grade classes, and i t was agreed th a t the inclusion o f two classes from each d i s t r ic t would be adequate. The teacher sample was id e n tifie d by an alphabetical l i s t consisting of a ll seventh grade academic teachers holding teaching positions in the ju n io r high school p a rtic ip a tin g in the study. In schools having less than ten teachers, a ll teachers were included in the sample. Schools having more than ten teachers working with seventh graders used the alphabetical l i s t to select ten teachers. Every second or th ird name on the l i s t was selected depending on the number o f teachers. This heterogeneous teacher sample o f 134 in d iv id u a ls , i t was assumed, would include both experienced and inexperienced teachers, e ffe c tiv e and in e ffe c tiv e teachers, and would include various teacher c h a ra c te ris tic s which one would expect to fin d in a large group. The data fo r the study was gathered from 1275 seventh graders in 28 schools in the p a rtic ip a tin g school d is t r ic t s . No special education classes were included; however, the usual range of d i s t r i ­ bution o f a b il it y and achievement, both among and w ith in classes, 106 was present in the study. This conclusion was reached a f t e r discussing the m atter with the building p rin cip al and a f t e r reviewing the Local D is tr ic t R eportJ In d is t r ic t s having more than one ju n io r high school or middle school, the school having the la rg e s t enrollment and the school having the sm allest enrollment were used in the study. To fu rth e r insure a cross representation o f students in the large d is t r ic t s , the superintendent or p rin cip a l was interviewed to determine i f the sm allest and la rg e s t schools presented a true makeup o f the d i s t r ic t 's seventh graders in terms of pupil achievement based on the s ta te assessment re s u lts . I f i t was determined th a t the large and small schools did n o t, a th ird school was included in the study to insure an unbiased sample of seventh graders was being included in the study. \ Description o f the Research Instruments Several r e lia b le instruments were already a v a ila b le to measure many o f the selected fa c to rs . In order to obtain q u a n tita tiv e data on the facto rs id e n tifie d fo r research, i t was necessary to develop some instruments th a t might measure and qu antify the va riab le s under in ve s tig atio n with a s u ffic ie n t degree of v a lid it y and r e l i a b i l i t y . In a ll the instruments used which asked students to give inform ation, every e f f o r t was made to assure the students of the purposes fo r obtaining such information and th a t t h e ir id e n tity would be completely protected. 1 Ib id . 107 The instruments used fo r th is research study include: (1) What's Your Opinion questionnaire, which was used to measure student self-concept of a b i l i t y , study h a b its , educational aspiratio n s and expectations, and involvement w ith le a rn in g , (2) The student questionnaire, What I Think which was used to measure a ttitu d e toward school and education, (3) My Opinions questionnaire which was used to measure the degree to which the teacher was meeting the e ffe c tiv e and cogn itive needs o f pupils (teacher in flu e n c e ), (4 ) The student questionnaire, How I Feel About Myself was used to measure a student's fe e lin g s about school and him self, (5) Questionnaire to Measure Teacher Job S a tis fa c tio n was used to measure the general le v e l of teacher s a tis fa c tio n ; teacher a ttitu d e toward students, school and community; and d is t r ic t organizational c lim a te , ( 6 ) P rin cip al Job S a tis fa c tio n questionnaire which was used to measure the general level o f p rin cip al s a tis fa c tio n , (7) Fact Sheet Survey questionnaire which was used to measure teacher turnover, local tax e f f o r t s , teacher experience, teacher-adm inistrator r a t io , teacher-pupil r a tio , hours o f pupil in s tru c tio n , days of pupil in s tru c tio n , student s i t in s , teacher s tr ik e s , age of school b u ild in g s , size of d i s t r i c t and school, and teacher residence, ( 8 ) The superintendent's questionnaire, A Rating Schedule which was used to measure the superintendent's opinion o f factors th a t may a ffe c t pupil achievement, (9) The Socioeconomic Background o f Students questionnaire (used by the class­ room teacher) to determine the socioeconomic background of the c h ild . A description o f each o f the instruments follow s. 108 What's Your Opinion (see Appendix A ). The f i r s t part of th is questionnaire was developed by Brookover, Patterson and Thomas^ and was used to measure how a student perceived his a b i l i t y . This te s t was standardized and constructed fo r use w ith a ju n io r high school population, minor m odifications were made to adjust i t fo r use by seventh grade students only. one through e ig h t. The te s t consists o f eigh t items, A sample o f these questions is as follow s: "Where do you think you rank in your class in the seventh grade?" "Do you think you have the a b i l i t y to complete high school?" Each question had fiv e possible answers and responses were scored from a low of one to a high of f iv e . Test items scored were then combined to a r riv e a t a to ta l self-concept of a b il it y score fo r each school d i s t r ic t . Total scores fo r the high achieving d is t r ic t s range from a low of 1938 to a high o f 2584, w h ile the low achieving d i s t r ic t had scores ranging from a low o f 1296 to a high o f 2064. Study habits were measured by u t i liz i n g eight questions from a Study Habit Inventory developed by Wrenn. The te s t was o r ig in a lly standardized in 1933 and revised and re-standardized in 1941. At th a t time i t was found th at the inventory s ig n ific a n tly d iffe r e n tia te d high and low achieving students. The te s t questions appeared to be re la te d to whether or not the in d iv id u a l finds i t d i f f i c u l t to study, as w ell as to his study habits. Two examples of te s t questions are: ^Brookover, Patterson and Thomas, Self-Concept o f A b ilit y and School Achievement, op. c i t . 2 C. 6 . Wrenn, Study Habits Inventory (re v . e d .; Palo A lto : Stanford U niversity Press, 1941). 109 " I have to re-read m aterials several times . . . the words do n 't have much meaning the f i r s t time I go over them." " I fin d i t hard to force myself to fin is h work by a c e rta in tim e." The complete te s t is located in Appendix A, items 14 through 21. On th is te s t a student received a score o f one fo r a response of "always," two fo r "o ften ," three fo r "sometimes," four fo r " ra r e ly ," and f iv e fo r "never." Using th is scoring system, a to ta l te s t score was computed fo r each d i s t r ic t . High achieving d is t r ic t s had scores ranging from a low of 1860 to a high of 2610. And the low achieving d is t r ic t s had scores ranging from a low of 1340 to a high o f 2182. In order to measure a student's le v e l of education as p ira tio n and educational expectation, two questions were used from the study of self-concept of a b il it y conducted by Brookover, Patterson and ThomasJ On each of these questions, the student was given the choice o f seven answers ranging from wanting to q u it school d ia te ly (scored one) to (scored seven). imme­ wanting to receive advanced college tra in in g A student could receive a score ranging from a low of one to a high of seven fo r each of these te s t items. These two te s t questions are located in Appendix A, items twelve and th irte e n . On the te s t items measuring education a s p iratio n s and educa­ tio n a l expectation, the low achieving d is t r ic t s had scores ranging from a low of 1935 to a high o f 3230. Forty-one of the low achieving d is t r ic t s ' students indicated th a t they aspired to q u it school (r ig h t now) w hile none o f the high achieving school d is tr ic ts ^Brookover, Patterson and Thpmas, op. c i t . i no students gave th is response. The high achieving d is t r ic t s had scores ranging from a low o f 2584 to a high of 3876. Involvement With Learning Test was developed a t the U n iversity of Michigan in th e ir u n iv e rs ity school research study on "Dimensions of C hildren's Social and Psychological Development Related to School Achievement."^ In a phase o f th is study which examined "Character­ is tic s of School Classroom Environments Over Time," i t is reported th a t the te s t items were standardized and norms were established using approximately 225 students in grades three through nine. Testing was repeated y e a rly w ith the same study body fo r a to ta l of three years. Involvement With Learning Test consists of th ree items and is located in Appendix A, items 9 , 10 and 11. For the te s t items the student had a choice of four possible answers. Using the scoring system developed fo r these item s, a student response was scored one, two, th re e , or fo u r. Test item scores were then combined to a r riv e a t a score. Scores on the Involvement With Learning Test range from a low of 3160 to a high of 4905, fo r the low achieving d is t r ic t s w h ile the high achieving d is t r ic t s had scores ranging from a low of 3420 to a high o f 5061. The student qu estionnaire, What I Think (see Appendix B). The scales used fo r th is research were adaptations o f the Purdue ^W. A. Ketcham and W. C. Morse, Dimensions o f C hildren 's Social and Psychological Development Related to School Achievement, Cooperative Research P roject No. 1286 (Washington: U.S. bepartment of H ealth, Education and W elfare, 1965). Ill I Master A ttitu d e Seal els J The v a lid it y of these scales has been established by te s te rs on a v a rie ty o f subjects. Wording changes in these scales were made in order to adapt them to the grade level of the subjects required by th is research. the scales was maintained. But the general in te g r ity of Based on the v a lid it y of the instrum ent, the proven v a lid it y of the Purdue Master A ttitu d e S caled th is instrument was assumed to be v a lid . My Opinions questionnaire (see Appendix C). A ffe c tiv e Scale, C ognitive Scale. Scales previously developed and used were employed 3 to measure teacher in fluence on p u p ils. The A ffe c tiv e Scale con­ sisted o f fiv e questions designed to fin d out to what extent the pupils perceived the teacher as lik in g them and as being considerate o f them. The Cognitive Scale consisted of f iv e questions designed to fin d out to what extent the pupils perceived the teacher as helping them le a rn . On both scales the pupils responded by in d ic a tin g how f r e ­ quently they perceived the teacher's behavior as meeting t h e ir needs as follow s: Always, U su ally, Seldom, Never. Each response was scored by giving i t a score of four f o r "always," three fo r "u s u a lly ," two fo r "seldom," and one fo r "never." The scores were to ta le d fo r ^H. H. Remmer, Manual fo r the Purdue Master A ttitu d e Scales (L a fa y e tte , In d .: Purdue U n iv e rs ity , 1960). 2 Ib id . 3 N. L. Gage, George E. L e a v itt, and George C. Stone, "Teachers' Understanding of T h eir Pupils and P u p ils' Ratings of T h eir Teacher," Psychologican Monograph No. 406 (Washington: American Psychological A ssociation, 1955). 112 each student on each scale, and the means scores were computed fo r each d i s t r i c t . A mean score fo r the high and low achieving d is tr ic ts was then computed. The high d is t r ic t s ' mean was 2 1 .0 , the low d is t r ic t s ' mean was 12 . 8 . These scales are found in Appendix C. The items on the A ffe c tiv e Scale are numbered with odd numbers, and the items on the Cognitive Scale, with even numbers. The student questionnaire, How I Feel About Myself (see Appendix D). This questionnaire is adopted from the instrument "How I Feel About Myself" which was developed a t the Horace MannLincoln In s titu te o f School Experimentation, Teachers C ollege, Columbia U n iv e rs ity . I t is a s e lf-r e p o r t instrument in which one must assume th a t the student ha$ an accurate perception of his s e lf organization as i t pertains to the present and his desire fo r the fu tu re . Dr. Miriam L. Goldberg, Professor of Psychology and Education, was the p rin cip al in v e s tig a to r and developer of the instrum ent. The instrument is used to determine how the student fe e ls about him self and school. I t is reported th a t these items were selected which best ty p ify an example o f the self-concept d e fin itio n . The items were derived from the study of the s e lf description of interm ediate grade pupils. A number o f interm ediate grade children from various New York schools were used as judges in the development of the instrument. The instrument consists of 50 pairs of unfinished sentences. A fte r every unfinished sentence there are f iv e lin e s , each one having a d iffe r e n t la b e l: "Most of the Time," "Much o f the Time," "About H alf 113 the Time," "Once in a W hile," "Seldom." which is most tru e fo r him. The pupil picks the ending Twenty-nine of the sentences are p o s itiv e t r a it s such as, " I Am Considered a Leader," " I Have a Good Sense of Humor," " I Am a Good Sport," and are scored from f iv e points (Most of the Time) to one point (Seldom). Twenty-one of the sentences are negative t r a i t s , such as " I Am Lazy," " I Am a Mean Person," " I Am S e lfis h ," " I Am a Pest," and are scored from one point (Most o f the Time) to f iv e points (Seldom). These 50 sentences c o n s titu te the "a" part o f the instrument from which is obtained a present status score designed as the " I Am" or "Self-Concept" score. Most of the items (33) concern the p u p il's fe e lin g s about him self as a person and/or social being. others r e la te d ir e c tly to his fe e lin g s about school. Seventeen Seven o f the 33 questions concerning the p u p il's fe e lin g s about him self and eight of the 17 questions concerning t i e p u p il's fe e lin g s about school were used in the author's questionnaire, How I Feel About M yself. Questionnaire to Measure Teacher Job S a tis fa c tio n (see Appendix E). The f i r s t 77 questions o f th is r e lia b le instrument were developed by Science Research Associates o f Chicago to measure the general level o f teacher s a tis fa c tio n . tested in 1962. s a tis fa c to ry . I t was developed and The r e l i a b i l i t y of the index was considered A fte r some experience using the index fo r measuring the level of teacher s a tis fa c tio n , usually upon the request of school adm inistrators, it s use was abandoned fo r public re la tio n s reasons. Its use was discontinued in order to m aintain fo r S.R.A. a non­ threatening image among classroom teachers, the company's prime customers. 114 Nine addition al questions were included in the questionnaire. Seven questions were designed to produce more s p e c ific inform ation about teacher's a ttitu d e s toward students, school and community. The questions are 78 through 8 6 . The Science Research Associates o f Chicago instrum ent, to measure the general level of teacher s a tis fa c tio n , was also selected as an instrument appropriate fo r c o lle c tin g teacher's perceptions of the d i s t r ic t 's organizational clim ate. S ix ty -th re e o f the in s tru ­ ment's 77 questions were deemed appropriate fo r use by the author and were patterned in use a f t e r the Organizational Climate Descrip­ tiv e Questionnaire. The Organizational Cl innate D escriptive Questionnaire (OCDQ) is an instrument developed by Hal pin and C r o ftJ I t is an instrument which permits the portrayal of the organizational clim ate of an elementary school. I t is a 64 item "Likest" type questionnaire which is given in a group s itu a tio n requiring no more than 30 minutes to adm inister. The questions were very s im ila r to those used by Science Research Associates of Chicago to measure teacher job s a tis fa c tio n (see Appendix F ). Halpin and C rp ft analyzed the clim ates o f 71 elementary schools from six d iffe r e n t regions of the United S tates. The analysis was based on descriptions of the schools by 1151 respondents. Six clim ate types were described u t iliz in g fa c to r i Andrew W. Halpin and Don B. C ro ft, The O rganizational Climate o f Schools, U.S. O ffic e o f Education Research P roject No. 543 (Washington: Department of H ealth, Education and W elfare, 1962). 115 a n a ly tic methods, and the clim ates were ranked in respect to the school' s score on E s p rit. Halpin and Croft^ summarized the character­ is tic s o f the s ix clim ktes as follow s: 1. The Open Climate describes an energetic, liv e ly organization which is moving toward it s goals, and which provides s a tis ­ fa c tio n fo r the group members' social needs. Leadership acts emerge e a s ily and approp riately from both the group and the leader. The members are preoccupied d isp ro p o rtio n ately with n eith er task achievement nor social-needs s a tis fa c tio n ; s a tis fa c tio n on both counts seems to be obtained e a s ily and almost e ffo r tle s s ly . The main c h a ra c te ris tic o f th is clim ate is the "a u th e n tic ity " of the behavior th a t occurs among a ll the members. 2. The Autonomous Climate is described as one in which leadership acts emerge p rim a rily from the group. The leader exerts l i t t l e control over the group members; high E s p rit re su lts p rim a rily from social-ne^ds s a tis fa c tio n . S a tis fa c tio n from task achievement is also present, but to a lesser degree. 3. The Controlled Climate is characterized best as impersonal and highly ta s k-o rien ted . The group's behavior is directed p r i­ m arily toward task accomplishment, while r e la t iv e ly l i t t l e a tte n tio n is given to behavior oriented to social-needs s a tis fa c tio n . E s p rit is f a i r l y high, but i t r e fle c ts achieve­ ment a t some expense to social-needs s a tis fa c tio n . This clim ate lacks openness, or "au th e n tic ity " of behavior, because the group is disproportionately preoccupied w ith task achievement. 4. The Fam iliar Climate is highly personal, but undercontrolled. The members of th is organization s a tis fy th e ir social needs, but pay r e la t iv e ly l i t t l e a tte n tio n to social control in respect to task accomplishment. Accordingly, E s p rit is not extremely high simply because the group members secure l i t t l e s a tis fa c tio n from task achievement. Hence, much of the behavior w ithin th is clim ate can be construed as "in a u th e n tic ." 5. The Paternal Climate is characterized best as one in which the p rin cip al constrains the emergence of leadership acts from the group and attempts to i n i t i a t e most of these acts him self. The leadership s k ills w ith in the group are used to supplement the p rin c ip a l's own a b il it y to i n i t i a t e leadership a c ts. Accordingly, some leadership acts are not even 1 Ib id . 116 attempted. In short, l i t t l e s a tis fa c tio n is obtained in respect to e ith e r achievement or social needs; hence, E sp rit among the members is low. 6. The Closed Climate is characterized by a high degree of apathy on the part of a l l members o f the organization. The organization is not "moving," E s p rit is low because the group members secure n e ith er social-needs s a tis fa c tio n nor the s a tis fa c tio n th a t comes from task achievement. The members' behavior can be construed as "in a u th e n tic "; indeed, the organization seems to be stagnant. Eight dimensions of the organizational clim ate were measured by assigning the 63 items in the questionnaire to eight subtests. Four o f the Subtests pertain to teacher c h a ra c te ris tic s and four to the c h a ra c te ris tic s o f the p rin c ip a l as a lead er. The behavior typed by each subtest is indicated below as expressed by Hal pin and C r o ftJ Teachers' Behavior: 1. Disengagement indicates th a t the teachers do not work well together. TFey pull irt d iffe r e n t d ire c tio n s w ith respect to the task; they gripe and bicker among themselves. Hindrance refers to the teachers' fe e lin g s th a t the p rin cip a l burdens them w ith ro u tin e d u tie s , committee demands, and other requirements which the teachers construe as unnecessary busy-work. 3. E sp rit re fe rs to "morale." The teachers fe e l th a t th e ir socTaT needs are being s a tis fie d , and th a t they a re , a t the same tim e, enjoying a sense o f accomplishment in th e ir jo b . 4. Intimacy re fe rs to the teachers' enjoyment o f fr ie n d ly social re la tio n s with each other. ^I b id . 117 P rin c ip a l's Behavior: 5. Aloofness re fe rs to behavior by the p rin cip a l which is characterized as formal and impersonal. He "goes by the book" and prefers to be guided by rules and p o lic ie s rath er than to deal w ith the teachers in an inform al, fa c e -to -fa c e s itu a tio n . 6. Production Emphasis re fe rs to behavior by the p rin cip al which is characterized by close supervision of the s t a ff . He is highly d ire c tiv e and tas k-o rien ted . 7. Thrust re fe rs to behavior marked not by close supervision of the teacher, but by the p rin c ip a l's attempt to m otivate the teachers through the example which he personally sets. He does not ask the teachers to give of themselves any­ thing more thvn he w illin g ly gives of him self; his behavior though s ta rk ly ta s k -o rie n te d , is nonetheless viewed favorably by the teachers. 8. Consideration re fe rs to behavior by the p rin cip a l which is characterized by an in c lin a tio n to t r e a t the teachers "humanly," to t r y to do a l i t t l e something extra fo r them in human terms. Though the Organizational Climate D escriptive Questionnaire is a sophisticated instrument which was designed to measure the organizational clim ate as re fle c te d by the perceptions o f the school fa c u lty , one should be cognizant of the many variab les which may in fluence p rin c ip a l-te a c h e r in te ra c tio n s and thus the perceptions measured. Hal pin and C ro ft indicated th a t the clim ate description r e fle c ts the perception of the te a ch er-p rin cip a l re la tio n s h ip . They also were cognizant of the fa c t th a t other forces act on school clim ates. Considering the lim ita tio n s o f the instrument and the many ra m ificatio n s o f such a measurement, Halpin and C ro ft 1 concluded th a t: 11bi d. 118 How the leader r e a lly behaves is less important than how members of his group perceive th a t he behaves; i t is th e ir perception o f his behavior th a t w ill determine the behavior o f the group members and w ill hence define the organizational clim ate. I t is the organizational clim ate as perceived by the s t a f f th a t concerns th is part o f the study. P rincipal Job S a tis fa c tio n questionnaire (see Appendix G). This questionnaire was adapted from the questionnaire to measure teacher job s a tis fa c tio n which was developed and tested by Science Research Associates of Chicago. Wording changes in these scales were made in order to adopt them to the subject required by th is research, but the general in te g r ity of the scales was maintained. The number of questions was redqced from 77 to 62. This was done because some questions did not apply in any way to the bu ild ing p rin c ip a l. Based on the proven v a lid it y o f the teachers' question­ naire to measure job s a tis fa c tio n , th is instrument was assumed to be v a lid . The s lig h t modifying of tne instrument should not a ffe c t it s r e lia b ility . A to ta l o f 62 questions make up the P rin cip al Job S a tis fa c tio n questionnaire. Questions 4 , 8 , 9 , 10, 11, 14, 16, 19, 24, 28, 30, 33, 37, 39, 40, 47, 49, 53, 55, 56, 57, and 60 were scored by giving each response three fo r "Disagree," two fo r "U ncertain," and one fo r "Agree." The remaining 40 questions were scored by giving each response three fo r "Agree," two fo r "Uncertain," and one fo r "Disagree." The scores were to ta le d fo r each p rin c ip a l on each s c ale , and the mean scores were computed fo r each high and low d i s t r ic t (see Table 7 ). A mean score fo r the high and low achieving d is t r ic t s was 119 then determined. The high d is t r ic t s ' mean was 159, the low d is t r ic t s ' mean was 144. Fact Sheet Survey questionnaire (see Appendix H). This instrument and the questionnaire A Rating Schedule (see Appendix J ) , have been developed by the author. This has been achieved by modifying instruments used in s im ila r studies in business and industry to an educational s e ttin g . The development o f an instrument which would give an in d i­ cation o f the knowledge of the superintendent about his d i s t r ic t and his a ttitu d e toward pupil achievement was a major requirement. A survey o f a v a ila b le studies and educational a r tic le s concerning superintendent's knowledge revealed the follow ing freq u en tly mentioned areas designations: 1. Public R elations. Included in th is area were items of information re la te d 1po student, teacher, parent, and community re la tio n s h ip s . P rin cip al and the environment of the school. 2. Curriculum. This ar$sa included questions about the job a c t iv it ie s carried out by the superintendent, his occupational goals and in te re s ts in education. 3. The Organizational Structure o f the School D is t r i c t . Included in th is area were items of inform ation about p u p il, p rin c ip a l, teacher preferences and desires and th e ir re la tio n s h ip to school organization. 4. School Financing. This area included such facto rs as pu pil-teacher r a t io , S.E.V. behind each c h ild , educational costs per c h ild , student academic accomplishments, school academic strengths and weaknesses and fu tu re education plans. Using these four areas o f designations as a to o l, the development of a fa c t sheet survey and a reading schedule was undertaken. 120 The o rig in a l d r a ft of these two questionnaires was modified and re fin e d a f t e r a p re -te s t t r i a l in two neighboring d is t r ic t s . The author met with the p a rtic ip a tin g superintendents a f t e r studying th e ir responses and comments about the questionnaire. In view of the remarks and observations made by the superintendents, the fin a l d r a ft was prepared. According to Webster, a te s t is v a lid i f i t is "well grounded, j u s t i f ie d , applicable to the m atter a t hand, able to e ffe c t or accomplish what is designated or intended." d is tin c tio n between two sorts of v a lid it y : G arrett has made a (1 ) Content or apparent v a lid it y , and (2 ) S t a t is t ic a l or experimental v a lid it y . For the f i r s t sort of v a lid it y The items o f a "personal judgment inventory" are said to have face or content v a lid it y whep they deal d ir e c tly w ith the area described by the inventory. S t a t is t ic a l v a lid it y , on the other hand, is determined by th e ir (standard te s ts ) c o rre la tio n with various independent c r it e r i a . Acceptable c r it e r ia are measures of aspects o f behavior believed to require the same a b il it ie s as those tapped by the t e s t . l The Socioeconomic Background of Students questionnaire (see o Appendix I ) . This questionnaire was based on Taussig's Fine Grade C la s s ific a tio n in order to obtain the socioeconomic status of the fam ily of each pupil in the study. major c la s s ific a tio n s . The questionnaire contains fiv e These c la s s ific a tio n s are: Professional, Sem i-professional, S k ille d Labor^ S e m i-s kille d Labor, and Common ^H. E. G a rre tt, Elementary S ta tis tic s (2nd e d .; New York: David McKay Co., In c . , 1966), p. 112. 2 Roger G. Barker, Jacob S. Kounin, and Herbert S. W right, Child Behavior and Development (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., I n c . , 1943). 121 Labor. Teachers o f pupils were asked to complete the questionnaires. In the la rg e r schools the building p rin cip a l c a lle d upon the counselor to provide the needed inform ation. Procedures In March of 1971, telephone c a lls were made to each of the 18 superintendents o f schools whose d is t r ic t s were being selected fo r study. The purpose of these c a lls was to make arrangements w ith each superintendent fo r a personal in terview i f he thought i t necessary so th a t d e ta ils of the research study could be explained. In each case, but one, his permission was granted and a le t t e r describing the research was sent. A fte r receiving my l e t t e r , none o f the superintendents f e l t an in terview was necessary. Nineteen of the o rig in a l 20 indicated th e ir w illingn ess to p a rtic ip a te in the study. In the la t t e r the superintendent was asked fo r permission to include the ju n io r high school in his d is t r ic t in the study. In a l l cases, the permission of the superintendent was granted, but one. A le t t e r was then sent to each ju n io r high school p rin c ip a l. The le t t e r contained a description of the research study. The p rin cip al was asked to cooperate f u l l y in th is study and to appoint e ith e r himself or his guidance counselor as coordinator fo r expediting the mechanics o f the study in his school. In response to the l e t t e r and follow -up telephone c a l l , p rin c ip a ls from a l l but one of the 19 d is tr ic t s s ig n ifie d w illingness to p a rtic ip a te f u l l y in the study. 122 The pupil questionnaires: What's Your Opinion, What I Think, My Opinions, and How I Feel About My A b ilit y were administered to pupils in the 18 school d is tr ic ts p a rtic ip a tin g in the study. The questionnaires were administered by th e ir classroom teacher and required on the average of one hour fo r students to complete. Pupils completed the questionnaires in the d iffe r e n t school d is tr ic ts during A p ril and May o f 1971. Each teacher was provided a b r ie f in tro duction and s p e c ific d ire c tio n s fo r adm inistering the questionnaires by inform ation pro­ vided the building p rin c ip a l. As indicated in the in s tru c tio n s , student names were not used on the questionnaires. The anonymity of the students' perceptions and scnool p a rtic ip a tin g was again assured. The teachers were instructed to assure the students th a t there were no rig h t or wrong answers and to read or explain any sentence or work which the students did not understand. In a ll schools, the student sample consisted of two classes o f 40 to 60 students, except in th re e d is t r ic t s where a ll students in the seventh grade were tested. A to ta l o f 446 students from the nine high achieving d is tr ic ts and 429 from the nine low achieving d is tr ic t s made up the student sample. A fte r the questionnaires were completed, the answer sheets were sealed in large envelopes and mailed to my o ffic e . A ll data w ith the exception of three questionnaires were placed on a standard answer sheet which was provided by Oakland Schools. The answer sheets were a ll hand reviewed by my sixteen year old daughter, Donna, during the summer to make sure a l l marks were in the proper squares or 123 columns. They were scored by computer a t the Data Processing Center o f the Oakland Schools, Pontiac, Michigan. The questionnaire What's Your Opinion was hand scored. The teacher questionnaire to measure Teacher Job S a tis fa c tio n was administered to 134 teachers in 18 school d is t r ic t s . The questionnaire which was to measure teacher job s a tis fa c tio n and d i s t r ic t organizational clim ate was administered to a ll seventh grade teachers a t the school or to the e n tire teaching s t a f f i f there were less than fiv e seventh grade teachers in the school. The p rin cip al of the school d is trib u te d the questionnaire and answered any questions the teachers had pertain in g to i t . D irections were provided the p rin cip al by l e t t e r . Teachers w$re asked not to w rite t h e ir names on the answer sheet. A ll answers were placed on a standard answer sheet which was secured from Oakland Schools and machine scored. The questionnaire took approximately 20 minutes to answer. The p rin cip a l qu estionnaire, P rin cip al Job S a tis fa c tio n was completed by the school p rin c ip a l o f each school in the d i s t r ic t taking part in the study. The superintendent's questionnaires, A Rating Schedule and Fact Sheet Survey were completed by the super­ intendent of each school d i s t r i c t included in the study. pals' answer sheet was machine scored by Oakland Schools. The p rin c i­ The superintendents' questionnaires were hand scored by the author. A to ta l of 27 p rin cip a ls and 18 superintendents responded to the questionnaires. This represents 87 percent o f the adm inistrators included in the study. i 124 Summary This study was conducted in 18 public school d is t r ic t s during the spring of 1971. I t u t iliz e s an experimental group design encompassing 7,473 pupils^ 332 teachers, 67 ju n io r high p rin c ip a ls , and 18 superintendents in 12 counties in the S tate of Michigan. The instruments used in th is study have mainly s t a tis t ic a l or experimental v a lid it y . Th eir v a lid it y is based on (standard te s ts ) c o rre la tio n with various independent c r it e r i a . th is were the instruments: Two exceptions to A Rating Schedule and Fact Sheet Survey. These two instruments have content or apparent v a lid it y . Their v a lid ity is based on the apparent lo g ical re la tio n sh ip s between the factors under in v e s tig a tio n , the questions asked, and the subjects who responded to these questions. This chapter has described the sample, the techniques used to id e n tify the sample, te s tin g instruments and procedures, and the method used to compare facto rs in the study with data based on other fin d in g s . The study is designed to in ve s tig ate the degree to which 31 selected facto rs are associated w ith high and low educational achieve­ ment as measured by the Michigan assessment program fo r seventh graders in selected schools. and analysis of the data. Chapter IV discusses the presentation CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF THE DATA This chapter presents inform ation about the s t a t is t ic a l methods used, the presentation and analysis of the data re su lts and summary of the chapter. S ta tis tic a l Methods Used Null hypotheses derived from these questions were tested by appropriate s ta tis t ic a l techniques. below. A lte rn a tiv e hypotheses are stated Each a lte rn a tiv e hypothesis has a corresponding null hypothesis which was e ith e r rejected (a t le v e ls indicated in follow ing T a b les ), or accepted. In the discussion o f the a lte r n a tiv e hypotheses which fo llo w s , i t w ill be understood th a t re je c tio n of an a lte r n a tiv e hypoth­ esis means th a t the corresponding null hypothesis could not be re je c te d . Likewise, the acceptance o f an a lte rn a tiv e hypothesis means th a t the corresponding null hypothesis wasre je c te d , and th a t a d iffe re n c e in the d ire c tio n o f the a lte r n a tiv e . For convenience, null hypotheses are not given in th is paper. Presentation and Analysis the data indicated the o f Results in Terms o f the Hypotheses I t seems appropriate here to re-examine the questions stated in Chapter I . Our findings r e la tiv e to these questions w ill depend p rim a rily on the data presented in th is chapter. 126 Twenty-one questions were selected fo r study: 1. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between the high and low j achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to to ta l general fund expen­ d itu re per p u p il, to ta l in s tru c tio n expenditure per p u p il, current operating expenditure per p u p il, and in s tru c tio n s a la rie s per pupil? 2. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between the high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to m ills levied fo r debt and operation, the s ta te equalized valuation per p u p il, and the support given the d i s t r i c t on m illage fo r operation and bonding programs? 3. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between the high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to s ize o f d i s t r i c t , school, and teach er-ad m in istrative ratio ? 4. Is there a s in g ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to students' study habits? 5. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to students' educational aspirations and educational expectations? 6. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to the economic status of students' fathers and socioeconomic background o f students? 7. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to students' a ttitu d e toward school and education? 8. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to students' self-concept o f a b ility ? 9. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in involvement w ith learning? 10. Is there a s ig n ific a n t pupil d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is t r ic t s and teacher influence on pupils? 11. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts and a p u p il's fe e lin g s about him self and school? 12. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to teachers' experience? 13. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is t r ic t s in regard to teacher s tr ik e s , h a lf days, and student s it-in s ? 14. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between the high and achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to teacher turnover and teacher residence in the d is tr ic t? low 127 15. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to students' vocabulary? 16. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts and the s t a f f 's a ttitu d e toward students, school and community? 17. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to teacher job s a tis fac tio n ? 18. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to p rin cip a l job s a tis fa c tio n ? 19. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to age of b u ild in g s , hours o f pupil in s tru c tio n per day, and days o f in s tru c tio n in the school year? 20. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in regard to the superintendent's opinion o f facto rs th a t may a ffe c t pupil achievement? 21. Is there a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in school organizational climate? Research hypotheses derived from these questions were stated in the form o f null hypotheses fo r te s tin g . The research hypotheses are now presented and analyzed in lig h t o f the evidence c o lle cte d . Hypothesis 1 - "The high achieving d is tr ic ts per pupil expenditure fo r in s tru c tio n , operating, general fund expenditures and in s tru c tio n s a la rie s are more than those of the low achieving d is t r ic t s ." The high d is tr ic ts were found to be s lig h tly but n o n s ig n ific a n tly higher in per pupil cost fo r these fa c to rs . Tables 4.1 A and 4.1 B. The hypothesis is re je c te d , based on the findings cited above and found in Table 4 .2 which reveals the high and low d is tr ic ts to be s im ila r in th e ir per pupil expenditure fo r in s tru c tio n , operating, general fund expenditures and in s tru c tio n s a la rie s . 128 TABLE 4.1 A HIGH DISTRICTS' PER PUPIL EXPENDITURE FOR: TOTAL INSTRUCTION EXPENDITURE, CURRENT OPERATING EXPENSES, TOTAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES AND INSTRUCTION High D is tric ts Total In stru c tio n Expendi ture 573.54 635.64 464.32 759.79 521.83 578.39 512.67 551.93 519.53 #1 n #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 Current Operating Expenses 744.24 879.74 644.48 1006.58 747.21 800.75 742.76 675.53 732.16 Total General Fund Expenditures 771.33 958.61 703.88 1058.67 788.09 848.57 828.53 721,85 842.93 In s tru c tio n S alaries 553.66 619.65 439.05 729.55 494.51 530.79 481.74 530.21 484.77 TABLE 4.1 B LOW DISTRICTS' PER PUPIL EXPENDITURE FOR: TOTAL INSTRUCTION EXPENDITURE, CURRENT OPERATING EXPENSES, TOTAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES AND INSTRUCTION Low D is tric ts Total In stru ctio n Expenditure #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 450.67 810.72 415.96 557.59 675.83 538.74 543.50 423.31 474.52 Source: Current Operating Expenses 653.22 1084.22 564.60 775.11 857.11 713.58 693.37. 625.51 682.56 Total General Fund Expenditures 793.44 1159.49 616.83 832.69 918.99 777.38 723.27 667.95 766.01 In s tru c tio n S alaries 426.46 766.16 394.44 529.64 629.99 508.88 523.35 391.74 454.01 Ranking o f Michigan Public High School D is tric ts by Selected Financial Data 1969-70: B u lle tin 1012. (Lansing, Michigan: Michigan Department of Education, December, 1970). 129 TABLE 4 .2 MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION AND F-RATIO FOR PER PUPIL INSTRUCTION EXPENDITURE, CURRENT OPERATING EXPENSES, GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES AND INSTRUCTION SALARIES FOR HIGH AND LOW DISTRICTS High D is tric ts Standard Mean Deviation Factors 1. 2. 3. 4. In stru c tio n Expenditure Low D is tric ts Standard Mean Deviation F-Ratio $563.24 84.2 $510.01 81.2 1.7a Current Operati ng Expenses 773.03 105.5 695.76 79.4 2 .7 b General Fund Expenditures 835.81 105.2 787.32 83.6 2 .2 C In stru c tio n S alaries 534.37 85,0 482.31 76.0 1.8 d 3F c F (1 , 1 6 ), non s ig n ific a n t (1 , 1 6 ), non s ig n ific a n t bF d F (1 , 1 6 ), non s ig n ific a n t (1 , 1 6 ), non s ig n ific a n t Hypothesis 2 - "The high d is tr ic ts w ill levy more m ills fo r debt and op eration, have greater s ta te equalized valuation per p u p il, and have b e tte r support fo r mi 11 age fo r both operation and bonding programs than the low d is t r ic t s ." As measured by data taken from B u lle tin 1012^ and Fact Sheet Survey (see Appendix H ), the high d is t r ic t s were found to have a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e in m ills levied f o r debt and operation and fo r mi 11 age support fo r operation and bonding programs than did the low d is t r ic t s . There was no s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low Ranking o f Michigan Public High School D is tric ts by Selected Financial Data 1969-70: B u lle tin 1012 (Lansing, Michigan: Michigan Department o f Education, December, 1970). 130 d is tr ic ts regarding the s ta te equalized valuation per p u p il. Based on findings presented in Table 4 .4 , two o f the three fa c to rs , m ills levied fo r debt and operation and b e tte r community support fo r operational and bonding m illage is accepted. The other fa c to r, s ta te equalized valua­ tio n per pupil is re je c te d . TABLE 4 .3 COMPARISON OF HIGH AND LOW DISTRICTS WITH MILLS LEVIED FOR DEBT AND OPERATION, STATE EQUALIZED VALUATION PER PUPIL, AND COMMUNITY SUPPORT FOR OPERATION AND BONDING PROGRAMS Debt and Operation High Low S.E.V. Per Child High Low i Community Support For Operation and Bonding Programs (E lection Defeats) High Low 34.0 21.0 14,617 12,347 1 4 29.3 22.5 20,929 36,726 2 2 27.7 24.4 16,105 9,268 0 4 34.7 20.5 23,113 29,911 2 2 27.5 27.5 9,145 21,033 0 1 34.9 31.1 19,472 13,323 3 4 21.5 26.0 17,847 11,686 1 5 29.8 18.8 16,847 23,116 0 3 17.3 28.3 33,659 17,725 2 3 Sources: Ranking of Michigan Public High School D is tr ic ts b.y Selected fin a n c ia l Data 1969-70: B u lle tin 1012 (Lansing, Michigan: Michigan Department o f Education, December, 1970). Fact Sheet Survey (see Appendix H). 131 fABLE 4 .4 MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION AND F-RATIO FOR HIGH AND LOW DISTRICTS WITH MILLS LEVIED FOR DEBT AND OPERATION, STATE EQUALIZED VALUATION PER PUPIL, AND COMMUNITY SUPPORT FOR OPERATION AND BONDING PROGRAMS Factors M ills Levied For Debt and Operation State Equalized Valuation Community Support For Operation and Bonding Programs High D is tric ts Standard Mean Deviation Low D is tric ts Standard Mean D eviation 30.5 5 .0 24.9 3 .9 4 .7 a $17,187 6405.3 $17,301 6176.5 0 .3 b 1.2 0 .6 3.1 1.2 4 .9 C aF (1 , 1 6 ), P < .05 CF (1 , 1 3 ), P < .05 F-R atio (1 , 1 6 ), non s ig n ific a n t Hypothesis 3 - "The high d is t r ic t s w ill be la rg e r in enrollm ent s iz e , have la rg e r school buildings and a b e tte r teachera d m in istrative r a tio than w ill the low d i s t r ic t s ." Presented in Table 4 .5 are; comparisons between the high and low d is t r ic t s in d i s t r i c t s iz e , school s ize and te a ch er-a d m in is tra tiv e r a tio . As measured by data from B u lle tin 1012* and Fact Sheet Survey (see Appendix H ), the correlatio n s between the high and low d is t r ic t s ' factors were found not to be s ig n ific a n t. Based on the findings reported above and found in Table 4 .6 , Hypothesis 3 is re je c te d . 1 Ib id . 132 TABLE 4 . 5 COMPARISON OF HIGH AND LOW DISTRICTS IN SAMPLE WITH SIZE OF DISTRICT, SIZE OF SCHOOL AND TEACHER-ADMINISTRATIVE RATIO Size o f D is t r ic t High Low 6,319 4,532 8,292 16,773 2,295 3,220 550 1,020 1,243 Teacher-Admi ni s t r a t i ve Ratio High Low Size o f School High Low 383 3,850 1,351 3,504 23,714 11,106 7,305 1,325 3,002 821 548 1,900 867 332 750 271 522 657 18-1 30-1 21-1 24-1 14-1 17-1 17-1 31-1 28-1 233 661 279 504 876 441 802 725 466 26-1 28-1 19-1 29-1 19-1 22-1 19-1 28-1 18-1 TABLE 4 .6 MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION AND F-RATIO OF HIGH AND LOW DISTRICTS' SIZE, SIZE OF SCHOOL AND TEACHER-ADMINISTRATIVE RATIO High D is tric ts Mean DStandard eviation Factors ractors 1. 2. 3. Size of D is t r ic t Size of School (J r. High) TeacherAdminis­ t r a tiv e Ratio N Low D is tric ts Standard Mean Deviation F-Ratio 9 4,917 4848.9 9 6,169 6961.7 0 . 17a 14 740 453.1 17 553 212.5 1 . 12b 9 22-1 5 .9 9 23-1 j 4 .3 0 .1 2 c aF (1 , 1 6 ), non s ig n ific a n t CF (1 , 1 6 ), non s ig n ific a n t bF (1 , 1 6 ), non s ig n ific a n t 133 Hypothesis 4 - "The high achieving d is t r ic t s ' students w ill have b e tte r study habits than the low achieving d is t r ic t s ' students." As measured by questions fourteen through twenty-one developed by Wrenn^ in What's Your Opinion questionnaire* the study habits of the high d is tr ic ts were found to be b e tte r but not s ig n ific a n tly b e tte r. As noted in Chapter I I I 9 although these te s ts (see Appendix A ), purport to assess study habits in r e a l i t y , some o f them cannot be defined as study h a b its, but are ra th e r c h a ra c te ris tic s of the a b ilit y of the in divid ual to study. Table 4 .7 reports the findings regarding the aspect of th is part of the study. The hypothesis is re je c te d , based on the findings reported in th is ta b le . TABLE 4 .7 NUMBER, MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION AND F-RATIO OF THE STUDY HABITS BETWEEN STUDENTS OF HIGH AND LOW ACHIEVING DISTRICTS Factor Study Habits aF High D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation 646 26.2 0.9 1 Low D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation 629 24.9 F-Ratio 1.5 3 .8 a (1 , 1 5 ), non s ig n ific a n t Hypothesis 5 - "The high achieving d is t r ic t s w ill have more s ig n ific a n t educational aspiration s and expectations than w ill the low achieving d is t r ic t s ." ^ Wrenn, op. c i t . i 134 As measured by two questions from a study on self-concept of a b il it y conducted by Brookover, Patterson and Thomas1 (Appendix A, Items 12 and 1 3 ), the high d i s t r ic t s ' pupils were found to have highly s ig n ific a n tly more educational aspiration s and expectations than the low d is t r ic t s ' pupils. Based on the findings c ite d above and found in Table 4 .8 , Hypothesis 5 is accepted* TABLE 4 .8 NUMBER, MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION AND F-RATIO OF HIGH AND LOW DISTRICTS' STUDENT EDUCATIONAL ASPIRATIONS AND EXPECTATIONS High D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation Factor Educational Aspirations & Expectations . aF 446 10.4 0.7 Low D is tr ic ts Standard Mean Deviation N. 429 8.7 0 .9 F-R atio 1 8 .5a (1 , 1 5 ), P < .01 Hypothesis 6 - "The high achieving d is t r ic t s w i ll have the higher economic status of students' fathers and socioeconomic background of students." 2 Taussig's c la s s ific a tio n was used in the questionnaire Socio­ economic Background o f Students to obtain the socioeconomic status of 1 2 Brookover, Patterson and Thomas, op. c i t . Barker, Kounin and W right, op. c i t . 135 the fa m ily , and questions 83 and 85 of the Questionnaire to Measure Teacher Job S a tis fa c tio n were used to measure economic status of the students' fa th e rs . As mdasured by these two instruments, we found th a t there is a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in the d is trib u tio n among the socioeconomic categories and in the economic status o f the students' fa th e rs . In the s ta tis t ic a l a n a ly s is , the professional and semiprofessional c la s s ific a tio n s are grouped together. Table 4 .9 shows the proportion o f fathers or other head of the fam ily f a llin g in to O each category in the high and low achieving d is t r ic t s . The X = 1377.8 is s ig n ific a n t a t the .001 le v e l, which is highly s ig n ific a n t. The Chi-square was used in comparing the d iffe re n c e o f socio­ economic background o f the high and low d is t r ic t s . The F -r a tio was used in comparing the economic status of the students' fath ers between high and low d is t r ic t s . A la rg e s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e was found a t .001 level (see Table 4 .1 0 ). Based on the findings c ite d above, the Hypothesis 6 is accepted. TABLE 4 .9 SOCIOECONOMIC CATEGORIES OF FATHERS OR OTHER HEAD OF THE FAMILY IN HIGH AND LOW DISTRICTS D is tric ts Professional and Semi-Professional S k ille d Sem i-Skilled Labor N. High 192 167 35 394 Low 59 208 158 425 251 375 193 819 Totals \ 136 TABLE 4 .1 0 MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION AND F-RATIO FOR HIGH AND LOW DISTRICTS WHOSE PARENTS' INCOME IS UNDER OR OVER $10,000 High D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation Factors Low D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation F-Ratio Parents' Income Over $10,000 394 0 .8 0 .8 425 1 .6 0 .6 5 1 .5a Parents' Income Under $10,000 394 1.2 0 .8 425 0 .2 0 .6 58.4b *F (1 , 162), P < .01 bF ( 1 , 1 6 2), P < . 01 Hypothesis 7 - "The high d is t r ic t s ' students w ill have a s in g ific a n tly b e tte r students' a ttitu d e toward school and education than w ill the low d is t r ic t s ' students." In order to determine i f there was any s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between high and low achieving d is t r ic t s in regard to students' a t t i ­ tude toward school and education, the questionnaire What I Think was used. The scales used in th is questionnaire were adaptations o f the Purdue Master A ttitu d e Scales. The v a lid it y o f these scales has been established by testers on a v a rie ty of subjects. The s t a t is t ic used to measure the sign ificance o f th is datum was the F -te s t o f s ig n ific a n c e . The mean scores f o r the a ttitu d e s toward school and education are presented in Table 4 .1 1 . The data in d ic a te th a t the high d is tr ic ts do have a s i g n i f i ­ cantly more p o sitiv e a ttitu d e toward school and education than do the pupils o f low d is t r ic t s . I t should be noted th a t the low d is t r ic t s had a mean score on a ttitu d e toward education th a t was nearer the 137 TABLE 4.1 1 MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION AND F-RATIO OF HIGH AND LOW ACHIEVING DISTRICTS' ATTITUDE TOWARD SCHOOL AND EDUCATION Factors High D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation Low D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation F-Ratio A ttitu d e Toward Education 391 11.1 6 .0 406 9.7 7.1 5 .8 a A tti tude Toward School 391 17.1 6 .9 406 15.3 6 .9 1 3 .9b aF (1 , 8 6 5 ), P < .05 bF ( 1 , 8 6 5 ), P < .01 the mean score fo r high d is tr ic ts than was the mean score fo r a ttitu d e toward school between the high and low d is t r ic t s . The even number questions were used to measure pupil a ttitu d e toward education and the odd number questions were used to measure pupil a ttitu d e toward school. (For instrument see Appendix B .) Hypothesis 8 - "The high d is t r ic t s ' students w ill have a b e tte r students' self-concept o f a b il it y than w ill the low d is t r ic t s ' students." As measured by questions one through e ig h t o f What's Your Opin­ ion questionnaire, the high d is t r ic t s ' students were found to be b e tte r in self-concept o f a b il it y but n o n s ig n ific a n tly b e tte r than the low d is t r ic t s ' students. The Hypothesis 8 is re je c te d , based on the findings c ite d above and found in Table 4 .1 2 . 138 The f i r s t e ig h t questions used in What's Your Opinion were developed by Brookover, Patterson and Thomas^ (see Appendix A ). TABLE 4.12 COMPARISON OF SELF-CONCEPT OF ABILITY BETWEEN HIGH AND LOW ACHIEVING DISTRICTS High D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation Factor Self-Concept of A b ility aF 409 30.3 1.9 Low D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation 431 28.8 F-R atio 1 .6 2 . 6a (1 , 1 5 ), non s ig n ific a n t Hypothesis 9 - "The high achieving d is t r ic t s w ill show greater student involvement with learning than w ill the low achieving d is t r ic t s ' students." Three questions in the questionnaire What's Your Opinion were used to measure student involvement with learn in g . 2 are from The Involvement With Learning Test The three questions which was developed a t the U niversity o f Michigan by Ketcham and Morse. As measured by the instrument above, the high d is t r ic t s ' stu ­ dents were not s ig n ific a n tly more involved w ith learning than the low d is t r ic t s ' students. By looking a t Table 4.13 the reader can see th a t there was a s lig h t more involvement w ith learning on the p a rt o f the students from the high d is t r ic t s than the low, but th is involvement was no n sig n ifican t. ^ Brookover, op. c i t . 2 W.A. Ketcham and W.C. Morse, Dimensions o f C hildren 's Social and Psychological Development Related to School Achievement (Washington, D .C .: U.S. Department o f H ealth, Education and W elfare, 1965), Cooperative Research P ro ject No. 1286. 139 Based on the fin d in g s , Hypothesis 9 is re je c te d . TABLE 4.13 COMPARISON OF INVOLVEMENT WITH LEARNING BETWEEN HIGH AND LOW ACHIEVING DISTRICTS Hiqh D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation Factor Involvement With Learning aF 409 8 .2 0 .6 Low D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation 431 8 .0 F-Ratio 0 .7 0 .2 a (1 , 1 5 ), non s ig n ific a n t Hypothesis 10 - "The high achieving d is t r ic t s ' teachers w ill have more influence on th e ir pupils than w ill the low achieving d is t r ic t s ' teachers." Scales previously developed by Gage, L e a v itt, and Stone1 were employed to measure the degree to which the teacher was meeting the a ffe c tiv e and cogn itive needs o f the pu pils. The a ffe c tiv e scale consists of fiv e questions designed to fin d out to what extent the pupils perceived the teacher as lik in g them and as being considerate of them. The cogn itive scale consists of fiv e questions designed to fin d out to what extent the pupils perceived th e ir teacher as helping them le a rn . The above scales were used in the questionnaire My Opinions to measure the high and low d is t r ic t s ' teacher influence on th e ir pupils 1 Gage, L e a v itt and Stone, op. c i t . 140 in the sample. The odd questions deal w ith the teacher lik in g the child and being considerate o f him and the even questions with the teacher helping the child learn (see Appendix C). As measured by the above instrum ent, the high d is t r ic t s ' teachers were found to have more influence on t h e ir pupils than the low d is t r ic t s ' teachers. The degree o f d iffe re n c e was s ig n ific a n t a t .01 level (see Table 4 .1 4 ). Based on the findings c ite d above and found in Table 4 .1 4 , Hypothesis 10 was accepted. TABLE 4.14 COMPARISON OF HIGH AND LOW DISTRICTS WITH TEACHER INFLUENCE ON PUPILS High D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation Factors Low D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation F-Ratio Pupil Perceived Teacher as Liking Him and Being Consider­ ate o f Him 404 10.3 5.7 436 12.1 7.0 1 7 .5a Pupil Perceived Teacher as Helping Him Learn 404 . 9.7 4 .9 436 10.4 5.8 1 4 .9b aF (1 , 8 6 7 ), P < .01 bF (1 , 6 9 0 ), P < .01 Hypothesis 11 - "Students o f the high achieving d is t r ic t s w ill have b e tte r fe e lin g s about themselves and school than w ill students o f the low achieving d is t r ic t s ." As measured by the students' responses to f if t e e n questions adopted from the How I Feel About M.vself, the students o f the high 141 achieving d is tr ic ts were found to have a s ig n ific a n tly b e tte r fe e lin g about themselves and school than the pupils o f the low achieving d is t r ic t s . The degree of d iffe re n c e was s ig n ific a n t a t the .01 level (see Table 4 .1 5 ). The How I Feel About Myself was developed a t the Horace MannLincoln In s titu te o f School Experimentation, Teachers C ollege, Columbia U n iv e rs ity . The same name was given to the author's questionnaire, How I Feel About M yself, which was the instrument used to measure Hypothesis 11 . Based on the findings reported in Table 4 .1 5 , Hypothesis 11 is accepted. TABLE 4.15 COMPARISON OF HIGH AND LOW DISTRICTS WITH STUDENTS' FEELINGS ABOUT THEMSELVES AND SCHOOL High D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation Factor Students' Feelings About Themselves and School aF 404 41.5 5.5 Low D is tric ts Standard Mean D eviation N. 436 40.2 6 .4 F-Ratio 1 1 .2a (1 , 8 9 5 ), P < .01 Hypothesis 12 - "High achieving d is tr ic ts w ill have teachers w ith more experience than w ill the low achieving d is t r ic t s ." Table 4.16 presents the data by per cent a v a ila b le , concerning the d iffe re n c e between the high and low d is t r ic t s . The high d is t r ic t s ranged from a low o f 7 2.6 per cent to a high o f 99.7 per cent fo r 142 teachers with three years' or more experience. With f iv e or more years' teaching experience, the high d is tr ic ts ranged from a low o f 30.9 per cent to a high of 92.6 per cent. The low d is t r ic t s ' high fo r three years' teaching experience was 89.8 per cent and the low was 56.4 per cent. While the high fo r f iv e years' teaching experience was 71.5 per cent and a low o f 38.6 per cent. The high achieving d is t r ic t s were found to have more teachers with three years' experience or more than the low d is t r ic t s . of s ig n ific a n c e was a t the .05 le v e l. The degree No s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e was found between high and low d is tr ic ts having teachers w ith f iv e or more years' teaching experience. (See Table 4 .1 7 ) TABLE 4 .1 6 PER CENT OF TEACHERS HAVING THREE YEARS AND FIVE OR MORE YEARS OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE (K-8 ONLY) D is tric ts High Low #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 m #7 #8 #9 . MEAN N. #1 1217 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 3 Years' Teaching Experience High N. Low 77 .4 83.1 91.2 8 4 .4 99.7 77.8 8 6 .6 94.0 72.6 8 5.2 1543 66.6 83.4 56.4 89.8 82.1 84.8 77.0 72.3 65.3 75.2 N. 1217 5 or More Years' Teaching Experi ence High N. Low 62.8 59.4 71.8 61.8 92.6 57.8 86.6 84.0 30.9 67.5 1543 55.5 68.2 38.6 61.6 71.2 70.7 71.5 4 1.7 4 7.2 58.5 143 TABLE 4.17 MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION AND F-RAT10 FOR THREE AND FIVE YEARS' OR MORE OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE (K-8 ONLY) Factors High D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation Low D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation F-Ratio 3 or More Years' Teaching Experience 1217 85.2 8.1 1543 75.2 10.3 4 .5 a 5 or More Years' Teaching Experience 1217 67.5 16.4 1543 58.5 12.5 1 .5 b aF (1 , 1 6 ), P < .05 bF (1 , 1 6 ), non s ig n ific a n t Hypothesis 13 - "High achieving d is tr ic ts w ill have more teacher s tr ik e s , h a lf days, and student s it - in s than w ill the low achieving d is t r ic t s ." As measured by questions s ix , seven and e ig h t o f the author's developed questionnaire, Fact Sheet Survey, there were no s ig n ific a n t d ifferen ces between high and low d is t r ic t s regarding teacher s trik e s , h a lf days fo r pupils and student s it - in s . As reported in Table 4 .1 8 , there were no d is t r ic t s having students on h a lf days and none reported having s it - in s th a t led to loss o f school days or class tim e. Based on the findings c ite d above, Hypothesis 13 is re je c te d . Hypothesis 14 - "The high d is t r ic t s w ill have less teacher turnover and more teachers residin g in the school d i s t r i c t than w ill the low d is t r ic t s ." As measured by the superintendents' responses to questions one and two o f the questionnaire, Fact Sheet Survey, there is s ig n ific a n tly 144 TABLE 4 .1 8 MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION AND F-RATIO FOR TEACHER STRIKES, HALF DAYS, AND STUDENT SIT-INS High D is tric ts Standard Mean Deviation Factors Teacher S trikes 4 .4 0.7 Low D is tric ts Standard Mean Deviation 3.3 H alf Days 0 0 Student S it-in s 0 0 aF F-Ratio 0 .5 0 .3 a (1 , 1 5 ), non s ig n ific a n t less teacher turnover and more teachers who liv e in the school d is tr ic ts o f the high achieving d is t r ic t s than the low achieving d is t r ic t s . The degree o f d iffe re n c e as seen in Table 4 .2 0 is a t the .01 level fo r teacher turnover and a t the .05 level fo r teacher residence in the d i s t r ic t . For addition al in form atio n, see Table 4 .1 9 . A ll questions found in the autho r's Fact Sheet Survey questionn aire were modified from instruments used in s im ila r studies in business and industry and pre-tested in two neighboring d is t r ic t s . This question naire is believed to have apparent v a lid it y when compared to G arrett's^ d is tin c tio n between two sorts of v a lid it y : (1) Content or apparent v a lid it y and (2 ) S ta tis tic a l or experimental v a lid it y . Based on the findings provided in Table 4 .2 0 , Hypothesis 14 is accepted. 'G a r r e tt, op. c i t . i 145 TABLE 4 .1 9 COMPARISON BETWEEN HIGH AND LOW DISTRICTS IN PER CENT OF TEACHER TURNOVER AND TEACHER RESIDENCE IN THE DISTRICT D is tric ts High Low #1 . #2 #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 N. 9 8 11 14 5 7 4 4 4 Teacher Turnover High Low N. 4 .3 12.3 13.3 18.6 3.1 2 1 .0 2 2 .0 9.3 17.0 4 9 5 9 16 9 7 4 5 28.3 17.8 29.6 24.3 19.1 19.3 23.3 21.3 22.3 Teacher Residence High Low 40 70 80 30 90 20 90 42 41 36 20 32 15 48 60 2 44 5 TABLE 4.20 MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION AND F-RATIO FOR PER CENT OF TEACHER TURNOVER AND PER CENT OF TEACHER RESIDENCE IN THE HIGH AND LOW DISTRICTS High D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation Factors Low D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation F-R atio Teacher Turn­ over in the D is tr ic t 1217 13.4 6.4 1543 22.8 3 .8 12 . 3a Teacher Resi­ dence in the D is t r ic t 1217 56.0 25.2 1543 29.0 18.8 5 .8 b aF (1 , 1 6 ), P < .01 bF (1 , 1 6 ), P < .05 Hypothesis 15 - "Pupils in the high achieving d is t r ic t s w ill have a greater vocabulary than the pupils in the low achieving d is t r ic t s ." 146 the vocabulary mean fo r each of the nine high achieving d is tr ic ts and each o f the nine low achieving d is tr ic ts may be seen in Table 4 .2 1 . The information fo r Table 4.21 was supplied by the Michigan Department o f Education. Table 4.22 shows th a t there is a very s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between the high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in th e ir pu p ils' vocab­ u la rie s . The degree of d iffe re n c e was found to be a t the .01 le v e l. Hypothesis 15 is th erefo re accepted. TABLE 4.21 COMPARISON OF PUPILS' VOCABULARIES BETWEEN HIGH AND LOW ACHIEVING DISTRICTS High D is tric ts N. #1 54.1 519 45.7 27 #2 54.5 315 46.8 311 #3 54.6 547 48.1 105 #4 57.3 1427 44.7 234 #5 54.0 174 47.0 1745 #6 ' 52.6 240 44.1 853 #7 52.1 41 45.3 511 #8 55.8 81 46.6 104 #9 54.9 62 46.7 231 D is tric ts • Source: Low D is tric ts N. Local D is t r ic t Report: Explanatory M aterials (Lansing, Michigan: Michigan Department o f Education Assessment Report No. 6 , 1970). 147 TABLE 4 .22 . MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION, AND F-RATIO OF PUPILS' VOCABULARIES BETWEEN HIGH AND LOW ACHIEVING DISTRICTS p High D is tr ic ts Standard N. Mean Deviation + Vocabulary 3406 aF 54.4 1 .5 Low D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation 3821 46.1 F-R atio 1 .2 1 5 9.l a (1 , 1 6 ), P < .01 Hypothesis 16 - "High achieving d is t r ic t s ' teaching s ta ffs w ill have a more p o sitiv e a ttitu d e toward t h e ir students, school and community than w ill the teaching s ta ffs of the low achieving d is t r ic t s ." as measured by teachers' responses to questions 78 through 82 and questions 84 and 85 of the Questionnaire to Measure Teacher Job S a tis fa c tio n , s ta ffs o f high achieving d is t r ic t s were found to have a more p o s itiv e a ttitu d e toward th e ir students, school and community than the s ta ffs o f the low achieving d is t r ic t s . Appendix E fo r complete set of questions.) (See A ll questions in th is part o f the study were developed by the author. Table 4.23 shows the reader the degree o f sig n ifican ce found between the s ta ffs o f high achieving and low achieving d is t r ic t s . s ig n ific a n c e was a t the .01 le v e l. The Based on th is fin d in g , Hypothesis 16 is accepted. Hypothesis 17 - "Teacher job s a tis fa c tio n w ill be higher in the high achieving d is t r ic t s than in the low achieving d is t r ic t s ." 148 TABLE 4.2 3 MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION AND F-RATIO FOR STAFFS' ATTITUDE TOWARD STUDENTS, SCHOOL AND COMMUNITY OF HIGH AND LOW SCHOOL DISTRICTS High D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation Factor S ta ffs ' A ttitu d e Toward Students, School and Community aF 66 10.4 3 .8 Low D is tric ts Standard N. Mean D eviation 68 6 .8 F-Ratio 3.7 3 5 .5a (1 , 162), P < .01 In order to measure the general le v e l o f teacher job s a tis ­ fa c tio n , we used an instrument c a lle d , Questionnaire to Measure Teacher Job S a tis fa c tio n . This questionnaire was developed by Science Research Associates of Chicago (see Appendix E ). A to ta l o f 66 teachers from the high d is tr ic ts and 68 teachers from the low d is tr ic t s completed the questionnaire. As measured by th is in s tru ­ ment, the high achieving d is t r ic t s were found to have teachers w ith b e tte r fe e lin g s toward t h e ir job than did teachers of the low achieving d is t r ic t s . Table 4.24 shows th a t the degree o f s ig n ific a n c e was a t the .01 level which is highly s ig n ific a n t. Based on th is fin d in g , Hypothesis 17 is accepted. Hypothesis 18 - "P rincipals o f the high achieving d is t r ic t s ' job s a tis fa c tio n w ill be b e tte r than p rin c ip a ls o f low achieving d is t r ic t s ." As measured by the P rincipal Job S a tis fa c tio n questionnaire, the p rin cip a ls from the high achieving d is t r ic t s did show a s i g n i f i ­ c a n tly higher degree o f job s a tis fa c tio n over p rin cip a ls from the 149 TABLE 4 .2 4 MEAN, STANDARD. DEVIATION AND F-RATIO FOR TEACHER AND PRINCIPAL JOB SATISFACTION OF HIGH AND LOW DISTRICTS Factors' High D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation Low D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation F-R atio Teacher Job S a tis fa ctio n 66 42.0 8 .8 68 33.3 8.9 3 8 .9a Principal Job S a tis fa ctio n 12 103.3 13.9 15 86.5 22.4 5 .6 b aF (1 , 162), P < .01 S ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e a t J Il. per cent (te ac h er). bF (1 , 2 5 ), P < .05 S ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e a t .05 per cent (p r in c ip a l). low achieving d is t r ic t s . Table 4 .24 shows the degree of d iffe re n c e to be a t the .05 le v e l. The P rincipal Job S a tis fa c tio n questionnaire was adopted by the author from the questionnaire to measure teacher job s a tis fa c tio n . Based on the proven v a lid it y o f the teacher's questionnaire to measure job s a tis fa c tio n , the instrument was assumed to be v a lid . Only minor word changes in the teacher questionnaire scales were made in order to adopt them to th is p a rt o f the study. A to ta l o f twelve p rin cipals from the high d is t r ic t s and f if t e e n p rin cipals from the low d is t r ic t s completed the questionnaire (see Appendix G). Based on the findings c ite d above, Hypothesis 18 is accepted. Hypothesis 19 - "High achieving d is t r ic t s w ill have newer b u ild in g s, a longer school day and school year than w ill the low achieving school d is t r ic t s ." \ 150 Questions 4a, 4b, 4c, and questions 13 and 13a in the author's Fact Sheet Survey questionnaire were used to obtain data fo r te s tin g th is hypothesis. Table 4 .25 shows th a t there were no s ig n ific a n t differences between high and low achieving d is tr ic ts in age o f school b u ild in g s , hours o f pupil in s tru c tio n per day, and days o f in s tru c tio n in school y e ar. Based on these fin d in g s , Hypothesis 19 is re je cte d . I t is ra th e r in te re s tin g to note th a t there is so l i t t l e d iffe re n c e between the high and low d is t r ic t s in both the newness and oldness o f th e ir school bu ild ings. I t is less surprising to see l i t t l e d iffe re n c e between the two groups in length o f school day fo r in stru c ­ tio n and the length o f school y e ar. Teacher negotiations and s ta te requirements undoubtedly determined these two factors fo r the local d is t r ic t s . TABLE 4.25 MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION AND F-RATIO FOR AGE OF SCHOOL BUILDINGS, HOURS OF PUPIL INSTRUCTION PER DAY AND DAYS OF INSTRUCTION IN SCHOOL YEAR BETWEEN HIGH AND LOW DISTRICTS High D is tric ts Standard Mean Deviation Factors Age of School Buildings Low D is tric ts Standard Mean D eviation F-Ratio (New) 7 .4 7.4 5.6 4 .3 0.34 (Old) 4 2.9 12.4 45.5 20.6 0.09 Hours o f Pupil In stru c tio n Per Day 5.6 0.4 5.8 0.3 0.53 Days of In stru c tio n in School Year 181 1.5 180.7 1.0 0.46 151 Hypothesis 20 - "Superintendents of the high achieving d is t r ic t s w ill score higher on th e ir opinions of fa c to rs th a t may a ffe c t pupil achievement than w ill the superintendents o f the low achieving d is t r ic t s ." Superintendents from nine high and nine low achieving d is t r ic t s responded to the fourteen questions on the questio nnaire, A Rating . Schedule. This instrument was developed by the author a fte r reviewing s im ila r instruments used in industry and educational s e ttin g s . The questions were based on studies and educational a r tic le s th a t showed there was general agreement among educators th a t fa c to rs re la te d to public re la tio n s , curriculum , the organizational s tru c tu re of the school d is t r ic t s , and finance a ffected pupil achievement. A fte r a p re te s t t r i a l , the questions were modified before becoming a p a rt o f the fin a l questionnaire. J. The complete set o f questions may be found in Appendix The instrument is believed to have v a lid it y since i t is based on the apparent lo g ic a l relatio n sh ip s between the factors under in v e s ti­ g a tio n , the questions asked, and the subjects who responded to the questions. As measured by the A Rating Schedule, the superintendents of the high achieving d is t r ic t s were found to score s lig h t ly under, but n o n s ig n ific a n tly less than the superintendents of the low achieving d is t r ic t s . See Table 4.27 fo r the s t a t is t ic used to measure the s ig ­ n ific a n c e . Tabulation o f the superintendents' opinions, (Table 4 .2 6 ) shows th a t f iv e or more of the nine superintendents o f the high achiev­ ing d is t r ic ts agreed on a ll questions but question tw elve. The super­ intendents o f the low achieving d is tr ic ts ( f iv e or more out o f nine) agreed on a l l questions but questions e ig h t, nine, te n , th irte e n and fourteen. H a lf or more of the superintendents from both groups 152 TABLE 4 .2 6 RATINGS OF FACTORS THAT MAY AFFECT PUPIL ACHIEVEMENT BY EIGHTEEN SUPERINTENDENTS OF HIGH AND LOW ACHIEVING SCHOOL DISTRICTS Factors High D is tr ic ts A 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. F U C Low D is tric ts A F Superintendent's complete knowledge of the school's curriculum 1 8 5 4 Superintendent's re la tio n s h ip with teachers 1 8 4 5 Superintendent's re la tio n s h ip with prin cipals 8 Superintendent's re la tio n s h ip with students 1 9 1 5 3 7 Superintendent's re la tio n s h ip with community 8 Superintendent's previous school a d m inistrative experience 3 5 1 2 7 Superintendent taking a strong stand on issues 3 5 1 3 6 Superintendent using his influence behind the scenes to insure the selection o f competent board members 1 1 6 1 1 1 2 3 3 2 7 3 3 Involvement o f s t a f f , p u p ils , and c itiz e n s in a ll possible decision making 2 6 1 2 4 The organizational s tru c tu re o f the d i s t r i c t 3 5 1 72 Length of service provided by superintendent to the d i s t r ic t 43 Superi ntendent' s a v a i1a b i1i ty to students 45 Key: A= Absolutely Essential F= F a ir ly Important 2 9 Involvement o f s t a f f , p u p il, and parents in a l l possible decisions regarding curriculum Superintendent's a b il it y to keep student rules and regulations to 9 minimum : U C 7 1 1 2 1 2 3 2 6 1 2 4 2 3 3 1 2 U= Unimportant C= Could Have a Negative E ffe c t 1 153 TABLE 4 .2 7 MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION AND F-RATIO OF HIGH AND LOW DISTRICTS SUPERINTENDENTS' OPINIONS OF FACTORS THAT MAY AFFECT PUPIL ACHIEVEMENT Factors (see Table 4 .2 6 ) High D is tric ts Standard Mean Deviation 2 .2 2.5 Low D is tric ts Standard Mean Deviation 2 .2 F-Ratio 2.1 0 .0 agreed th a t a ll questions but questions e ig h t, eleven, and fourteen were f a i r l y im portant. Seventeen out o f the eighteen superintendents agreed th a t the superintendent's re la tio n s h ip with p rin c ip a ls and community was absolutely essential to pupil achievement. Based on these fin d in g s , Hypothesis 20 is re je c te d . Hypothesis 21 - "The high achieving d is t r ic t s w ill have more favorable organizational clim ates than w ill the low achieving d is t r ic t s ." Table 4 .29 presents the d i s t r i c t p ro file s o f the questionnaire to assess the eighteen d is t r ic t s ' o rganizational clim ate according to each clim ate category. Chapter I I I . The eight clim ate categories were described in Table 4 .30 id e n tifie s the clim ate types with the high and low achieving d is t r ic t s . The Science Research Associates of Chicago instrum ent, to measure the general level o f teacher s a tis fa c tio n was deemed appropriate fo r measuring teach er's perceptions o f the d i s t r ic t 's organizational clim ate. S ix ty -th re e of the instrum ent's 77 questions were found to be very much lik e the 64 questions used in the O rganizational Climate D escriptive Q uestionnaire, an instrument developed by Halpin and C r o f t .* Because of the s im ila r ity o f the questions, the v a lid it y o f the scales is not believed to be a ffe c te d . Questions from the Questionnaire to Measure Teacher Job S a tis ­ fa c tio n were divided in to the follow ing eigh t dimensions: ment— 22, 32, 40, and 42. 6 8 , 69, and 76. Disengage­ Hindrance— 18, 21, 27, 31, 43, 52, 53, 55, E s p rit— 1, 2 , 3 , 5, 6 , 20, 23, 25, 26, 29, 30, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 54, 56, 57, 58, 6 6 , 71, 72, 74, 75, and 77. 7 , and 33. and 44. Aloofness— 16, 41, 45, 60 and 65. Thrust— 13, 24, 28, 35, and 39. Intim acy— Production— 9, 14, 34, Consideration— 8 , 15, 19, 61, and 62. The s t a t is t ic used to measure the s ig n ific a n c e of th is data was the F -te s t o f s ig n ific a n c e . The mean scores fo r school organizational clim ate between the high and low d is t r ic t s are presented in Table 4 .2 8 . TABLE 4.28 MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION AND F-RATIO OF HIGH AND LOW ACHIEVING DISTRICTS' SCHOOL ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE High D is tric ts Standard N. Mean D eviation r ac or Organizational Climate aF 88 8204 14.3 (1 , 1 6 2), P < .01 1 Hal pin and C ro ft, op. c i t . Low D is tric ts Standard N. Mean Deviation 79 4264 20.9 F-Ratio 3 9 .3a 155 TABLE 4 .2 9 HIGH AND LOW DISTRICT PROFILES OR SUBTEST PERCENTAGES9 ON QUESTIONNAIRE TO ASSESS THE DISTRICTS' ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE, SPRING, 1971 Subtestsb D is tr ic t Number N. 1 Dis. 2 Hin. 3 Esp. 4 In t . 5 A le. 6 Prod. 7 Thr. 8 Con. High D is tric ts 1 16 79 76 86 89 69 72 68 76 2 19 95 95 98 100 90 100 91 98 3 8 58 55 77 93 50 73 57 63 4 8 98 84 69 100 96 99 75 98 5 6 86 71 84 100 65 77 85 80 ’ 6 8 95 88 99 100 93 90 92 90 7 8 87 61 79 100 71 68 66 85 8 5 100 80 96 100 76 85 86 84 .9 10 100 88 95 100 69 93 96 100 Low D is tric ts 1 5 77 58 45 45 55 64 68 74 2 10 100 75 96 100 97 95 96 98 3 5. 100 44 74 92 67 66 100 100 4 9 71 66 77 75 47 64 88 83 5 22 64 69 72 91 62 100 71 76 6 8 84 69 93 94 77 78 76 90 7 8 72 67 75 100 50 63 66 68 8 5 47 67 78 80 40 77 38 50 9 7 69 50 79 78 27 80 64 50 High percentages in d ic a te high degree o f the q u a lity tested fo r subtest: one, th re e , fo u r, seven and e ig h t. Low percentages in d ic a te high degree o f the q u a lity tested fo r subtest: two, fiv e and s ix . disengagement, Hindrance, E s p rit, Intim acy, Aloofness, Production, Emphasis, Th ru st, Consideration. 156 TABLE 4 .3 0 IDENTIFICATION OF THE CLIMATE TYPES WITHIN THE HIGH AND LOW DISTRICT SETTINGS Climate Number and Type Hiqh D is tric ts Low D is tric ts 1. Open 4%a 2 2. Autbnomous l%a 1 3. Controlled 1 1 4. Fam iliar 1 3 5. P a te rn a lis tic 0 2 6. Closed 1 0 9 9 Total a Having c h a ra c te ris tic s o f both. A ll data fo r th is analysis was gathered through responses to questions in the questionnaire. The responses o f the teachers were re a d ily adaptable to coding, key punching, and v e r if ic a tio n . S ix ty - three questions from the Questionnaire to Measure Teacher Job S a tis ­ fa c tio n were used to assess the organizational clim ate o f the d is tr ic ts as discussed in Chapter I I I . The questionnaire was scored by subtests which presented a raw score fo r each o f the e ig h t dimensions o f the school organizational c lim ate. The scores were obtained by acquiring the sum o f the items scored, subtest by subtest, and d ivid in g each of the eigh t sums by the number of items in the corresponding subtest. The mean and standard deviation were computed u t i liz i n g sums o f the 167 respondents from the eighteen d is t r ic t s in the sample (see Table 4 .2 8 ). 157 The subtest scores as presented in Table 4.29 are standard scores r e la tiv e to the 1971 mean of 167 respondents o f the sample. The clim ate assessment is made in re la tio n s h ip to the mean perceptions of school clim ate as indicated by the responses o f the teachers from each o f the eighteen school d is t r ic t s in Michigan. The d is t r ic t p ro file s or subtest scores found in Table 4.29 are the standard scores fo r each o f the subtests o f nine high and nine low d is t r ic t s . The f i r s t four subtests represent teacher c h a ra c te ris tic s and subtests fiv e through eigh t re fe r to the dimensions o f the clim ate which describe the p rin c ip a l's behavior as perceived by the fa c u lty . See pages 116 and 117 fo r description o f the subtests. Of the fo u r dimensions which c h a racterize teacher behavior, two, Disengagement and Hindrance carry with them a negative connotation while E s p rit which re fe rs to teacher morale is considered a very desirable q u a lity . Hal pin and C ro ft indicated th a t the E s p rit is the one fa c to r which is most closely associated with clim ate type. They stated th a t: "The ranking o f the clim ates r e la tiv e to openness roughly p a ra lle ls the scores which the schools receive on E s p rit, the best single in d ic a ­ to r of 'M orale 1. 11 They noted the loading o f E s p rit correspondingly decreased as they move from the more "open" to the more "closed" c l i ­ mates. E sp rit was designated as the "key" subtest fo r describing school clim ates. Intimacy may w ell be considered a "middle o f the road" dimension and is considered desirable when perceptions are n eith er very high or low. "Teachers enjoy th e ir working re la tio n s h ip , but fe e l no need fo r an extremely high degree o f association." 158 In an open clim ate the f i r s t two subtests, Aloofness and Production Emphasis of the p rin c ip a l's behavior generally carry with them negative value, w hile Thrust and Consideration are p o s itiv e in ch aracterizin g the prin cip al as a le a d e r. Hal pin and C ro ft re fe rre d to E s p rit and Thrust as the es p e cia lly s ig n ific a n t subtests. They re fe rre d to Thrust as a c r it ic a l a ttr ib u te of a le a d e r's behavior. Hal pin and C roft describe the follow ing technique fo r iden­ tif y in g a given school p r o file : To determine which of the six clim ate p ro file s is most s im ila r to a given school's p r o f ile , simply compare the school p r o file with each o f the six prototype p r o file s , in tu rn , and in each instance derive a p r o file s im ila r ity score. To do t h is , compute the absolute d iffe re n c e between the scores o f each subtest and sum these differences fo r each o f the s ix prototypic p r o file s . A fte r a p r o file s im ila r ity score has been computed fo r each prototypic p r o f ile , s im p ly.select the prototype with the sm allest sum. This prototype w ill in d ic a te which clim ate best characterizes the school. Based on the d i s t r ic t clim ate s im ila r ity scores, the clim ates o f the eighteen d is t r ic t samples o f th is study were id e n tifie d . In the high d i s t r ic t s , numbers 2, 4 , 6 , and 7 were id e n tifie d as Open clim ates, D is t r ic t 1 was id e n tifie d as being an Autonomous c lim a te , D is t r ic t 3 was id e n tifie d as being a Controlled c lim a te , D is t r ic t 5 was id e n tifie d as being a F a m iliar c lim a te , D is t r ic t 9 was found to have an organization th a t possessed c h a ra c te ris tic s o f both Open and Antonomous clim ates, D is t r ic t 8 was id e n tifie d as a Closed c lim a te . In the low d is t r ic t s , numbers 2 and 5 were id e n tifie d as having Open clim ates, D is tric ts 7 , 8 , and 9 exhibited a F am iliar c lim a te , D is tric ts 159 3 and 4 Paternal clim ates, D is t r ic t 1 was id e n tifie d as having a C ontrolled c lim a te , and D is t r ic t 6 an Antonomous clim ate. As shown in Table 4.29 the high d is t r ic t s ' teachers reported less: Hindrance (the degree to which the teachers fe e l the principal in te rfe re s with th e ir w ork), Aloofness (re fe rs to behavior by the principal which is characterized as formal and im personal), and Produc­ tio n Emphasis (re fe rs to behavior by the p rin cip a l which is charac­ te rize d by close supervision o f the s t a f f ) , than did the teachers of the low achieving d is t r ic t s . The same ta b le also shows th a t the high d is t r ic t s ' teachers have less Disengagement (the tendency of teachers to do things without commitment to the task or goal of the organization) than the teachers of the low achieving d is t r ic t s . At the same tim e, the high achieving teachers are experiencing b e tte r morale and social re la tio n s w ith each other (E s p rit and In tim acy). Their building p rin cip al does a b e tte r job o f m otivating the teachers by the example which he personally s e ts , though he is ta s k -o rie n te d , he is viewed favorably by the teachers and they fe e l he tre a ts them humanly (Thrust and Consideration). Summary In th is chapter the 21 questions stated in Chapter I were re-examined and stated in the form of null hypotheses fo r te s tin g . A to ta l of 21 research hypotheses were presented and analyzed by the author in lig h t o f the evidence c o lle c te d . An analysis o f variance technique was used to in ve s tig ate the 21 hypotheses. The s t a t i s t ic used to measure the sign ificance o f the data fo r 20 o f the 21 hypotheses was the F -te s t of \ s ig n ific a n c e . The Chi-square te s t was used to measure the sign ificance o f the findings fo r the remaining hypothesis. Hypotheses 1, 3 , 4 , 8 , 9 , 13, 19, and 20 were rejected based on the data gathered. Hypotheses 5, 6 , 7 , 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 21 were accepted based on the re su lts o f the fin d in g s . Two of three factors tested in Hypothesis 2 were accepted, one was re je c te d . While one fa c to r was accepted in Hypothesis 12 and the other fa c to r re je c te d . Thus a to ta l o f eigh t hypotheses were re je c te d , eleven were accepted and two were p a rtly accepted. Chapter V w ill be devoted to a concise summary o f the research, conclusions, im p lic a tio n s , suggestions o f questions fo r fu rth e r study, and re fle c tio n s . CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS This f in a l chapter w ill be devoted to a summary o f the study, followed by a discussion o f the conclusions generated from the analysis o f the data. The chapter w ill be concluded with im plications fo r education and recommendations fo r fu rth e r research. Summary Purposes of the Study 1. The basic purpose of th is study was to determine the degree to which selected factors are associated w ith high and low achieving school d is t r ic t s in Michigan. The selected facto rs are: Total general fund expenditure per pupil Total in s tru c tio n expenditure per pupil Operating expenditure per pupil In s tru c tio n s a la rie s per pupil M ills levied fo r debt and operation S tate equalized valuation per pupil Local tax support or e ffo rts Size of d i s t r ic t and s ize o f school Teacher-adm inistrative ra tio Pupil study habits Educational aspirations and educational expectations Economic status o f students' fath ers and socioeconomic background o f students 161 162 i Students' a ttitu d e toward school and education Students' self-concept o f a b il it y Pupil involvement with learning Teacher influence on pupils P u p il's feelin g s about him self and school Teachers' experience Teacher s trik es H alf days fo r students Student s it - in s Teacher turnover Teacher residence in the d i s t r ic t Students' vocabulary S ta ff's a ttitu d e toward students, school and community Teacher job s a tis fa c tio n P rincipal job s a tis fa c tio n Age of school buildings Hours of pupil in s tru c tio n per day and days of in s tru c tio n in the school year Superintendent's opinion o f facto rs th a t may a ffe c t pupil achievement School organizational clim ate. 2. Closely a llie d w ith th is purpose was the desire to ascertain i f factors responsible fo r the character of education in various school d is tr ic ts o f Michigan could be singled out as constant factors which could be considered of primary importance in any e f f o r t to equalize educational opportunities fo r p u p ils, and to assure high pupil achieve­ ment. 3. The study a d d itio n a lly sought to determine i f there existed s ig n ific a n t d ifferences between factors associated w ith high and low educational achievement among students o f a ll le v e ls o f a b i l i t y , not ju s t students re s tric te d to any one socioeconomic group w ith in the d is tr ic t. 163 In order to explore these four re la te d y e t d is t in c t ly d iffe r e n t purposes, twenty-one hypotheses were developed. These w ill be discussed la te r in th is chapter under Conclusions. Lim itations of the Study 1. The eighteen selected schools used in th is study were selected on achievement re su lts th a t were one or more standard deviation above or below the mean based on the i n i t i a l 1969-70 Michigan Educational Assessment Program. The assessment program was given to a ll children in grades four and seven in the public schools, except those enrolled in remedial classes in reading, mathematics, and English. 2. The Michigan Assessment Educational Program in it s i n i t i a l year does not supply school d is tr ic ts with a comprehensive assessment o f th e ir students, but provides group inform ation about students' performance in reading, mathematics, and English. 3. Though the study seeks to discern a re la tio n s h ip between school d is tr ic ts who score high and those d is tr ic ts who score low on student achievement and to discover the common facto rs among both high and low d is t r ic t s , i t does not purport to be an in ten sive socio­ lo g ical study of the d i s t r ic t . 4. The findings o f th is in v e s tig a tio n are based on seventh grade pupils only. 5. The in v e s tig a tio n is meant only to be an exploratory study in the f ie ld of factors th a t may a ffe c t pupil achievement w ith in school d is tr ic ts in Michigan. 6. The eighteen d is t r ic t s under study adhered to a philosophy "which promotes the p rin cip le s of s p i r i t of American Democracy" which 164 the author in te rp re ts to mean having f a it h in e d u c a b ility o f a ll young people, and a desire to o ffe r educational opportunities to every in divid ual youngster to develop to his f u lle s t exten t. 7. The findings o f a re la tio n s h ip between pupil achievement and educational factors are viewed as associational and not causal. 8. The selected school adm inistrators w ill cooperate in granting interviews and furnishing data concerning th e ir s p e c ific d is t r ic t s . Reivew o f L ite ra tu re A review o f lit e r a t u r e fo r th is study consisted o f an analysis o f some o f the facto rs th a t are re la te d to pupil achievement. I t is agreed by most in vestig ato rs th a t low pupil achievement e x is ts , but they are not y e t sure what the facto rs or combination o f facto rs are th at produce i t . Major findings o f previous achievement studies in education which were p a rtic u la r ly s ig n ific a n t were as follow s: 1. I t is now recognized th a t low achievement must be id e n t i­ fie d in the c h ild 's beginning years o f formal education. This is necessary so th a t the experimentation may proceed in order to fin d approaches to overcome i t . 2. Low achievement is o f great complexity. There would probably be agreement th a t i t cannot be a ttrib u te d e n tir e ly to separate or is o la te d fa c to rs . 3. Since some students o f unfavorable circumstances achieve and some do not comes tpe im plication th a t i t is not necessarily the negative s itu a tio n but the lack of p o sitiv e approach or purpose th a t is associated with low achievement. 4. Research a tte s ts to the importance o f socioeconomic fa c to rs , but i t also suggests th a t i t should not be given importance out o f proportion to i t s re la tio n s h ip to low achievement. 165 5. Research suggests and recommends the need fo r new approaches, programs and counselihg fo r the low achieving c h ild . 6. The 1ite r a tu r e on fin a n c ia l fa c to rs .re la te d to pupil achievement emphasizes three fa c to rs : ( 1 ) those id e n ti­ fie d as school system v a ria b le s , ( 2 ) those id e n tifie d as community v a ria b le s , and (3) those th a t are products or re su lts o f in te rre la tio n s h ip s between various community and. school system v a ria b le s . 7. The most r e lia b le fin a n c ia l variables used in achievement s tu d ies, according to the lit e r a t u r e reviewed, are perpupil expenditures, local tax e f f o r t s , enrichment expenditures, teachers with fiv e years or more o f prepara­ tio n , teacher and adm inistrator s a la rie s , and wealthy school d is t r ic t s . 8. Other facto rs found to be important in pupil achievement were p u p il-teach er r a tio s , s t a f f s iz e , school s iz e , educational clim ate o f the school, community in te r e s t in the schools, number of business and professional workers in the d i s t r i c t , a d u lt educational le v e l, and to ta l expenditure on education. 9. The organizational s ize o f a school d i s t r i c t tends to a ffe c t it s in te rn a l s tru c tu re . Larger organizations are more lik e ly to have more levels o f hierarchy, la rg e r adminis­ t r a t iv e components, less close interpersonal re la tio n s among members, more c e n tra liz a tio n s o f formal a u th o rity , and more d i f f i c u lt i e s with communication. 10. Most studies report th a t the la rg e r the o rg a n izatio n , the lower the level of employer s a tis fa c tio n and the less lik e ly i t is th a t the individual w ill be s a tis fie d with his ro le in the organization. 11. The lit e r a t u r e does emphasize the importance of fa c e -to -fa c e methods of communication and interpersonal re la tio n sh ip s between the adm inistration and teachers. One can add th a t th is is more lik e ly to occur in small schools than la rg e r ones. 12. Employee f a m ilia r it y with others tends to decrease in la rg e r systems, which in turn a ffe c ts th e ir a ttitu d e s and conse­ quently th e ir behavior at work. 13. The lit e r a t u r e reviewed, strongly im plicates the sig n ifican ce o f interpersonal re la tio n s h ip s , the ro le of the human element in the determination o f the le v e l of the clim ate o f a school on the continuum from open to closed. 166 14. Many factors associated w ith the school have been given which various in vestig ato rs fe e l are re la ted to under­ achievement. Some of these facto rs appear to be due to the student's own fe e lin g s . Others appear to be placed upon the school and the teacher. 15. The lit e r a t u r e on teacher influence indicates a real r e la ­ tio nship between the way a teacher behaves in the classroom and the achievement and a ttitu d e s o f the students. Students tend to achieve more and have more p o s itiv e a ttitu d e s in classes taught by teachers, who, to a greater e x te n t, employ techniques th a t generate an atmosphere in which students fe e l fre e to express th e ir own ideas. 16. The behavior o f each student in a given learning s itu a tio n is a product o f the influences of his peers, physical environment, and his teacher in te ra c tin g w ith the a ttitu d e s , t r a i t s , goals, and s k ills th a t comprise his p e rs o n a lity. 17. An in flu e n tia l force on student behavior in the classroom is the teacher. The teachers strongly influence the educational demands and expectations o f students. 18. The lit e r a t u r e dealing w ith the superintendent tends to support th a t he does play a key in d ire c t ro le in pupil achievement. 19. A review of the lit e r a t u r e fo r th is study indicated th a t environmental facto rs are re la te d to p u p ils' in te lle c tu a l and personality behaviors. 20. The lit e r a t u r e indicates th a t in te lle c tu a l performances are re la te d to social class v a ria b le s , the c h ild -re a rin g practices are re la te d to social class le v e ls , th a t person­ a l i t y variab les are re la ted to c h ild -re a rin g practices and th a t in te lle c tu a l and achievement behaviors are re la te d to fam ily v a riab le s . 21. Social class remains no more than a moderate c o rre la te or p re d ic to r o f an in te lle c tu a l and educational success. 22. Regardless o f the variance in the re su lts of s tu d ies, the findings do in d ic a te the socioeconomic status merits consid­ eratio n as a fa c to r in pupil achievement. 23. Pupil achievement is not merely the product o f a b il it y alone, but is influenced by a number of n o n in te lle c tu a l fa c to rs . 24. A remarkable range o f d ifferences exists among students. These differences p e rs is t and are in evidence in every measurable t r a i t . The lit e r a t u r e suggests th a t these i 167 differences are la rg e ly unchangeable and can be altered only s lig h tly by innovations such as in s tru c tio n a l and ad m inistrative school organizations. 25. The school and it s clim ate may hold some untapped resources . th a t influence the c h ild 's perception o f him self and fu tu re development. 26. Educational expectations and aspiration s of students, both vo cationally and e d u c a tio n a lly , a f t e r high school appear to be related to school achievement. The low achiever aims fo r less education and is not as in clined to include college in his plans. The achiever is more c e rta in of his purposes and decides sooner, w hile the underachiever is in clin ed to be uncertain and vague about his educational and vocational in te n tio n s . 27. I t appears th a t high achievers excel low achievers in self-esteem , the d esire to succeed, perseverance, emotional s t a b ili t y , com petitiveness, peer acceptance, seriousness, and purposefulness o f in te n t, o v e rall involvement, and study habits. 28. In divid uals who perceive themselves as having considerable control over what b e fa lls them are more lik e ly to engage in a c t iv it ie s which w ill enable them to successfully cope with problems which confront them. This has a p o sitiv e influence on t h e ir achievement. Design o f the Study In order to determine and measure the d iffe re n c e between 31 factors of th is study, nine instruments were used along w ith data from the Michigan Department of Education. Data from the Michigan Department o f Education was selected to measure per pupil to ta l general fund expenditure, per pupil to ta l in s tru c tio n expenditure, per pupil current operating expenditure, in s tru c tio n s a la rie s per p u p il, m ills levied fo r debt and o p eration , and s ta te equalized valuation per p u p il. The What's Your Opinion questionnaire was selected to measure pupil self-concept of a b i l i t y , study h a b its , educational aspirations and expectations, and student involvement with le a rn in g . The student 168 questionnaire, What I T h ink, was used to measure a ttitu d e toward school and education. My Opinions questionnaire was selected to measure teacher influence on pupils by measuring the e ffe c tiv e and cognitive needs of pupils. In order to measure students' fe elin g s about school and themselves, the questionnaire How I Feel About Myself was used. The Questionnaire to Measure Teacher Job S a tis fa c tio n was selected to measure the general level of teacher s a tis fa c tio n , teacher a ttitu d e toward students, school and community, and d i s t r ic t organiza­ tio n a l clim ate. The P rincipal Job S a tis fa c tio n instrument was selected to measure the general level of p rin cip a l job s a tis fa c tio n . The assess­ ment o f teacher turnover, local tax e f f o r t s , teacher experience, teacherad m inistrative r a t i o , teacher-pupil r a t i o , hours of pupil in s tru c tio n , days o f pupil in s tru c tio n , student s i t - i n s , teacher s tr ik e s , age of school bu ild ings, size of d i s t r ic t and school, and teacher residence was accomplished through the use o f the Fact Sheet Survey, developed s p e c ific a lly fo r th is study. To measure the superintendents' opinions o f factors th a t may a ffe c t pupil achievement, the instrument A Rating Schedule was developed. In order to learn what the socioeconomic background o f the students in the sample were, The Socioeconomic Background o f Students questionnaire was used. Eighteen school d is t r ic t s o f Michigan which were located in both the lower and upper peninsula made up the sample fo r th is study. Nine high achieving d is t r ic t s were selected on the basis th a t th e ir seventh grade pupils had scored one or more standard deviatio n above the mean on the 1970 Michigan assessment program. Nine low achieving 5 169 d is tr ic ts were selected by the same instrument whose pupils had scored one or more standard deviation below the mean. The mean was (5 0 .7 9) and the standard deviation was (2 .5 5 ). Twenty-seven ju n io r high schools from the eighteen d is tr ic ts were represented in the study. A to ta l o f 1275 seventh grade p u p ils, 142 teachers, 27 ju n io r high p rin cip a ls and 18 superintendents made up the to ta l sample fo r th is study. Of the eighteen d i s t r ic t s , seven were ty p ic a lly of a rural nature, six were in urban areas, the remaining d is tr ic ts were in in d u s tr ia l-r e s id e n tia l or re s id e n tia l areas. Though the ra c ia l composition o f the d is t r ic t s was not a s ig n ific a n t v a riab le fo r th is study, the w r ite r was cognizant of the im plications of comparing schools with s ig n ific a n tly d iffe r e n t ra c ia l compositions, and kept th a t in mind w hile selecting the schools to be used in the study. A ll answers, with the exception o f three questionnaires (which had to be hand scored), were placed on a standard answer sheet, key punched on computer data cards,and scored by computer a t the Data Processing Center o f the Oakland Schools, Pontiac, Michigan. Findings and Conclusions Hypothesis 1 - The fo r and low high achieving d is tr ic ts per pupil expenditure in s tru c tio n , operating, general fund expenditures in s tru c tio n s a la rie s are more than those of the achieving d is t r ic t s . Findings The analysis o f variance technique was used to in v e s tig a te th is hypothesis. The study was concerned w ith the examination o f s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e s , i f any, between group means. An "F" 170 s t a tis t ic was generated o f 1 .7 , 2 .7 , 2 .2 , and 1 .8 , no nsign ificant fo r each fa c to r in the hypothesis. Conclusions Based on the evidence c ite d above, Hypothesis 1 is re je cte d . In stru c tio n expenditure, current operating expenses, general fund expenditures and in s tru c tio n s a la rie s per pupil do not seem to e x ert a s ig n ific a n t influence on pupil achievement. In the r e je c tio n , th e re fo re , o f th is hypothesis i t can be concluded th a t the findings do not support the lite r a tu r e reviewed in Chapter I I . According to the lit e r a t u r e , the most r e lia b le fin a n c ia l factors used in q u a lity education studies were such factors as per pupil expenditures and teachers' s a la rie s . A lo g ical explanation fo r th is conclusion may be th a t with teachers in Michigan now having the r ig h t to negotiate th e ir s a la rie s and working conditions, such fin a n c ia l factors as per pupil expendi­ tures and teachers' s a la rie s may have lo s t what r e l i a b i l i t y they once had fo r measuring pupil achievement. One can conclude from the findings th a t per pupil expenditure is not necessarily a measure or in d ic a to r o f community a ttitu d e s , p ra c tic es , and in te re s t in th e ir school system. Hypothesis 2 - The high d is t r ic t s w ill levy more m ills fo r debt and operation, have greater s ta te equalized valuation per p u p il, and have b e tte r support in mi 11 age elections fo r operation and bonding programs than w ill the low d is t r ic t s . Findings The analysis of variance was used to determine i f a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e existed between the high and low d i s t r ic t means fo r each fa c to r tested . An "F" s t a t is t ic of 4 .7 , s ig n ific a n t a t the .05 level 171 was found fo r m ills levied fo r debt and operation. An "F" s t a t is t ic o f 4 .9 , s ig n ific a n t a t the .05 le v e l was found fo r community support fo r operation and bonding e le c tio n programs. An "F" s t a t is t ic of 0 .3 , nonsignificant was found f o r s ta te equalized valuation per p u p il. Conclusions Based on the findings c ite d above, Hypothesis 2 is p a rtly accepted and p a rtly re je c te d , high d is tr ic ts do vote more mi 11 age fo r debt and operation while a t the same time receiving g reater community support in th e ir e f f o r t . The data suggests th a t w illingness and unwillingness of the community to pay fo r education were more in flu e n tia l than the amount o f need in determining the ra te of tax levied fo r education. High and low d is t r ic t s were found to have l i t t l e d iffe re n c e in the amount o f s ta te equalized valuatio n behind each c h ild . This is inconsistent with other studies th a t show wealthy school d is tr ic ts as a r e lia b le fa c to r in measuring q u a lity education. In gen eral, the conclusions are not substantiated by the lit e r a t u r e reviewed fo r th is study. Hypothesis 3 - The high d is tr ic ts w i ll be la rg e r in enrollment s iz e , have la rg e r school buildings and a b e tte r teacherad m inistrative r a tio than w ill the low d is t r ic t s . Findings The analysis of variance technique was used to in v e s tig a te th is hypothesis, as once again the study was concerned w ith the examination o f s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e s , i f any, between group means. An "F" 172 s t a t i s t ic was generated of 0 .1 7 , fo r size of d i s t r i c t , 1 .1 2 , fo r size o f school and 0 . 12 , fo r teach er-ad m in istrative r a t io , nonsignificant, in each case. Conclusions Based on the above reported evidence, Hypothesis 3 is re je c te d . E vid en tly, the number of students found in a school d i s t r ic t or enrolled in a school has no influence on th e ir achievement. Apparently low achieving school d is tr ic ts have and support a teach er-ad m in istrative r a tio th a t is not s ig n ific a n tly d iffe r e n t from the high achieving school d is t r ic t s . Hypothesis 4 - The high achieving d is t r ic t s ' students w ill have b e tte r study habits than the low achieving d is t r ic t s . F’i ndi ngs The s t a t is t ic used to measure the sign ificance o f th is data was the F -te s t o f s ig n ific a n c e . The degree o f d iffe re n c e between th is one fa c to r and the high and low d is tr ic ts w ith in th is study was revealed to be d iffe r e n t but q u ite m ild. An "F" s t a t is t ic o f 3 .8 , between means was revealed, which is nonsignifcant. Conclusions 1‘ i ■!!■■■ Based on the evidence c ite d above, Hypothesis 4 is re je c te d . One can conclude th a t low achieving students have no more or less d if f ic u lt y studying than do high achieving students. This conclusion is contrary to most o f the studies reported in the review of the lit e r a t u r e . Results o f several studies in which study habits or study s k ills were a consideration have indicated th a t students c la s s ifie d as underachievers 173 and low achievers have less d esirable work habits and less e ffe c tiv e study s k ills than students achieving on a higher le v e l. This fin d in g suggests th a t study habits may no longer hold the importance they once held fo r pupil achievement. Hypothesis 5 -• The high achieving d is tr ic ts w ill have more s ig n ific a n t educational aspiration s and expectations than w ill the low achieving d is t r ic t s . Findings The s ig n ifican ce of th is one fa c to r o f th is hypothesis proved to be one o f the strongest o f any w ith in the study. Using analysis of variance once again to determine i f a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e existed in mean educational aspiration s and expectations between these two d is t r ic t s ' groups, the a rith m e tic d iffe re n c e o f 18.5 accuracy points was demonstrated to be s ig n ific a n t a t the .001 le v e l, or w ell beyond the .05 alpha le v e l. Conclusions Based on the above c ite d fin d in g s , Hypothesis 5 is accepted. I t is f a i r to conclude, th e re fo re , th a t students o f the high achieving d is tr ic ts have s ig n ific a n tly more educational aspirations and expec­ tation s than w ill those students o f the low achieving d is t r ic t s . conclusion is supported by the lit e r a t u r e reviewed in Chapter I I . Wilson and Morrow* using a sample o f b rig h t low and high achieving high school students, found th a t the two groups d iffe re d s ig n ific a n tly in th e ir level o f educational a s p ira tio n . *Wilson and Morrow, op. c i t . This 174 Brookover, Patterson and ThomasJ in a s im ila r study a t the ju n io r high school le v e l, reported d iffe re n c e s , but not a t a s ig n ific a n t le v e l. They found th a t high achieving students do have a higher level o f educational a s p ira tio n than low achieving students. When the resu lts presented above are considered along w ith the findings o f these researchers, i t would appear th a t they support Wilson and Morrow's f i ndi ngs. I t must be emphasized th a t these findings do not suggest whether or not there is a cause and e ffe c t re la tio n s h ip between academic achieve­ ment and the student's le v e l of educational a sp iratio n and educational expectation, but a re la te d fin d in g by Child and Whiting^ does appear to be pertin en t to th is question. These researchers reported th a t fr u s tr a ­ tio n tends to lower an in d iv id u a l's level of a s p ira tio n . I t would appear, th e re fo re , th a t there is support fo r the th e o re tic a l contention th at the academic success being experienced by the students o f the high achieving d is tr ic ts tends to increase t h e ir le v e l of educational a s p ira tio n . I t would also seem lik e ly th a t Child and W hiting's findings would have a s im ila r im p lic a tio n fo r the v a riab le educational expectation. Hypothesis 6 - The high achieving d is t r ic t s w ill have the higher economic status o f student fathers and socioeconomic background o f students than w ill the low achieving d is t r ic t s . 1 Brookover, Patterson and Thomas, op. c i t . ^ S .L . Child and J.W. W hiting, "Determinants o f Level o f A spiration: Evidence from Everyday L ife ," Journal Abnormal Socio­ lo g ic a l Psychology, Vol. 44 (1 9 49 ), 303-314. 175 Findi ngs An analysis of variance between group means of high and low d is tr ic ts who's fa th e r's income was above or below ten thousand do llars revealed a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e . An "F" s t a t is t ic was generated of 5 1 .5 , highly s ig n ific a n t a t the .001 le v e l fo r parent income over ten thousand d o lla rs fo r high d is t r ic t s , and an "F" s t a t is t ic of 5 8 .4 , highly s ig n ific a n t a t the .001 level fo r parent income under ten thousand d o lla rs fo r low achieving d is t r ic t s . In order to determine the extent to which pupils in the high and low achieving d is t r ic t s were d iffe r e n t in socioeconomic background, the Chi-square te s t was used. 2 The X value is s ig n ific a n t a t the .001 le v e l. Conclusions Based on the evidence provided above, Hypothesis 6 is accepted. Fathers of students in the high achieving d is t r ic t s do have a higher occupation status than fathers in the low achieving d is t r ic t s and th e ir income is more. One can conclude from th is study th a t the occupational le v e l of the fa th e r proved to be one o f the most important in the achievement of students. This conclusion is supported by Betty Miner* and others reported on in the review o f the lit e r a t u r e . I t would appear th a t e ffo rts to enhance the achievement level of students in low d is t r ic t s are doomed to f a ilu r e unless the occupational opportunities o f fathers are improved. ^ M iner, op. c i t . , pp. 372-373 176 From the data one can see some of the d i f f i c u lt i e s faced by the local d i s t r ic t in improving the educational system. I t would appear th a t unless outside factors in terv e n e , a school system would tend to perpetuate i t s e l f unchanged. Parents with low educational attainm ent would generally have low incomes, which would not permit high expenditures fo r schools. T h eir c h ild re n , in tu rn , w ill probably be dropouts because o f poor m otivation and general in te r e s t in school. They end up lik e th e ir parents with low incomes, thus completing the cycle. Hypothesis 7 - The high achieving d i s t r ic t s ' students w ill have a s ig n ific a n tly b e tte r a ttitu d e toward school and education than w ill the low achieving d is t r ic t s ' students. i Findings An analysis o f variance te s t was used to in v e s tig a te this hypothesis. The study was concerned with the examination of s ig n if ­ ic a n t d iffe re n c e s , i f any, between group means. An "F" s t a t is t ic was generated o f 5 .8 fo r a ttitu d e toward education, s ig n ific a n t a t .05 le v e l. An "F" s t a t is t ic of 13.9 fo r a ttitu d e toward school was demonstrated, s ig n ific a n t a t .01 le v e l. Conclusions Based on the above fin d in g s , Hypothesis 7 is accepted. One can conclude, th a t students from low achieving d is t r ic t s are not achieving as well as they might because of th e ir a ttitu d e s , toward school and education. Research would tend to support th is conclusion. The research on teacher influence co n sisten tly indicates a r e la tio n ­ ship between the way a teacher behaves in the classroom and the 177 achievement and a ttitu d e s of students. A review of the lit e r a t u r e indicated th a t many factors associated with the school have been given which various in vestig ato rs fe e l are re la te d to underachievement. Some o f these factors appear to be due to the student's own fe e lin g s . 1 Passow in a study of seventy high school underachievers with an in te llig e n c e quotient of 120 or more found th a t fo r the students who improved, id e n tific a tio n with a teacher who supported, was in t e r ­ ested, and assisted in mastering study s k ills seemed to be the cru cial fa c to r. In a report on c u ltu ra lly deprived c h ild re n , Marburger th a t: 2 stated "These children often have a b il it y le v e ls which in d ic a te they could perform w e ll, i f they were reached and in terested in. what the schools o ffe re d ." Hypothesis 8 - The high d is t r ic t s ' students w ill have a b e tte r s e lf concept of a b il it y than w ill the low d is t r ic t s ' students. Findings Using analysis of variance again to determine i f a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e existed in mean accuracy of pu pils' self-concept of a b il it y between the high and low achieving d is t r ic t s , the a rith m e tic d ifferen ce of 2 .6 accuracy points was demonstrated to be n o n s ig n ific a n t. Conclusions Based on the above reported fin d in g s , Hypothesis 8 is re je c te d . Thus the re su lts of th is study d if f e r from the findings reported in ^Passow and Goldberg, op. c i t . 2 Marburger, op. c i t . 178 Chapter I I . However, they do not d i f f e r completely. This study did fin d a d iffe re n c e in pupil self-concept of a b il it y between high and low achieving d is t r ic t s , but i t was not s ig n ific a n t. This fin d in g suggests th a t teachers may be doing a b e tte r job in bu ild ing student self-concept o f a b i l i t y by creating a more p o sitiv e a ttitu d e between teacher and student, and providing a learning environment from which ! the student can achieve. Other research reports thait low achieving students' academic achievement tends to be accompanied by a r e la tiv e ly lower self-concept o f a b i l i t y , while the high achieving students' academic achievement tends to be accompanied by a r e la t iv e ly higher s elf-concept o f a b i l i t y . Brookover, Patterson and Thomas^ obtained s im ila r resu lts u t iliz in g a sample o f high and low achieving boys a t the ju n io r high school le v e l. These researchers concluded th a t self-concept o f a b il it y c le a rly functions independently of measured in te llig e n c e in predicting school achievement. F u rther, they propose th a t self-concept o f a b il it y is subject to m odification and i f improvement occurs, the achievement le v e l of the in d ivid u al may be s ig n ific a n tly enhanced. This p o s s ib ility awaits fu rth e r research. Hypothesis 9 - The high achieving d is tr ic ts w ill show greater student involvement w ith learning than w ill the low achieving d is t r ic t s ' students. Findings An analysis o f variance between group means of high and low ^Brookover, Patterson and Thomas, op. c i t . 179 achieving d is tr ic ts in t h e ir students' involvement with learning f a ile d to reveal any s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e . Conclusions Based on the evidence c ite d above, Hypothesis 9 is re je c te d . I t was therefo re concluded th a t the fa c to r o f student involvement w ith learning has l i t t l e , i f any, influence upon pupil achievement. The fa c t th a t no d iffe re n c e in the le v e l of involvement with learning was found f a i l s to support the contention th a t a student's level of involvement is related to his level o f academic achievement. p o s s ib ility awaits fu rth e r research. This I t is in te re s tin g , however, to note th at both high and low achieving d is tr ic ts had the same degree of involvement with le arn in g . This suggests th a t students in the high and low d is tr ic ts e ith e r had a high or low level o f involvement w ith learn in g . The l a t t e r would suggest th a t t h e ir teachers need to do a b e tte r job in determining how the in te re s t o f th e ir pupils could be aroused. H opefully, once th is arousal has taken place, the teacher w ill be b e tte r able to reach her achievement oriented goals. Hypothesis 10 - The high achieving d is t r ic t s ' teachers w ill have more influence on t h e ir pupils than w ill the low achieving d is t r ic t s ' teachers. Fi ndinqs The analysis o f data p e rtin e n t to th is hypothesis, when tested fo r differences between the group means, was found to be s ig n ific a n t. An "F" s t a t is t ic was generated of 1 7 .5 , s ig n ific a n t a t the .01 le v e l, fo r pupils perceiving th e ir teacher as lik in g them and being consid­ e ra te of them. An "F" s t a t is t ic was reported of 1 4 .9 , s ig n ific a n t a t the .01 le v e l, fo r pupils perceiving th e ir teacher as helping them leara 180 Conclusions Based on the findings reported above, Hypothesis 10 can be j accepted/ In the acceptance, th e re fo re , o f th is hypothesis i t can be concluded th a t teachers o f the high achieving d is tr ic ts do have more influence on th e ir pupils than the teachers o f the low achieving d is t r ic t s . And th a t th is influence re su lts in a more p o s itiv e r e la ­ tionship between the way a teacher behaves in the classroom and the achievement and a ttitu d e s of students. by Flanders, 1 This conclusion is supported 2 and Emmer and others reported on in the review of the lit e r a tu r e fo r th is study. Hypothesis 11 - Pupils of the high achieving d is tr ic ts w ill have b e tte r feelin g s about themselves and school than w ill pupils of the low achieving d is t r ic t s . Findings The analysis of variance technique was used to in ve s tig ate th is hypothesis, as once again the study was concerned w ith the examination o f s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e s , i f any, between group means. An "F" s t a t i s t ic o f 1 1 .2 , very s ig n ific a n t a t the .01 le v e l, was found. Conclusions Based on the fin ding c ite d above, Hypothesis 11 was accepted. This fin d in g suggests th a t students o f low achieving d is t r ic t s do not have fe e lin g s about themselves and t h e ir school th a t are as p o sitive as students of high achieving d is t r ic t s . This condition would imply th a t the degree to which a student perceives him self as having an V la n d e rs , op. c i t . 2 Emmer, op. c i t . 181 influence' over what happens to him while in school, w ill a ffe c t both his a ttitu d e toward him self, the school, and his achievement. Hypothesis 12 - High achieving d is tr ic ts w ill have more teachers with three years o f experience and more teachers with fiv e years o f experience than w ill low achieving d is t r ic t s . Findings The analysis o f data p e rtin e n t to th is hypothesis, when tested fo r differences between the means o f both groups o f teachers with three or more y e ars ’ teaching experience, was found to be s ig n ific a n t. "F" s t a tis t ic was found of 4 .5 , s ig n ific a n t a t the .05 le v e l. An The analysis of variance was used again to determine i f a s ig n ific a n t diffe re n c e existed in means of both groups fo r teachers with fiv e or more y e ars ’ teaching experience. I t was found to be n o n sig n ifican t, as the d iffe re n c e between the high and low d is t r ic t s with teachers of fiv e or more years' experience was only 1.5 points. Conclusions From the evidence c ite d above, only p art of Hypothesis 12 can be accepted. The re su lts would suggest th a t low achieving d is tr ic ts have more teachers with less than three years of teaching experience than do the high achieving d is t r ic t s . The findings would also suggest th a t evidently the low d is t r ic t s have as many teachers with fiv e or more years' experience as do the high d is t r ic t s . This la s t fin d in g is contrary to most research c ite d in the review o f the lit e r a t u r e fo r th is study. Teacher tra in in g and experience were found to be one of the more r e lia b le facto rs used in measuring pupil achievement. A possible explanation fo r th is conclusion is Public Act 379 th a t provides teachers with the power to negotiate t h e ir own s a la rie s . I I 182 The point being th a t good and poor teachers are more evenly spread among d is tr ic t s than was the case s ix years ago, before Act 379 came into being. Hypothesis 13 - Low achieving d is t r ic t s w ill have more teacher s trik e s , h a lf days, and student s it - in s than w ill the high achieving d is t r ic t s . Findings An analysis of variance between group means o f teacher s trik e s , h a lf days of school fo r students, and loss of time due to student s i t ins fa ile d to reveal any s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e between the high and low d is tr ic ts fo r each o f the three fa c to rs . Conclusions Based on the evidence c ite d in the findings above, Hypothesis 13 is re je cte d . I t is f a i r to conclude, th e re fo re , th a t teacher s trik e s , h a lf days of school fo r students and student s it - in s can and do occur equally as often or less often fo r both groups. One can also conclude from the findings th at the amount or lack of pupil achievement taking place in the high or low d is tr ic ts has l i t t l e , i f any, e ffe c t on whether there w ill be teacher s tr ik e s , h a lf days or student s it - in s in the d i s t r ic t . Hypothesis 14 - The high d is t r ic t s w ill have less teacher turnover and more teachers residing in the school d i s t r i c t than w ill the low d is t r ic t s . Findings An analysis of variance was used to in v e s tig a te th is hypothesis. Here again the study was concerned w ith the examination o f s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e s , i f any, between the high and low d is t r ic t s ' means. 183 Teacher turnover generated an "F" s t a t is t ic o f 1 2 .3 , s ig n ific a n t a t the .01 le v e l. Teacher residence in the d i s t r i c t showed an "F" • s t a t is t ic o f 5 .8 , s ig n ific a n t a t the .05 le v e l. Conclusions Based on the evidence c ite d above, Hypothesis 14 is accepted. The basic conclusion which one must draw from the foregoing data analysis is th at high achieving school d is tr ic ts are more successful in keeping th e ir teachers longer, and have a higher percentage th a t reside in the d is t r ic t than do the low achieving school d is t r ic t s . This suggests that fa c u ltie s o f high d is tr ic ts are more s ta b le than fa c u ltie s o f low d is t r ic t s ; and th a t money is not a fa c to r in teacher turnover in the low d is tr ic ts since th is study found th a t there was no s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e in teachers' sa la rie s between the high and low d is t r ic t s . The findings also suggest th a t more teachers in the low d is t r ic t s , because they reside outside the d i s t r i c t in which they teach, w i ll be less perceptive o f parent a ttitu d e s than w ill those teachers who reside in the d i s t r i c t . S im ilar findings were reported by John Bohnsen. 1 Hypothesis 15 - Pupils in the high achieving d is t r ic t s w ill have a g re a ter vocabulary than the pupils in the low achieving d is t r ic t s . Findings Using analysis of variance to determine i f a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e existed in mean accuracy of vocabulary between the high ^John F. Bohnsen, "A Study o f Teacher Morale as i t Relates to Teacher Perceptions of Parent A ttitu d es" (Unpublished Doctoral d is s e rta tio n , Michigan State U n iv e rs ity , 1970), pp. 107-108. 184 and low achieving d is t r ic t s , the arithm etic d iffe re n c e o f 159.1 accuracy points was demonstrated to be highly s ig n ific a n t a t the .001 le v e l, or well beyond the .05 alpha le v e l. Conclusions Based on the evidence c ite d above in the fin d in g s , Hypothesis 15 is accepted. From th is one can conclude th a t the students of high achieving d is t r ic t s have more in te llig e n c e than do the students of the low achieving d is t r ic t s . Ketcham found th a t the fa c to r in te llig e n c e influences in divid ual d ifferences in achievement by 70 per cent. Vocab­ ulary is g enerally accepted as a good measurement o f in te llig e n c e . Hypothesis 16 - Teaching s ta ffs o f high achieving d is t r ic t s w ill have more p o sitiv e a ttitu d e s toward th e ir students, school and community than w ill the teaching s ta ffs o f the low achieving d is t r ic t s . Findings The s im ila r ity o f th is hypothesis to the preceding one enabled an id e n tic a l s t a t is t ic a l approach. A d iffe re n c e between the mean accuracy scores of teachers' a ttitu d e s toward students, school and community fo r high achieving d is t r ic t s and the combined mean o f the low achieving d is t r ic t s were shown to be highly s ig n ific a n tly d iffe r e n t a t the .001 alpha le v e l. Conclusions Based on the findings reported above, Hypothesis 16 is accepted. I t is , th e re fo re , appropriate to conclude th a t low achieving d is t r ic t s ' teaching s ta ffs are considerably less attuned to the fe e lin g s and needs * Ketcham, op. c i t . 185 o f th e ir students and are th e re fo re uncertain o f th e ir a ttitu d e toward the school and community, or teachers o f low achieving d is t r ic t s are less s a tis fie d with th e ir pupil achievement and the school and community commitment to education. This demonstrated condition w ill not be explained fu r th e r , but deferred to fu tu re research. Hypothesis 17 - Teacher job s a tis fa c tio n w ill be higher in the high achieving d is t r ic t s than in the low achieving d is t r ic t s . Findings As th is hypothesis is b u ilt upon an assumption o f d iffe re n c e between the teachers' means o f high and low achieving d i s t r ic t s , analysis o f variance was used again to determine i f a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e existed in mean accuracy:between the two teacher groups. An "F" s t a t is ­ t i c was developed of 3 8 .9 , very s ig n ific a n t a t the .001 le v e l.. Conclusions Based on the findings reported above, Hypothesis 17 is accepted. In the acceptance, th e re fo re , o f th is hypothesis i t can be concluded th a t teachers who teach in d is t r ic t s where pupils are achieving s a tis ­ f a c to r ily are more li k e l y to have a p o s itiv e a ttitu d e toward th e ir work and thus greater job s a tis fa c tio n than are teachers who teach where students are not achieving s a t is f a c t o r ily . Hypothesis 18 - Principal job s a tis fa c tio n w ill be b e tte r in the high achieving d is t r ic t s than in the low achieving d is t r ic t s . Findings An analysis of variance was used to in v e s tig a te th is hypothesis, as once again the study was concerned w ith the s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e s , 186 i f any, between the p rin c ip a ls ' group mean. An "F" s t a t is t ic was | generated: o f 5 .6 , s ig n ific a n t a t the .05 le v e l. Conclusions Based on the evidence c ite d above, Hypothesis 18 is accepted. I t is f a i r to conclude, th e re fo re , th a t the a ttitu d e s toward t h e ir own jobs as p rin cip a ls who adm inister schools where teacher job s a tis fa c tio n is good and where pupils are achieving s a t is f a c t o r ily is lik e ly to be b e tte r than the prin cip als who are adm inistering schools where teacher job s a tis fa c tio n is poor and pupil achievement is less than s a tis fa c to ry . Hypothesis 19 - High achieving d is t r ic t s w ill have newer b u ild in g s , a longer school day and school year than w ill the low achieving school d is t r ic t s . F in d in g s The s t a t is t ic used to measure the s ig n ific a n c e of th is data fo r th is hypothesis was the F -te s t o f s ig n ific a n c e . The degree o f d iffe re n c e fo r the three facto rs in the hypothesis was found to be only s lig h tly d iffe r e n t between the high and low d is t r ic t s . An "F" s t a t is t ic o f 0.34 and 0.09 between means fo r age of school buildings was revealed, which is n o n sig n ifican t. An "F" s t a t is t ic o f 0 .5 3 , between means fo r hours o f pupil in s tru c tio n per day was found and a 0 .4 6 , between means fo r days of in s tru c tio n in school year was revealed. Both o f which are n o n sig n ifican t. Conclusions Based on the above c ite d fin d in g s , Hypothesis 19 must be re je c te d . I t is f a i r to conclude, th e re fo re , th a t age o f school buildings has l i t t l e , i f anything, to do w ith pupil achievement. Since we found no s ig n ific a n t differen ces in length o f school day or school 187 year between the high and low d i s t r ic t s , we do not know i f a longer school day and school year would b e n e fit the students o f the low achiev­ ing d is t r ic t s . Hypothesis 20 - Superintendents o f the high achieving d is t r ic t s w ill • score higher on th e ir opinions of facto rs th a t may a ffe c t pupil achievement than w ill the superintendents o f the low achieving d is t r ic t s . Findings Using analysis of variance once again to determine i f a s ig n if ­ icant d iffe re n c e existed in mean accuracy of opinions between the superintendents o f the high and low achieving d i s t r ic t s , the arith m e tic d iffe re n c e of 0 .0 accuracy points was demonstrated to be no n sig n ifican t. Conclusions Based on the above c ite d fin d in g s , Hypothesis 20 is re je c te d . I t i s , th e re fo re , appropriate to conclude th a t superintendents of high achieving d is tr ic ts are no more or no less in agreement than are the superintendents o f the low achieving d is t r ic t s as to the degree o f importance the selected fourteen facto rs are to pupil achievement in th e ir d is t r ic t s . Hypothesis 21 - The high achieving d is t r ic t s w ill have a more favorable organizational clim ate than w ill the low achieving d is t r ic t s . Findings The analysis of data p e rtin e n t to th is hypothesis, when tested fo r differences between the group means, was found to be s ig n ific a n t. An "F" s t a t is t ic was generated of 3 9 .3 , s ig n ific a n t a t the .01 le v e l, fo r high d is t r ic t s having a b e tte r organizational clim ate than the low d is t r ic t s . 188 Conclusions Based on the findings reported, Hypothesis 21 can be accepted. In the acceptance, th e re fo re , o f th is hypothesis i t can be concluded th a t teachers of the high achieving d is tr ic ts fe e l th at th e ir moral or social expectations are being more s a tis fie d and th a t they have a b e tte r sense of job accomplishment than do the teachers o f the low achieving d is t r ic t s . One can also conclude th a t the p rin cip a ls o f the low achieving d is tr ic ts operate more on the basis of rules or p o lic ie s and tend to avoid fa c e-to -fa c e s itu a tio n s , while a t the same time providing closer supervision and are less s e n s itiv e to s t a f f feeling s and a ttitu d e s than prin cip als o f the high achieving d is t r ic t s . Im plications The findings o f the data presented in th is study would appear to have broad im plications fo r public education as the schools attempt to fin d a solution to the problem o f improving the achievement of the low achieving student. 1. One of the major problems public school education faces to day in Michigan is the f a ilu r e o f low achievers, who come mainly from homes o f low economiq s ta tu s , to achieve a t the same ra te as those students who come from homes o f high economic s ta tu s . The data from th is research in d icate the obstacles the public schools in Michigan face in t h e ir e ffo rts to develop solu tion s. This study has shown th a t students of both high and low achieving d is tr ic ts have the same study h a b its , self-concept o f a b i l i t y , and involvement with learnin g. s ig n ific a n t differences in : I t has also shown th a t there are a ttitu d e toward school and education; 189 / educational aspirations and expectation; and pu pils' fe elin g s about themselves and school, between students o f high and low achieving d is t r ic t s . Teachers, adm inistrators and others must make the school system a place in which low achieving students fe e l comfortable and able to achieve. Anything less is not lik e ly to make the low achieving student's a ttitu d e toward school more d e s ira b le . We have found th a t pupils from low d is tr ic ts fe e l more p o s itiv e ly about education than they do about school. An important im p licatio n from th is conclusion is th a t a m otivational d riv e fo r education is present in the low achiever to a g re a ter degree than is present in his a ttitu d e toward school. A p o sitiv e a ttitu d e toward school would be a more important fa c to r in achieving than would a ttitu d e toward education. The fa c t th a t those who lik e school w i ll generally do well in school is p redictable and understandable. I t is the school th a t w ill pass out rewards fo r acceptable behavior, a ttitu d e s and achievements, and w ill pass out punishments fo r unacceptable behavior, a ttitu d e s and achievement. Thus, i t is the school as an in s titu tio n th a t w ill receive the h o s t ilit y fo r passing judgment on work, not education as a concept. I 1 I t can be generalized th a t the p u p il's grade is to some degree a r e fle c tio n o f his a ttitu d e toward school. A pupil who has a h o s tile a ttitu d e toward school is u n lik e ly to p a rtic ip a te in any meaningful way in the school system o f rewards and punishment, or in other words, i t system o f measuring achievement. This im plies re la tio n s fo r variance between high and low student achievement in school. For high achieving '/’ 190 d is t r ic t s , a p o s itiv e a ttitu d e toward school was s ig n ific a n tly related to achievement, w hile fo r the low achieving d is t r ic t s i t was not. There is a profound im p lic a tio n in the findings th a t the low achiever sees the school n egatively and a negative a ttitu d e toward school is a detrim ent to achievement. The most obvious conclusion is th a t in order to improve the low achiever, the schools are going to have to improve th e ir image in the eyes o f the low achiever. Low achievers are going to have to be convinced th a t the school is the place fo r them to achieve t h e ir goal of education, th a t meaningful, fu tu re -o rie n te d goals are obtainable through education, and th a t the low achiever can partake o f th is in s titu tio n and fin d education in the same way as the high achiever. The schools should provide continual in -s e rv ic e education fo r its teaching and counseling s t a f f in the m atter o f human re la tio n s . Many low achievers fe e l th a t they are discrim inated against in the schools because of th e ir socioeconomic fam ily background. The board and adm inistration have an o b lig a tio n to work with the profes­ sional s t a ff to help them develop s k ill in working w ith s e n s itiv e low achievers who are usually accustomed to being discrim inated against and are looking fo r u n fa ir treatm ent in th e ir everyday contacts. The teacher tra in in g in s titu tio n s must put more emphasis on the human re la tio n s aspect o f teaching. Much in the same way as the public schools should help the teaching s t a f f , teacher tra in in g in s titu tio n s should prepare the in d iv id u a ls tra in in g fo r teaching to understand the special problems of the low achiever in today's public schools. 191 2. I t is generally accepted th a t there are in e q u a litie s in the q u a lity and kinds of experiences provided through the fa m ilie s of high and low socioeconomic students. Though no in e q u a litie s in the expen­ d itu re and resources between the high and low achieving d is tr ic ts were found in th is study, a s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e was found between the high and low achieving d is t r ic t s and the c h ild 's fa th e r's socio­ economic statu s. Thus suggesting th a t low achieving d is t r ic t s cannot be expected to overcome the in e q u a litie s in the q u a lity and kinds of experiences provided by the fa m ilie s o f low socioeconomic s ta tu s , when th e ir expenditure per c h ild and resources remain the same as those of high achieving d is t r ic t s . One^of the most s trik in g findings of th is study was th a t in s p ite of the findings o f in e q u a litie s in teacher influence (exten t the pupil perceived the teacher as lik in g him and helping him le a rn ); teacher a ttitu d e toward student, school, and community; student educa­ tio n al a s p iratio n s and expectation; and a ttitu d e toward school and education, no s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e was found between the high and low achieving d is t r ic t s fo r student study h a b its , self-concept o f a b il it y and th e ir involvement with le a rn in g . In the opinion o f the w r ite r , the v a ria tio n in the findings between the high and low achiev­ ing d is t r ic t s is suggestive o f and im plies the fo llo w in g : a. Contrary to the often expressed idea th a t students from low socioeconomic d is t r ic t s do not have good fe e lin g s about themselves in re la tio n s h ip to education and school, th e ir general fe e lin g s about school may be as p o s itiv e as those o f the high socioeconomic students. The influence o f socioeconomics may th e re fo re not be a fa c to r one must deal with in an attempt to improve th is important student v a ria b le . A common technique may be used in working with 192 students in improving th is important student perception v a ria b le which Brookover1 re fe rs to as es p e cia lly s ig n ific a n t in the enhancement o f achievement. Brookover reported th a t socioeconomic status has a low re la tio n s h ip to self-concept o f a b i l i t y and achievement. The major fin d in g was, "That academic achievement can enhanced by self-concept enhancement." From the conclusion o f th is and other s tu d ies , one may surmise th a t the school and it s clim ate may hold some untapped resources th a t influence the c h ild 's perception o f him self and fu tu re achievement. b. The s ig n ifican ce of the home, fa m ily , and environment may be so great fo r the high achieving d is t r ic t s th a t personal q u a litie s may not be s ig n ific a n tly affected by school clim ates. As c ite d in the review o f the lit e r a t u r e in reports by Fox, L ip p it t , Schmuck,2 Creaser, 3 and others, communication between home and school is greater in high socioeconomic d is t r ic t s . However, the over­ rid in g influence o f socioeconomics in low socioeconomic d is tr ic ts is so great th a t the d i s t r i c t must e n lis t the cooperation and coordinated assistance of other agencies and in s titu tio n s i f a substantial impact on personalsocial feelin g s about s e lf and school and le v e ls of a sp iratio n is to be made. The im plications fo r a massive coordinated assault on the problems o f the students from the low socioeconomic s e ttin g are c le a r. Socioeconomics seems to be an important fa c to r a ffe c tin g the low achiev­ ing d is t r ic t s , and th a t they need special help in negating th is in f lu ­ ence. This is not to in tim ate th a t school personnel should give up in t h e ir attempts to improve students' personal q u a litie s . On the co n trary, the re su lts of th is study in d ic a te th a t school personnel, e s p e cia lly the teacher and building p r in c ip a l, may be very instrumental in a lte rin g students' personal q u a litie s which are s ig n ific a n tly Brookover, Patterson and Thomas, op. c i t . 2 Fox, L ip p itt and Schmuck, op. c i t . 3_ Creaser, op. c i t . 193 re la ted to student achievement. Teachers, p rin cip a ls and a ll school personnel must, th e re fo re , c a re fu lly evaluate t h e ir behavior in an attempt to improve pupil achievement. 3. There appears to be a tendency in education to view low achieving students as i f they represent a highly homogeneous group. To some extent th is viewpoint has been fostered by the lit e r a t u r e . i For example, Roth and Myersberg have concluded th a t there is a s p e c ific non-achievement syndrome, while others have suggested that low achievers generally can be c la s s ifie d in to one o f two categ ories, those w ith ego impairment or those with residual language d i f f i c u lt i e s . This tendency may also be due to the acceptance o f the b e lie f th a t the lim ite d number o f variab les fourjd to d if fe r e n t ia t e high and low achieving students represents ra th e r c le a r-c u t a ttrib u te s fo r the various members of these two groups, i . e . , poor a ttitu d e toward school and education fo r those in the low achieving d is t r ic t s versus good a ttitu d e toward school and education fo r those in the high achieving d is t r ic t s . The la t t e r point is questionable since most would agree th at a wide range in in divid ual d ifferen ces could be expected among low achievers on these v a ria b le s . To date, programs of assistance fo r the low achieving students a t both the elementary and secondary le v e l have, in most instances, consisted o f special academic in s tru c tio n . Although these programs are sometimes e ffe c tiv e with c e rta in students, in general they do not appear to reverse the student's pattern o f underachievement. ^Roth and Myersberg, op. c i t . 5 194 Perhaps a more r e a lis t ic approach to the problem would be fo r the educator to make a renewed concerted e f f o r t to id e n tify the poten­ t ia l underachiever as e a rly as possible. Once he is id e n tifie d he should be evaluated by a diagnostic team (school psychologist, school social worker, reading s p e c ia lis t, school nurse, parent, classroom teacher, building p rin c ip a l, e t c . ) . The evaluation process should continue, along with the necessary program, as long as the pupil has need fo r such a program. In a d d itio n , i t is also very probable th a t low achieving students could be b e tte r assisted by regular classroom teachers i f the teachers would acquire a more p o s itiv e a ttitu d e toward th e ir students and adjust t h e ir methods to the needs o f the in divid ual students. Admittedly th is is a challenge to the teacher but as th is study would in d ic a te , i t could be done, and some teachers are doing a b e tte r job a t i t than others. There are a number o f recent advances in education th a t appear to hold promise fo r in d iv id u a liz in g in s tru c ­ tio n . Programmed in s tru c tio n which stresses pacing in s tru c tio n to the s k ill level of the in d iv id u a l, team teaching with it s emphasis on teaching methods, the nongraded school concept which is concerned b a s ic a lly with content mastery and s k ill development, and the indepen­ dent study concept which stresses teaching methods and techniques fo r involving the student in the learning process, seem to be the most promising. The arena of the peer group also should not be ignored in considering in divid ual d iffe re n c e s . Watson* the teacher as an agent of s o c ia liz a tio n . has stressed the ro le of According to Watson, the teacher can a s sis t individual pupils in the school s e ttin g by a v a rie ty o f "consciously recognized devices . . . creating s itu a tio n s in which i t would be possible to see a previously objectionable c h ild in a new r o le , g ettin g a c h ild previously ignored to contribute a ta le n t which the other pupils have not recognized, helping a c h ild to accept her as a person by accepting him as a person o f worth, hoping these w ill lead to peer acceptance." In conclusion, i t would appear desirable to attempt to adapt the curriculum , as w ell as the teaching methods, to the in d ivid u al needs of the c h ild . For those in need of more in ten sive forms of assistance, i t appears necessary fo r the school to be prepared to provide a v a rie ty o f programs which are appropriate to the needs of the in d ivid u al c h ild . H opefully, in th is manner, students can develop th e ir po ten tial to the f u lle s t fo r th e ir own personal b e n e fit as well as fo r the b e n e fit o f society. 4. Evidence is indicated th a t the school organizational clim ate; teacher and p rin cipal job s a tis fa c tio n ; teacher in flu e n c e ; teacher a ttitu d e toward student, school and community; and pupil a ttitu d e toward school and education has s ig n ific a n t impact on pupil achievement. I t is suggested th a t w hile the Federal Government, S ta te , and local school d is tr ic ts are investing funds to provide more s t a f f , m a te ria ls , remedial work, and varying kinds o f innovations, special a tte n tio n and * R .I. Watson, Psychology o f the Child (2nd ed .; New York: John W iley, 1959). 196 funds should also be given to develop techniques fo r improving in t e r ­ personal relationsh ips and school clim ates as a way o f upgrading pupil achievement and social development in the public schools. I f the public schools are going to help the low achiever, they w ill need to change t h e ir image. At the present tim e , they do not seem to be viewed by low achievers as in s titu tio n s th a t serve both low and high achievers e q u ally. In order to change th e ir image, they are going to have to change th e ir curriculum , th e ir a ttitu d e s toward low achievers, th e ir public re la tio n s ,an d th e ir methods of sele c tin g and tra in in g teachers, and to a lesser degree, p rin c ip a ls . Suggestions fo r Future Research The findings o f th is study suggest a number o f possible areas fo r the conduct o f fu tu re research. 1. In th is study, i t was found th a t s ig n ific a n t d ifferences in pupils' feeling s about themselves and school e x is t between high and low achieving students. In a re la te d fin d in g , McKeachie, 1 using a sample o f college students, found lim ite d support fo r the hypothesis th a t "academic achievement of students with a strong a f f i l i a t i v e motive w ill be r e la t iv e ly higher in classes high in a f f i l i a t i v e cues than in classes with few a f f i l i a t i v e cues, w hile the achievement o f students with a weak a f f i l i a t i o n motive w ill be r e la t iv e ly lower in classes high in a f f i l i a t i v e cues than in classes w ith few a f f i l i a t i v e cues." ^W.J. McKeachie, "M o tivation, Teaching Methods, and College Learning." In M.R. Jones (e d .) Nebraska Symposium on M otivation (L in c o ln , Nebraska: U n iv e rsity o-f Nebraska Press, 1961), pp. 111-142. 197 McKeachie's findings raise some in te re s tin g questions regarding students a t the elementary and secondary le v e l. Would elementary and secondary students with a high need fo r a f f i l i a t i o n be more successful academically in classes in which th e ir teachers are warm, f r ie n d ly , and highly in terested in areas re la ted to social development? Would students with a high need fo r achievement be more successful academically in classes in which th e ir teachers tend to be su bject-orien ted and stress in divid ual accomplishment? Answers to such questions may a s s is t the educator in determining whether or not various teaching methods a ffe c t a p u p il's achievement le v e l. 2. Longitudinal studies o f low achieving students would be helpful in answering a number o f questions. For example, what changes occur w ith in these students over a period of time? students a f t e r they leave school? What happens to these Do the facto rs re la te d to t h e ir achievement in school become manifested in th e ir vocational and community liv in g ? 3. Some s ig n ific a n t patterns were found in the acceptance and re je c tio n o f the hypotheses. The presence of these patterns in the high achieving d is tr ic ts and the absence o f other patterns in the low achieving, d is tr ic ts suggests th a t perhaps the va riab le s in these patterns may be powerful influences on a student's achievement le v e l. Therefore, one wonders whether or not the achievement level o f the low achieving students would be enhanced i f they developed these character­ is t ic s . For example, students o f high achieving d is tr ic ts were found to have a pattern o f b e tte r educational aspiration s and expectations, more p o s itiv e a ttitu d e s toward school and education, b e tte r feelin g s 198 about themselves and school, w hile students o f the low achieving d is tr ic ts were found not to have such a p a tte rn . He see another pattern where the teachers o f the high achieving d is tr ic ts have a more p o sitive influence on th e ir students and a b e tte r a ttitu d e toward th e ir students, school and community than the teachers of the low achieving d is t r ic t s . I f low achievers were id e n tifie d who lacked educational aspirations and expectations, had poor a ttitu d e s toward school and education, and unsat­ is fa c to ry fe elin g s about themselves, would th e ir level of achievement be raised i f techniques were used by th e ir teachers which had more posi­ t iv e influences on th e ir pupils? This appears to be an in trig u in g question, fo r it s answer may lead to the development of c le a rly defined techniques to a s sis t c e rta in teachers in having a g re a ter in fluence on pupil achievement. 4. The w rite r believes th a t the ratings of the re la tio n s h ip between the high and low achieving d is t r ic t s by th e ir teachers and p rin cip a ls on the Questionnaire to Measure Teacher Job S a tis fa c tio n should be explored more thoroughly through d u p licatio n o f th is portion o f the study with a la rg e r p rin c ip a l-te a c h e r sample. Would trends uncovered in th is study continue? E ffo rts should be made to examine the reasons teachers and p rin cip als ra te t h e ir school d i s t r i c t , students, teachers, e tc . as they do in the d iffe r e n t behaviors found in the job s a tis fa c tio n scale. This would necessitate interviews of teachers and p rin c ip a ls follow ing the completion of the questionnaire. 5. School d is c ip lin e . This is an area th a t concerns the new teacher and a d m in istrato r, Jthe experienced teacher and a d m in is tra to r, \ 199 parents* and the taxpayers as much as any area in school. A compre­ hensive study o f d is c ip lin e p o lic ie s , th e ir enforcement and the ra tio n a le fo r the p o lic ie s could provide a focal point fo r try in g to understand the "image" o f the school and it s re la tio n s h ip to pupil achievement. Ref!ections Although th is study's findings were in agreement w ith much o f the research reviewed in Chapter I I , several of the findings were also of an unexpected nature. For example, i f we look a t the follow ing groupings of facto rs we can see th a t i t had been assumed, as expressed in the hypotheses th a t a ll th irty -o n e facto rs under study would be accepted. This assumption was based in part on previous research and on the author's untested b e lie fs which had form erly been based merely upon casual observation. 1. Factors re la te d to teachers o f the high achieving d is t r ic t s a. b. c. d. e. f. g. Considerate of pupils and helping them learn More teachers with f iv e years' teaching experience More teachers with three years' teaching experience Less teacher turnover Teachers residing in d i s t r i c t A ttitu d e toward students, school and community would be b e tte r Job s a tis fa c tio n would be b e tte r (accepted) (re je c te d ) (accepted) (accepted) (accepted) (accepted) (accepted) I t should be o f in te r e s t, e s p e cia lly to the classroom teacher, th a t o f the above facto rs th a t are believed to a ffe c t pupil achievement, the teacher holds the key in determining the degree of success these factors w ill have on pupil achievement. 200 2. Factors re la te d to the adm inistrators o f high achieving d is tr ic ts a. b. P rin c ip a ls ' job s a tis fa c tio n would be b e tte r Superintendents' opinions would be d iffe r e n t (accepted) (re je c te d ) Most boards o f education and superintendents would probably agree th a t a building p rin c ip a l's performance or lack of performance can be d ire c tly re la te d to teacher job s a tis fa c tio n . This study would suggest th at th is is the case and th a t the p rin c ip a l's job s a tis fa c tio n , in a d d itio n , is d ir e c tly re la te d to his teachers' accomplishments. 3. Factors related to students in high achieving d is t r ic t s a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. Student study habits would be b e tte r Educational aspirations and expectations would be b e tte r Father's occupational status would be higher A ttitu d e toward school and education would be b e tte r Self-concept of a b il it y would be b e tte r Student involvement with learning would be greater Feelings about themselves and school would be b e tte r Student vocabulary would be greater (re je c te d ) (accepted) (accepted) (accepted) (re je c te d ) (re je c te d ) (accepted) (accepted) While th is study found th a t high achieving students do have higher educational aspirations and expectations, fathers w ith a higher occupational s ta tu s , b e tte r a ttitu d e toward school and education, stronger feelin g s about themselves and school, and a la rg e r vocab­ u la ry , the low achieving students were found to have equally as good study h a b its, self-concept of a b i l i t y , and involvement with learning as did the high achieving students. When th is is considered in lig h t of the findings th a t the low achieving students did not fe e l th a t th e ir teachers lik e d them or helped them le a rn , and th a t t h e ir teachers had 201 a poor a ttitu d e toward them, the school and community, is there l i t t l e wonder why the other factors were accepted? • 4. Factors re la ted to the schools in high achieving d is tr ic ts a. b. c. d.e. f. g. Size of d i s t r i c t Size of school buildings H alf days Age of school buildings Length o f school day Student s it - in s Organizational clim ate (re je c te d ) (re je c te d ) (re je c te d ) (re je c te d ) (re je c te d ) (re je c te d ) (accepted) - I t is worth noting, I th in k , th a t of a ll the facto rs hypothesized in th is study to have influence on pupil achievement, only one, the organizational clim ate o f the school d i s t r i c t was assumed to have such in flu en ce. 5. Factors re la te d to school finance in high achieving d is tr ic ts a. b. c. d. d. f. g. State equalized valuatio n would be g re a te r In s tru c tio n expenditure would be greater Current operating expenses would be g re a ter General fund expenditures would be greater In s tru c tio n s a la rie s per pupil would be greater Tax support fo r operation and bonding programs would be greater Teacher-adm inistrative r a tio would be b e tte r ! (re je c te d ) (re je c te d ) (re je c te d ) (re je c te d ) (re je c te d ) (accepted) (re je c te d ) I t has been generally assumed, as expressed in Hypothesis 1, th a t s ta te equalized v a lu a tio n , per pupil expenditure fo r in s tru c tio n , op erating , general fund expenditures, in s tru c tio n s a la rie s and the teacheradm in istrative ra tio would be betcer in the high achieving school d is tr ic ts than in the low achieving school d is t r ic t s . The study, however, revealed the high and low d is t r ic t s to be s im ila r. One can conclude from the findings th a t per pupil expenditure is a measure or in d ic a to r o f community a ttitu d e s , p ra c tic e s , and in te re s t 202 in t h e ir school system. I t is re fle c te d in the way the community supports it s schools by taxes, voting on bond issues, and by other measures taken to improve the school d i s t r ic t . i BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Anderson, Harold H. C re a tiv ity and It s C u ltiv a tio n . Harper and Brothers, 1959. New York: Barker, Roger G .; Kounin, Jacob S .; and W right, Herbert S. Child Behavior and Development. New York: McGraw-Hill Book C o., TncTT" T'9?3. --------- --------- Berkowitz, Ir a M orris. Group S ize and Social O rganization. New Haven: In te ra c tio n Laboratory, Sociology department, Yale U n iv e rs ity , 1960. B r ic k e ll, Henry M. Organizing New York State fo r Educational Change. Albany: State Education Department, lB 6 l . Brookover, Wilbur B.; Erickson, Edsel; and J o in e r, Lee. S e lf Concept of A bility and School Achievement. East Lansing: Educational Publishers Services, Michigan State University, 1967. Brookover, Wilbur B.; Patterson, Ann; and S h a ile r, Thomas. S e lf Concept of A b ilit y and School Achievement. Final Report of Cooperative Research Project No. 845 e n title d The R elationship of Self-Im ages to Achievement in Junior High School Subjects. East Lansing: O ffic e o f Research and P ub lication s, Michigan S ta te U n iv e rs ity , 1962. Brookover, Wilbur G.; Patterson, Ann; and S h a ile r, Thomas. S e lf Concept of A b ilit y and Achievement. Final Report on Cooperative Research P roject No. 1636 e n title d Improving Academic Achievement Through Students' S e lf Concept ITnhancementT East Lansing: Bureau o f Educational Research Services, Michigan S tate U n iv e rs ity , 1965. Burkhead, Jesse. Public School Finance Economics and P olitics. Syracuse,”0 7 1 Syracuse University Press, 1964. Carlson, Richard 0. Executive Succession and Organizational Change: Place-Bound and Career-Bound Superintendents o f Schools. Chicago: Midwest A dm inistration Center, U niversity o f Chicago, 1962. 204 205 Carlson, Richard 0. Adoption of Educational Innovations. The Center fo r the Advanced Study of Educational A dm inistration , U niversity of Oregon, 1965. Eugene: Coleman, James S ., e t a l . Equalit.y of Educational Opportunity. Washington: U.S. Government P rin tin g O ffic e , 1966. Combs, Arthur W., and Snygg, Donald. In d ivid u al Behavior. Harper and Row, Publishers, 1959. New York: Cook, W alter. Grouping and Promotion in the Elementary Schools, No. 2. Minneapolis: U niversity o f Minnesota Press, 1941. Davis, A llis o n . "Child Training and Social C lass." C hild Behavior and Development. New York: McGraw-Hill Co., In c ., 1943. E l l i s , Kenneth, e t a l . In te llig e n c e and C ultural D ifferences: A Study of C ultural Learning and Problem S olving. Chicago: U niversity of Chicago Press, 1951. Farquhar, W. W. A Comprehensive Study o f the In s tru c tio n a l Factors Underlying Achievement of Eleventh Grade High School ' Students. Cooperative Research P roject No. 846. Washington: U.S. Department o f H ealth, Education and W elfare, 1963. Flanders, Ned A. Teacher In flu e n c e , Pupil A ttitu d e s , and Achievement. U.S. O ffic e of Education Cooperative Research Monograph, No. 12. Washington: U.S. Government P rin tin g O ffic e , 1965. Fox, Robert S .; Luszki, M .; and Schnesck, R. A. Piagnosing Classroom Learning Environment. Chicago: Science Research Associates, In c ., 1966. Fox, Robert S .; L ip p it t , Ronald 0 .; and Schmuck, Richard A. Pupil Teacher Adjustment and Mutual Adaptation in Creating Class­ room Learning Environments. Final Report on Cooperative Research Project No. 1167. Ann Arbor: In s t it u t e fo r Social Research, O ffic e of Education, U n iv e rs ity of Michigan, 1964. G allup, George. Second Annual Survey o f the P u b lic 's A ttitu d e Toward tfoe Public Schools. P rinceton, N .J .: Gallup In te rn a tio n a l, 1970. G a rre tt, Howard E. Elementary S t a t is t ic s . David McKay C o., In c ., 1966. 2nd ed. New York: Gerth, Hans H ., and M ills , Wright C. Character and Social S tru ctu re. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1953. 206 Goodlad, John I . , and Anderson, Robert H. The Non-Graded Elementary School. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1959. Goodman, Samuel M. The Assessment o f School Q u a lity . Albany: York S tate Educational Department, March, 1959. Hal p in , Andrew W. Theory and Research in A dm inistration. York: The Macmillan Company, 1966. New New H alpin, Andrew W., and C ro ft, Don B. The O rganizational Climate of Schools. U.S. O ffic e of Education Research P roject No. 543. Washington: U.S. Department of H ealth, Education and W elfare, 1962. Havighurst, Robert J . , and Taba, H ild a. Adolescent Character and P e rso n a lity . New York: John Wiley and Sons, In c ., 1949. Hemblin, R. L i, and M il le r , Kenneth. V ariation s in In te ra c tio n P ro file s and Group S iz e . Technological Report No. 3. S t. Louis: Social Science In s t it u t e , The Small Groups Research Center, Washington U n iv e rs ity , 1960. Jones, Howard R. Financing Public Elementary and Secondary Education. New York: The Center fo r Applied Research in Education, In c ., 1966. Ketcham, Warren A ., and Morse, W illiam C. Dimensions o f C hildren 's Social and Psychological Development Related to Scho~oT Achievement. Cooperative Research Project No. 1286 . Washington: U.S. Department of H ealth, Education and W elfare, 1965. Kumpf, Carl H.The Adaptable School. 1952. New York: The Macmillan C o., Lewin,Kurt. F ie ld Theory in Soqial Science. Selected Theoretical Papers'! Edited by barwin C artw right. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1957. L ip p it , R ., and White, R. K. "The Social Climate of C hildren 's Groups." Child Behavior and Development. Edited by R. G. Barker, J. S. Loremin, and H. F, Wright. New York: M cGraw-Hill, 1943. March, John G ., and Simon, Howard A. John W iley, 1958. O rganizations. McClelland, Donald C ., e t a l . The Achievement M otive. Appleton-Century-C rofts, 1953. New York: New York; M orris, Glyn. The High School P rin cip al and S ta ff Study Youth. New York! Teachers C ollege, Columbia U n iv e rs ity , 1958. 207 Mort, Paul R ., and C o rn e ll, Francis S. American Schools in T ra n s itio n . New York: Bureau of P u b lication s, Teachers C ollege, Columbia U n iv e rs ity , 1941. Mort, Paul R ., and Furmo, Orlando F. Theory and Synthesis o f a Sequential Simplex. New York! In s t it u t e of A dm inistrative Research, Teachers C ollege, Columbia U n iv e rs ity , 1960. Mort, Paul R .; Vincent, W illiam S .; and Newell, Clarence A. The Growing Edge. New York: M etropolitan School Study Council, Teachers College, Columbia U n iv e rs ity , 1945. Cited by Donald H. Ross, e d ., Adm inistration fo r A d a p ta b ility , p. 26. Nicholas, Lynn N .; Virgo, Helen E .; and Wattenburg, W illiam W. E ffe c t o f Socioeconomic Setting and Organizational Climate on Problems Brought to School O ffic e s . Final Report of Cooperative Research Project No. 2394. D e tro it: Wayne S tate U n iv e rs ity , O ffic e o f Education, 1965. Parsons, T .; Bobs, R. F . ; and S h ils , E. A. Working Papers in the Theory o f A ction. Chicago: The Free Press, 1953. P la n t, J. S. "Personality and an Urban Area." Reader in Urban Sociology. Edited by P. H. Hott and A. J. Reiss. STehcoe: I l l i n o i s Press, 19511 Riessman, F. The C u ltu ra lly Deprived C h ild . and Row, 1962. Remmer, New York: Harold H. Manual fo r the Purdue Master A ttitu d e L a fa y e tte , In d .: Purdue U n iv e rs ity , 1960. Harper Scales. Ross, Donald H ., ed. Admi ni s t r a t i on fo r Adaptabi1i t y . New York: M etropolitan School Study Council, Teachers C ollege, Columbia U n iv e rs ity , 1958. R o tte r, J. B. Social Learning and C lin ic a l Psychology. C1i f f s , N .J .: R re n tic e -H a ll, 1954. Ryans, David G. C haracteristics of Teachers. American Council on Education, i960. Englewood Washington: Seashore, S. E. Group Cohesiveness in In d u s tria l Work. U n iversity of Michigan, 1954. Sears,R. R.; Maccaby, E. E .; and Levin, H. Patterns Rearing. New York: Row, Peterson, 1957. Ann Arbor: o f Child 208 Shaw, M e rv ille C. " D e fin itio n and Id e n tific a tio n of Academic Underachievers." Guidance fo r the Underachiever with Superior A b il it y . Edited by Leonard to. M ille r . Washington: OTS. Department of H ealth, Education and W elfare, 1961. Spain, Charles; Drummond, Harold 0 .; and Goodlad, John I . Educa­ tio n a l Leadership in the Elementary School. New York: Rinehart and Company, 1956. S w eitzer, Robert E ., e t a l . Role Expectations and Perceptions of School P rin c ip a ls . U.S. O ffic e o f Education Research P roject No. 1329. S tillw a te r : Oklahoma S tate U n iv e rs ity , Research Foundation, 1963. Symond, Percival M. What Education Has to Learn from Psychology. New York: Teachers College, Columbia U n iv e rs ity , n.d. A rtic le s reprinted from Teachers College Record from February, 1955 through November, 1959. Tannenbaum, A. S ., and Kohn, R. L. P a rtic ip a tio n in Evanston, 111.: Row Peterson, 1958. Terman, Louis M. The G ifted Child Grows Up. U n iversity Press, 1947. Watson, Robert I . Psychology of the C h ild . John W iley, 1959. Union Locals. Palo A lto : Stanford 2nd ed.New York: Wineman, David. "Existing and Projected Research on In divid ual and Group Approaches in the Treatment of Juvenile Delinquency." Role o f the School in Prevention o f Juvenile Delinquency. Edited by W illiam R. C o rrik er. Washington: U.S. Government P rin tin g O ffic e , 1963. Wrenn, Charles G. Study Habits In vento ry. Stanford U niversity Press, 1941. Rev. ed. Palo A lto : A rtic le s and P eriodicals Bayley, Nancy. "Child Development." Encyclopedia of Educational Research. Edited by W alter S. Monroe. 2nd ed. New York: The Macmillan C o., 1950. B i l l s , Robert E. "About People and Teaching." B u lle tin , X X V III, No. 2 (Bureau of School S ervice, College o f Education, U n iv e rsity of Kentucky, Lexington, December, 1955). 209 Blou, Peter M .; W olf, Heydebrand W.; and S to u ffe k , Robert E. "The Structure o f Small Bureaucracy . 11 American Sociological Review, XXXI, No. 2 (1 9 66 ), 179-19T! Bronfenbrenner, U. "S o c ia liza tio n and Social Class Through Time and Space." Readings in Social Psychology. Edited by E. E. Maccoby, T. M. Newcomb, and E. L. H a rtle y , 1958. Caplow, Theodore. "The E ffe c t of Changing Size on Organizational Structure in In dustry." Transactions of the Third World Congress of Sociology, IlT Amsterdam In te rn a tio n a l Sociological A ssociation, 1957. C h ild , Samuel L ., and W hiting, John W. "Determinants of Level A sp iration: Evidence from Everyday L if e ." Journal Abnormal Sociological Psychology, 1949. of Cogan, Morris Louis. "The Behavior of Teachers and the Productive Behavior o f T h eir Pupils: I , Perception A nalysis." Journal of Experimental Education, XXVII (December, 1958), 89-105. Cogan, Morris Louis. "Research on the Behavior o f Teachers: Phase." Teacher Education, XIV (1 9 63 ), 238-243. A New C lark, Kenneth. "Defeatism in tine Ghetto School." School Children in the Urban Slums. Edited by John I . Roberts. New York: The Free Press, 1967. C o rn e ll, E. L. "The V a r ia b ilit y of Children of D iffe re n t Ages and It s R elation to School C la s s ific a tio n and Grouping." Educational Research Studies. B u lle tin 1010, No. 1. New Vork: U niversity of the S tate o f New York, 1937. Dale, Edgar. "Planning and Developing the Company Organization S tru c tu re ." Research Report No. 20, American Management Association. New York: American Management A ssociation, 1952. Deutsch, N. "The Role of Social Class in Language Development and C ognition." American Journal o f O rthopsychiatry, XXV (January, 1965), 56-62. ■ Dodd, S tuart C arter. "D iffu sio n is Predictable Testing P ro b a b ility Models fo r Laws o f In te ra c tio n ." American Sociological Review, XX (1 9 55 ), 392-401. Flanagan, John C ., e t a l . A Survey and Follow-up Study o f Educa­ tio n a l Plans and Decisions in R elation to Aptitude P attern s." Studies o f the American High School. Pittsburgh: U n iversity of P ittsbu rg h, 1962. i 210 Flanders, Ned H ., and Havunaki, S ic lo . "Group Compliance to Dominative Teacher In flu e n c e ." Bureau o f Educational Research, Reprint BER 60-2. Minneapolis: College of Education, U niversity o f Minnesota, 1960. French, J. R .; Is r a e l, J .: and As, D. "An Experiment in P a rtic ip a tio n in a Norwegian Factory." Human R elations, X I I I , No. 1 (1960), 3. Firman, W illiam D. "Which Schools are Better?" B u lle tin (October, 1963), 88-89. NEA Research Gage,Nelson L .; L e a v itt, George E .; and Stone, George C. "Teachers' Understanding of Th eir Pupils and P up ils' Ratings of Their Teacher." Psychologicon Monograph. Washington: American Psychological Associates, 1955. G etzels, Jacob W. "Adm inistration as a Social Process." Administra­ tiv e Theory in Education. Chicago: Midwest Adm inistration Center, 1958. Gordon, O liv e r J."A Factor Analysis in Human Needs and In d u s tria l Morale." Personnel Psychology, V I I I , No. 1 (1 9 55 ), 1-8. Gould, Rosalind. "Some Sociological Determinants o f Goal S triv in g s ." Journal o f Social Psychology, X II (1 9 41 ), 461-473. Guion, Russel M. "The Employee Load o f F ir s t Supervisors." Personnel Psychology, VI (1953), 17-22. Haggard, Edward T. " S o c ia liz a tio n , Personality and Academic Achievement in G ifted C hildren ." School Review, LXV (1 9 57 ), 388-414. Harp, John. "A Note on Personality Variables in D iffusio n Research." Rural Sociology, XXV ( I9 6 0 ) , 347. Havighurst, R. J. "Who are the S o c ia lly Disadvantaged?" Journal Negro Education, No. ) (W in ter, 1965). of H e lle r, Robert W. "Informal Organization and Perceptions of the O rganizational Climate o f School." The Journal of Educa­ tio n a l Research, LX, No. 9 (May-June, 1968), 40J>-4ll. Hemphill, John K. Group Dimensions, A Manual fo r Their Measurements. Research Monograph No. 87. Columbus: Ohio State U n iv e rs ity , Bureau of Business Research, 1956. 211 H ild re th , Gertrude. "Individual D iffe re n c e s ." Encyclopedia of Educational Research. Edited by Walter S. Monroe. 2nd ed. New Vork: The Macmillan Co., 1950. Hughes, Byron 0. " V a r ia b ility Among and W ithin In d iv id u a ls in Relation to Education." M e rrill-P a lm e r Q u a rte rly , CXI, No. 3 (Spring, 1957), 167-187. In d ik , Bernard P. "The Relationship Between Organization Size and Supervision R atio ." A dm inistrative Science Q u a rte rly , IX , No. 3 (1 9 64 ), 310-312“ Jones, Harold E. "The Environment and Mental Development." Manual o f Child Psychology. Edited by L. Carmichael. New Vork: John Wiley and Sons, 1964. Katz, D. "Morale and M otivation in In d u s try." CurrentTrends in In d u s tria l Psychology. Edited by W. Dennis. Pittsburgh: U niversity Press, 1949. K atz, D ., and Kohn, R. L. "Some Recent Findings in Human Relations Research in Industry." Readings in Social Psychology. Edited by G. E. Swanson and E. L. H a rtle y . New York: Henry H o lt, 1952. Ketcham, Warren A. "Worries Teachers Should Forget." Ann Arbor: U niversity of Michigan, School o f Education, May, 1962. (Mimeographed.) Ketcham, Warren A ., and L a ffitte ., Rondeau F. "How Well Are They Learning?" Educational Leadership, XVI, No. 3 (March, 1959), 337-341. Kohn, M a ritz. "Social Class and Parent C hild Relationships: An in te rp re ta tio n ." The American Journal of Socioloqy, L X V III (1964), 471-480. Lesser, G. S .; F if e r , G ,; and C la rk, J. H. Mental A b ilit ie s of Children from D iffe re n t Social-C lass and C ultural Groups. Monographs of the Society fo r Research in Child Development, XXX, No. 4 (S e ria l No. 102). Chicago: U n iv e rsity of Chicago Press, 1967. Lewin, K .; L ip p it t , R .; and White, R. "Patterns o f Aggressive Behavior in Experim entally Created 'Social C lim a te s .1" Journal of Social Psychology, X (1 9 39 ), 271-299. 212 Marburgar, Lari L. "Consideration fo r Educational Planning." Education in Depressed Areas. Edited by A. Harry Possow. New York: Teachers C ollege, Columbia U n iv e rs ity , 1963. Marburgar, Carl L. Great C itie s P ro je c t. Report to the Board of Education, D e tr o it, Michigan, 1961. Mason, Ward S ., and Gross, Neal. "Intra-O ccupational Prestige D iffe re n tia tio n : The School Superintendent." American Sociological Review (June, 1955), 415. McDavid, James, R. "Some Relationships Between Social Reinforcement and Scholastic Achievement." Journal Consultant Psychology, X X III (1 9 59 ), 1 5 1 - m i M c D ill, E. L .; Meyers, J. C .; and Rigsby, L. C. " In s titu tio n a l E ffects in the Academic Behavior of High School Youths." Sociology o f Education, XL (Summer, 1967), 181-191. McKeachie, Warren J. "M otivation, Teaching Methods, and College Learning." Nebraska Symposium on M otivation. Edited by M. R. Jones. Lincoln: U n iv e rsity of Nebraska Press, 1961. M ille r , Gerald L. "An In v e s tig a tio n o f Teaching Behavior and Pupil Thinking." Department of Education, U niversity o f Utah, 1964. Miner, B etty. "Sociological Background Variables A ffec tin g School Environment." The Journal o f Educational Research, LXI, No. 8 ( A p r il, 1968), 372-373. Mollenkopf, W illiam G ., and M e lv ille , Donald S. "A Study of Secondary School C h a ra c te ris tic s as Related to Test Scores." Research B u lle tin 56-6. Princeton, N .J .: Educational Testing S ervice, 1956. (Mimeographed.) Morgenstern, Oson. Polegomena to a Theory O rganization. Report Monograph, No. /3 4 . Santa Monica: Rand Corporation, 1951. Nelson, L. N. "The E ffe c t of Classroom In te ra c tio n on Pupil L in g u is tic Performance." D is s erta tio n A bstracts, XXV (1 9 64 ), 789. Nemzek, C. L. "The Value o f C ertain N o n -In te lle c tu a l Factors fo r D ire c t and D iffe r e n tia l P rediction of Academic Success." Journal of Social Psychology, X II (1940), 21-30. O tto, Henry J. "Elementary Education— I I I ; Organization and A dm inistration ." Encyclopedia of Educational Research. Edited by W alter S. Monroe. 2nd ed. New York: the Macmillan C o., 1950. 213 Passow, Harry A ., and Goldberg, Miriam L. "Talented Youth P ro je c t, Horace Mann, Lincoln In s titu te of School Experimentation, Teachers College, Columbia U n iv e rs ity , New York C ity , New York." Education Leadership (November, 1958), 121-125. Passow, Harry A ., and Goldberg, Miriam. "Study of Underachieving G ifte d ." Educational Leadership, XVI (1 9 59 ), 121-125. Perkins, Hugh V. "Teachers' and Peers' Perceptions of Childrens' S elf-co n cep t." Maladjusted Child Development, XXIX (1 9 58 ), 217- 2 ! 8 . ------P ierce, James V. "The Educational M otivation Patterns of Superior Students Who Do and Do Not Achieve in High School." Mimeographed Report o f Research Performed Pursuant to a Contract w ith the United States O ffic e of Education, Department of Health, Education and W elfare. U n iversity of Chicago, 1959. Phores, E. J. "Expectancy Changes in S k ill and Chance S itu a tio n s ." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, LIV (1 9 57 ), 339-342. R ezler, Agnes G. "Personal Values and Achievements in C ollege." The Personnel and Guidance Journal, XXXIX (1 9 60 ), 139. Robinson, Helen F. "School Practices That Cause F a ilu re ." Education, LXIV,No. 3 (November, 1967), 169-173. Childhood Rodin, M ., and Glasser, P. "The Use of Parental A ttitu d e Question­ naires with C u ltu ra lly Disadvantaged Fam ilies." Journal of Marriage and Family, XXVII (1956), 49-58. Rodin, N ., and Kam rii, C. "The Child Rearing A ttitu d e s o f Dis­ advantaged Negro Mothers and Some Educational Im p lic a tio n s ." Journal of Negro Education, XXII (1 9 6 5 ), 138-146. Roth, Ronald M ., and Myersberg, Howard A. "The Non-Achievement Syndrome." Personnel Guidance Journal, XX (W in ter, 1966), 291-409. ' Sears, Peter. Level of A spiration in Academically Successful and Unsuccessful C hildren." Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, XXV (1940), 498-536". S haycroft, Marion F. The High School Years: Growth in Cognitive S k i l l s . P ittsburg: American In s t it u t e fo r Research in Schools of Education, U niversity of P itts b u rg , 1967. 214 Smigel, E. 0. "Public A ttitu d e s Toward Stealing as Related to the Size of the Victim O rganization . 11 American Sociological Review, XXI (1 9 66 ), 320-327. T a lla c h i, S. "Organization Size and In d u s tria l A ttitu d e s and Behavior: An Empirical Study." A dm inistrative Science Q u a rte rly , V (December, 1960), 398-420. T e rrin , Fredrick W., and M ills , Donald L. "The E ffe c t of Changing Size'Upon In tern a l Structure of O rganizations." American Sociological Review, XX (1951), 11-13. Thomas, Edwin J . , and Fink, C linton F. "E ffects of Group S ize ." Psychology B u lle tin , LX, No. 4 (1 9 63 ), 337-338. Wilson, Ronald C ., and Morrow, Ross W. "School and Career A djust­ ment o f Bright High-Achieving and Under-Achieving High School Boys." Journal General Psychology, Cl (1962), 91-103. Worthy, James C. "Organizations Structure and Employee Morale." American Sociological Review, XV (1 9 50 ), 169-179. Z i l l e r , Robert C. "Toward a Theory of Open and Closed Groups." Psychological B u lle tin , LXIV, No. 3 (1 9 65 ), 164-182. Reports and B u lletin s Abstracts o f D is s e rta tio n s . Action Society T ru s t. T ru s t, 1953. U niversity of Southern C a lifo rn ia , 1957. Size and Morale. London: Action Society American In s titu te o f Research. Studies of the American High School, Project T a le n t, Pittsburgh: The In s t it u t e , 1962. Ber 6 0 -2, College o f Education, Minneapolis, U n iversity o f Minnesota, 1960. In terim Report. Talent Preservation P ro je c t. Bureau o f Educational and Vocational Guidance, High School D iv is io n , Board of Education, C ity o f New York, August, 1959. "Levels of Educational Performance and Related Factors in Michigan, 1970." Assessment Report No. 4. Michigan Department of Education, Bureau o f Research, Evaluation and Assessment. 215 Local D is tr ic t Report: Explanatory M a te ria ls . Lansing: Michigan Department of Education, Assessment Report No. 6 , 1970. New England School Development Council. State Aid to Education in Massachusetts. A NESDC Research Report. Cambridge: TReCouncil, 1962. Cited by Leonard M. B ritto n , Operation Yardstick. Cleveland: The Martha Holden Jennings Foundation, w : Ohio L e g is la tiv e Service Commission. Ohio High Schools--a S ta tis tic a l P r o f ile . Columbus: The State of Ohio, S ta ff Research B u lle tin No. 56, January, 1963. President Lyndon B. Johnson, in an address to the National Education Association, July 2, 1965, New York Times, July 3, 1965, p. 8 . Prospect fo r America. The R ockefeller Panel Reports.Garden C ity , N. Y.': Doubleday and Company, In c ., 1961. Ranking of Michigan Public High School D is tric ts by Selected Financial Data. Lansing: Michigan Department of Education, B u lle tin 1012, December, 1970. ! Roberts, John I . School Children in the Urban Slums. New York: The Free Press, 1967. Unpublished M aterials Bohnsen, John F. "A Study of Teacher Morale as i t Relates to Teacher Perceptions of Parent A ttitu d e ." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta ­ tio n , Michigan S tate U n iv e rs ity , 1970. Bosler, David D. "An In v e s tig a tio n of C ertain Factors Influencing the Optimum Size fo r Elementary School Attendance U n its ." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , S tate U niversity o f Iowa, 1960. B u tle r, John J. " D iffe r e n tia l Factors in the Self-Concepts of Overachieving, Underachieving, and Expected-Achieving Adolescents." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U niversity o f Southern C a lifo r n ia , 1959. C o llin s , James A. "Individual Personality and Organizational C lim ate." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , Claremount Graduate School and U niversity Center, 1965. 216 Creaser, M orira. "Parent-Teacher Contacts as Related to School S ize , Number o f Bussed Pupils and Organizational C lim ate." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , Wayne S tate U n iv e rs ity , 1966. Dave, Ronald. "The Id e n tific a tio n and Measurement of Environmental Process Variables Related to Achievement." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U niversity o f Chicago, 1964. Emmer, Emitt T. "The E ffe c t of Teacher Use and Acceptance of Student Ideas on Student Verbal In it ia t io n ." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U niversity of Michigan, 1967. Flagg, Joseph T. "The Organizational Climate of Schools: It s R elationship to Pupil Achieyement, Size of School and Teacher Turnover." Unpublished Ed.D. d is s e rta tio n , Rutgers, The S tate U n iv e rs ity , 1965. H a ll, M orril L. "A Study fo r Some of the Relationships Between Size o f School and Selected C haracteristics o f Students, Teachers, and P rin c ip a ls ." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , Florida S tate U n iv e rs ity , 1956., Hamachek, Donald E. "A Study of the Relationships Between C ertain Measures o f Growth and Self-Im age of Elementary School C hildren ." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U n iversity o f Michigan, 1960. In d ik , Bernard P. "Organization S ize and Member P a rtic ip a tio n ." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U niversity of Michigan, 1961. Lowther, Malcolm A. "A Comparison of the Educational M otivatio n , S e lf-E v a lu a tio n and Classroom Conduct of High and Low Achieving Eighth Grade Students." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U niversity o f Michigan, 1961. Lumpkin, Donovan D. "The Relationship of S e lf Concept to Achievement in Reading." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U n iversity o f Southern C a lifo r n ia , 1959. Morrison, Bernard M. "The Reactions of In te rn a l and External Children to Patterns of Teaching Behavior." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U niversity o f Michigan, 1966. Murdy, Leonard L. "Perception of Interpersonal Relationships Among Secondary School A dm inistrators." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U niversity of Southern C a lifo rn ia , 1962. 217 Nason, L e s lie J. "Patterns of Circumstances Related to Educational Achievement of High School Pupils of Superior A b ilit y ." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U n iv e rsity of Southern C a lifo rn ia , 1954. Payne, David A. "A Dimension Analysis of the Academic Self-Concept of Eleventh Grade Under and Over-Achieving Students." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , Michigan State U n iv e rs ity , 1961. Richmond, Charles H. "A Study of Predicted and Measured Achievement and Some Possible Causative Factors of D iffe re n c e s ." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U n iv e rsity of Oklahoma, 1959. Roberson, Marvin J. "Negro and White Eighth Graders' A ttitu d e Toward the In s titu tio n o f Education and the Schools as Related to Th eir Academic Achievement." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U niversity of Michigan, 1970. Roberts, Helen. "Academic Achievement." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta ­ tio n , U n iversity of C a lifo rn ia , 1960. Stoner, W illiam G. "Factors Related to Underachievement o f High School Students." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , Stanford U n iv e rs ity , 1956. Strong, W ill R. "An A n a ly tic a l Comparison o f Large and Small Schools w ith Respect to Achievement of Pupil A ttitu d e s o f Teachers." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , Indiana U n iv e rs ity , 1964. Watson, Betty J. "A Study of the R elationship Among Selected Aspects o f A dm inistrative Behavior and Teacher Group Cohesiveness in the Elementary School." Unpublished Ed.D. d is s e rta tio n , Michigan S tate U n iv e rs ity , 1965. Wolfe, Ronald. "The Id e n tific a tio n and Measurement of Environmental Process Variables Related to In te llig e n c e ." Unpublished Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n , U niversity o f Chicago, 1965. APPENDICES APPENDIX A What's Your Opinion? 219 WHAT'S YOUR OPINION? The follow ing questions give you the opportunity to express what you think and fe e l. Please put a check nark in fro n t o f your answer. There are no rig h t or wrong answers. Since th is is a group assessment, your name is not required. 1. Where do youthink you rank in your class in the seventh grade? a .__ Among the best b .__ Above average c .__ Average 2. d .___ Below average e .___ Among the poorest Do you think you have the a b il it y to complete high school? a .__ Yes, d e fin ite ly b .__ Yes, probably c .__ Not sure e ith e r way 3. d. Probably not e .___ No How do you ra te y o u rs e lf in school a b i l i t y compared w ith those in your class a t school? a. I am among the best b ._ I am above average c .__I am average 4. d .___ I. am below average e .___ I am among the poorest Forget fo r a moment how others grade your work. how good do you think your work is? d .___ My work is below average e .___ My work is much below average a. My work is e x c e lle n t b . ____ My work is good c .____ My work is average 5. What kind of grades do you think you are capable of getting? a .__ Mostly A's b . __ Mostly B's c .__ Mostly C's 6. d . _Mostly D's e .___ Mostly E's Where do you think you would rank in your class in high school? a .__ Among the best b .__ Above average c . __ Average 7. d .___Below average e .___ Among the poorest How do you ra te y o u rs e lf in school a b il it y compared to your class friends? a . __ I am the best b . __ Above average c . __ I am average 8. In your own opinion, d .___I am below average e .___ I am the poorest Do you think you.have the a b il it y to complete college? a . __ _Yes, d e fin ite ly b .__ Yes, probably c . __ Not sure e ith e r way d.___Probably not e.___ No 220 i WHAT'S YOUR OPINION? Page .2. Do you fin d y o u rs e lf thinking about other things when you're suppose to be doing the classwork? a . _ Almost always b .___Most o f the time 10. Almost always Most of the time e .___To go to college fo r awhile f .___To graduate from college g .___Jo do graduate work beyond college Sometimes what we would lik e to do i s n 't the same as what we expect to do. How f a r in school do you expect you w ill r e a lly go? e .___ I th in k I r e a lly w ill go to college fo r awhile f .___ I th in k I r e a lly w ill graduate from college g .___ I th in k I r e a lly w ill do graduate work beyond college I have to re-read m aterial several tim es, the words do n 't have much meaning the f i r s t time I go over them. a .___Never b .___Rarely c. Sometimes 15. JSometimes ’Hardly ever I f you were fre e to go as f a r as you wanted to in school, how f a r would you lik e to go? a .___ I th in k I r e a lly wi 11 q u it school as soon as I can b .___ I th in k I r e a lly wi 11 go to high school fo r awhile c. I th in k I r e a lly wi 11 graduate from high school d .___ I think I r e a lly wi 11 go to business school or technical school 14. Sometimes Hardly ever c. d. a .__ I 'd lik e to q u it rig h t now b .__ Jo go to high school fo r awhile c. To graduate from high school d .__ To go to business school or some other technical school 13. c. d. My teacher makes everything seem in te re s tin g and im portant. a .__ Almost always b. Most o f the time 12. JSometimes, Hardly ever How often do you get bored in class? a ._ b. 11. c. d." d *. e .' JDften "Always I have a tendency to "daydream" when try in g to study. a. b. c. Never Rarely Sometimes d .___ Often e .___ Always 221 APPENDIX B What I Think 222 WHAT I THINK 1. I lik e most o f the work 2 . Education serves people in school. w e ll. 3. Most of the things I learn in school are useful to me. 4. Education makes you a b e tte r person. 5. I look forward to school s ta rtin g every f a l l . 6. Education makes th is a b e tte r world. 7. There are too many rules in school. 8. Education is getting b e tte r a ll the time. 9. The books we use in school are in te re s tin g . 10. The more education you get the b e tte r you w ill be able to liv e . 11. I think I learn a lo t in school. 12. Education w ill not harm anyone. 13. There are some big changes I would lik e to make 14. Education r e a lly ju s t fools people and does 15. I'm treated w ell in school. 16. Education does harm to some people. 17. I often t e l l my friends about the in te re s tin g things I learned in school. 18. Education does more harm than good. 19. I never miss school i f I can help i t . 20. I w ill in myschool. not do much good. try to become as educated as possible. 21. I take part in many of the extra school things lik e teen clubs or sports. 22. Education is worth a ll the money spent on i t . 23. I plan to stay in school as long as I can. 24. Education w ill help solve most of the world's problems. 25. Most o f the teachers I have had in school were good people. 223 \ WHAT I THINK . 26. - Page 2. I f you have lo ts o f education you w ill get a b e tte r jo b . 27. I would lik e to be a teacher some day. 28. Educated people have most of the power in our country. 29. Most o f my teachers are f a i r to 30. I f you r e a lly want to get aheadyou should as possible. 31. I believe I w ill q u it school as soon as I can and get a jo b . 32. The more education you have the more people lik e you. 33. Most school work is a waste o f time. 34. I f you have a lo t of education you w ill 35. Most school work is not very in te re s tin g . 36. You w ill get a b e tte r job i f you have 37. I wish I enjoyed school more, 38. Most teachers d o n 't seem to lik e kids. 39. Education w ill make you an important person. 40. Education w ill help make the United States a great country. kids. get as much education be happy. a lo t of education. 224 v APPENDIX C My Opinions 225 MY OPINIONS RESPONSE CODE: CHOOSE ONE ONLY THESE QUESTIONS ARE DESIGNED TO FIND OUT WHAT PUPILS THINK ABOUT THEIR TEACHERS. MARK 1 IF ALWAYS SINCE THIS IS A GROUP ASSESSMENT, YOUR MARK 2 IF USUALLY NAME IS NOT REQUIRED. PLEASE PICK THE MARK 3 IF SELDOM ANSWER THAT WILL MAKE THE QUESTION MOST MARK 4 IF NEVER TRUE FOR YOU BY BLACKING IN THE NUMBER OF YOUR CHOICE (NOT THE SPACE IN FRONT OF THE NUMBER) USE PENCIL ONLY.____________ 1. Is your teacher kind to you? 2. Does your teacher take time to help you? 3. Does your teacher lik e you even i f you have made a mistake? 4. Does your teacher explain your work so you can understand it? 5. Does your teacher make you feel th a t he r e a lly lik e s you? 6. Does your teacher l e t you choose the group you want to work with? 7. Does your teacher make sure you d o n 't fe e l foolish? 8. Does your teacher show you how to do your assignments? 9. Does your teacher make sure you d o n 't fe e l afraid? 10. Does your teacher show you where you can fin d m aterial fo r special projects? 226 5 APPENDIX D How I Feel About Myself 227 HOW I FEEL ABOUT MYSELF RESPONSE CODE: CHOOSE ONE ONLY ON THIS FORM THERE ARE SENTENCES WHICH TELL SOMETHING ABOUT YOU. BUT THE SENTENCES ARE MARK 1 IF SOME OF THE TIME NOT FINISHED. YOU ARE TO PICK THE ANSWER MARK 2 IF ALL THE TIME WHICH WILL MAKE THE SENTENCE MOST TRUE FOR YOU MARK 3 IF MOST OF THE TIME BY BLACKING IN THE NUMBER OF YOUR CHOICE . MARK 4 IF NONE OF THE TIME (NOT THE SPACE IN FRONT OF THE NUMBER) USE PENCIL ONLY. THIS IS A GROUP ASSESSMENT, YOUR ___________________________ NAME IS NOT REQUIRED.__________________________ 1. I do well in math 2. I get good marks 3. I am considered a leader 4. I get good marks in English 5. I do b e tte r than most students in my class 6. I can do school work w ithout help 7. I can take c ritic is m 0. I lik e to read 9. I do w ell in sports 10. I am a b lu ffe r 11. I am a leader 12. I am stupid 13. I am a slow learner 14. I envy people 15. I do reports well 228 i APPENDIX E Questionnaire to Measure Teacher Job S a tis fa c tio n 229 QUESTIONNAIRE TO MEASURE TEACHER JOB SATISFACTION 1. I think my work load is about r ig h t fo r me. 2. The condition o f the buildings and grounds here make th is pleasant place to work. a 3. In g eneral, I am s a tis fie d w ith the textbooks in our classes. 4. New curriculum m aterials tend to s i t on the s h e lf instead o f being used in the classroom. 5. I'm s a tis fie d with the way salary matters are handled here. 6. I th in k I understand a ll of the provisions fo r retirem en t. 7. Most o f my fe llo w workers are quite fr ie n d ly . 8. My immediate supervisor has usually been as f a i r as possible in his dealings with me. 9. My immediate superior seldom gives us c r e d it or praise fo r work well done. 10. The superintendents and th e ir assistants are not very in terested in our w e lfa re . 11. The superintendents and th e ir assistants tend to ignore our suggestions and complaints. 12. The board members should re ly more on the professional s t a f f . 13. My immediate superior does his best to get us the professional help we need. 14. We have fa r too many classroom in te rru p tio n s . 15. The adm inistration keeps us w ell informed about school plans and developments. 16. The adm inistration does a poor job o f handling complaints and suggestions. 17. The c itiz e n s in th is community are g enerally glad to give us time and energy to help the school program. 18. I am often bothered by unexpected extra assignments. 19. I believe th a t present grievance or adjustment procedure gives a person a f a i r opportunity to get a problem s e ttle d . 20. I am convinced th a t my work is r e a lly worthwhile. 230 QUESTIONNAIRE TO MEASURE TEACHER JOB SATISFACTION - Page 2. 21. I h a v e .lit t le opportunity to use my own judgment in my work. 22. In general the o v e rall curriculum in th is school system is on the rig h t tra c k . 23. The longer you work fo r th is school system the more you fe e l you belong. 24. Classroom teachers can get outside help on th e ir remedial problems. 25. There is plenty o f opportunity fo r professional growth in th is school system. 26. The people who get promotions in th is school system usually deserve them. 27. Teachers' meetings and committee meetings and other e x tra -c u rric u la r a c t iv it ie s take up too much of my time. 28. The adm inistration does a l l that i t can to give us good working conditions. 29. The work we do in building our own curriculum m aterials is worthwhile. 30. Most o f the m aterials and teaching aides provided fo r teachers are useful. 31. In my opinion, the s a la rie s in our school system are lower than in most other school systems. 32. I think I understand a ll the provisions fo r sick leave and other benefi t s . 33. Most o f the people I work with are very cooperative. 34. My immediate superior is always breathing down our necks, he watches us too c lo s e ly . 35. My immediate superior r e a lly tr ie s to get our ideas about improvements. 36. The superintendents and t h e ir assistants do everything they can to see th a t we are treated f a i r l y on the job. 37. Local pressure groups have too much influence on board members' decisions. 38. Board members are generally in terested in our w e lfa re . 39. My immediate superior does his best to see th a t I have the equipment I need to do an e ffe c tiv e jo b . 231 QUESTIONNAIRE TO MEASURE TEACHER JOB SATISFACTION - Page 3. 40. This school system generally operates e f f ic ie n t ly and smoothly. 41. The adm inistration keeps us in the dark about things we ought to know. 42. I feel th a t I know how I f i t in w ith the to ta l program in th is school system. 43. Often I feel obligated to p a rtic ip a te in too many unrelated community a c t iv it ie s . 44. You have to have a drag with the adm inistration to get a good assignment. 45. Some employees who have fa ile d could have been saved by more s k ill f u l handling during probationary or c r it ic a l periods. 46. My work in th is school system is w ell suited to my tra in in g and c a p a b ilitie s . 47. I'm doing the kind o f work, in th is school system th a t I li k e best. 48. This school system is doing a b e tte r than average job in preparing pupils fo r l i f e . 49. I have a great deal o f in te r e s t in th is school system and it s fu tu re . 50. The a v a ila b le f a c i l i t i e s fo r pupil coinseling and guidance services are adequate. 51. The in -s e rv ic e tra in in g program in th is school system helps me do a b e tte r job. 52. I have l i t t l e opportunity to use my real a b i l it ie s in th is school system. 53. I think I could do a b e tte r job i f I had more unassigned tim e. 54. In general, I have enough modern equipment to teach e ffe c tiv e ly . 55. The classroom teach er's need should be given more consideration in the selection o f curriculum m a te ria ls . 56. I think th a t the salary schedule in our school system in administered f a i r l y and o b je c tiv e ly . 57. Compensation p o lic ie s fo r e x tra -c u rric u la r a c t iv it ie s is about r ig h t. 58. I'm s a tis fie d with the way our sick leave and b e n e fit programs are handled. 232 5 QUESTIONNAIRE TO MEASURE TEACHER JOB SATISFACTION - Page 4 59. Some of the prople I work w ith tr y to avoid th e ir f a i r share of e x tra ­ c u rric u la r a c t iv it ie s . 60. My immediate superior is too concerned w ith his own career to care about our needs. 61. My immediate superior generally keeps his promises. 62. I f I have.a complaint to make, I fe e l fre e to t a lk to someone in the ad m inistrative o ffic e s . 63. The board members allow community a c t iv it ie s to in te r fe r e too much with the classroom program. 64. The board members do everything they can to see th a t we are treated fa ir ly . 65.. My immediate superior keeps putting things o f f , he ju s t le ts things r id e . 66. Most classroom in terru p tio n s contribute to our overall educational program. 67. The superintendents and t h e ir assistants are r e a lly try in g to bu ild an integrated school program and make i t successful. 68. I have to depend on the grapevine as my source o f inform ation. 69. I fe e l there are too many re s tric tio n s on my personal a c t iv it ie s . 70. The adults in our community are not p a r tic u la r ly in terested in schools. 71. I am confident I can keep my present assignment as long as I do a good job. 72. My work in th is school system c a lls fo r the best I have to o ffe r . 73. Sometimes I feel th a t my work counts fo r very l i t t l e program. 74. Generally speaking, th is school system is doing an e x c e lle n t jo b . 75. I am proud to be p art of the educational program o f th is community. 76. In s u ffic ie n t help is provided fo r the solution of d i f f i c u l t d is c ip lin e problems. 77. Most pupils are placed a t the level th at is best fo r them. 78. Pupils in th is school are achieving up to th e ir a b i l i t y . , 233 in the school QUESTIONNAIRE TO MEAUSRE TEACHER JOB SATISFACTION - Page 5. 79. I th in k the students in th is school have a good a ttitu d e toward school. 80. Pupils wish to achieve in th is school. .81. Student attendance is good in th is school. 82. Students are good readers in th is school. 83. Most of the students* parents have incomes of over 84. This school is in a good community. 85. This school d i s t r ic t has good schools. 86. Most parents' income in th is community is under$10,000. 234 $10,000. APPENDIX F .... The Organizational Climate D escriptive Questionnaire 235 THE.ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE DESCRIPTIVE QUESTIONNAIRE i . 1 - The questionnaire was developed by Halpin and C ro ft (1962). The OCDQ is an instrument which permits the portrayal o f the organizational clim ate o f an elementary school. I t is a 64 item L ikest type questionnaire which is given in a group type s itu a tio n requirin g no more than 30 minutes to adm inister. 1 . Teachers' closest frien d s are other fa c u lty members a t th is school. 2. The mannerisms of teachers a t th is school are annoying. 3. Teachers spend time a f t e r school w ith students who have in divid ual problems. 4. In structions fo r the operation o f teaching aids are a v a ila b le . 5. Teachers in v ite other fa c u lty members to v i s i t them a t home. 6. There is a m inority group o f teachers who always oppose the m a jo rity. 7. Extra books are a v a ila b le fo r classroom use. 8. S u ffic ie n t time is given to prepare ad m inistrative reports. 9. Teachers know the fa m ily background o f other fa c u lty members. 10. Teachers exert group pressure on non-conforming fa c u lty members. 11. In fa c u lty meetings, there is a fe e lin g of " le ts get things done." 12 . A dm inistrative paper work is burdensome a t th is school. 13. Teachers ta lk about th e ir personal l i f e to other fa c u lty members. 14. Teachers 15. School supplies are re a d ily a v a ila b le 16. Student progress reports require too much work. 17. Teachers have fun s o c ia liz in g together during school tim e. 18. Teachers in te rru p t other fa c u lty members who are ta lk in g in s ta ff meetings. 19. Most o f the teachers here accept the fa u lts of t h e ir colleagues. seek special favors from the p rin c ip a l. 236 fo r use in class work. THE ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE DESCRIPTIVE QUESTIONNAIRE - Page 2. 20. Teachers have too many committee requirements. 21. There is considerable laughter when teachers gather in fo rm a lly . 22. Teachers ask nonsensical questions in fa c u lty meetings. 23. Custodial service is a v a ila b le when needed. 24. Routine duties in te rfe re w ith the job o f teaching. 25. Teachers prepare adm in istrative reports by themselves. 26. Teachers ramble when they ta lk in fa c u lty meetings. 27. Teachers a t th is school show much school s p ir it . 28. The prin cip al goes out of his way to help teachers. 29. The p rin cipal helps teachers to solve personal problems * 30. Teachers a t th is school stay by themselves. 31. Teachers accomplish t h e ir work with great vim, vigor and pleasure. 32. The p rin cipal sets an example by working hard him self. 33. The prin cipal does personal favors fo r teachers. 34. Teachers eat lunch by themselves in th e ir own classrooms. 35. The morale of the teachers is high. 36. The prin cip al uses constructive c r itic is m . 37. The p rin cipal stays a f t e r school to help teachers fin is h th e ir work. 38. The teachers s o c ia liz e together in small s e le c tiv e groups. 39. The p rin cipal makes a l l class scheduling decisions. 40. The teachers are contacted by the p rin cip al each day. 4 1 .. The p rin cipal is well prepared when he speaks a t school functions. I ' . 42. The p rin cipal helps s t a f f members s e t tle minor d iffe re n c e s. 43. The p rin cipal schedules the work fo r the teachers. 44. Teachers leave the grounds during the school day. 45. The prin cipal c r it ic iz e s s p e c ific acts ra th e r than a s t a f f member. 237 THE ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE DESCRIPTIVE QUESTIONNAIRE - Page 3. 46. Teachers help s e le c t which courses w ill be taught. 47. The principal corrects teachers' mistakes. 48. The principal ta lk s a great d eal. 49. The p rin cipal explains his reasons fo r c ritic is m to the teachers. 50. The principal t r ie s to get b e tte r s a la rie s fo r teachers. 51. Extra duty fo r teachers is posted conspicuously. 52. The rules set by the p rin cip al are never questioned. 53. The prin cip al looks out f o r the personal w elfare o f teachers. 54. The school s e c re ta ria l service is a v a ila b le fo r teachers' use. 55. The p rin cipal runs the fa c u lty meeting lik e a business conference. 56. The p rin cipal is in the bu ild ing before teachers a r riv e . 57. Teachers work together preparing adm in istrative reports. 58. Faculty meetings are organized according to grade le v e l. 59. Faculty meetings are mainly prin cip al re p o rt meetings. 60. The principal t e lls teachers o f new ideas he has run across. 61. Teachers ta lk about leaving the school system. 62. The p rin cipal checks the subject matter a b il it y o f teachers. 63. The p rin cipal is easy to understand. 64. Teachers are informed of the re su lts o f the supervisory v i s i t . (The OCDQ is a sophisticated instrument which was designed to measure the organizational clim ate as re fle c te d by the perceptions of the school fa c u lty .) APPENDIX G Principal Job S a tis fa c tio n 239 PRINCIPAL JOB SATISFACTION 1. I think my work load is about r ig h t fo r me. 2. The condition o f the building and grounds here makes th is a pleasant place to work. 3. In general, I am s a tis fie d with the textbooks in my b u ild in g . 4. New curriculum m aterials tend to " s it on the shelf" instead o f being used in the classroom. 5. I am s a tis fie d with the way salary matters are handled here. 6. Most o f my fe llo w workers are qu ite frie n d ly . 7. My immediate superior has usually been as f a i r as possible in his dealings with me. 8. My immediate superior seldom gives me c re d it and praise fo r work well done. 9. The superintendent and his assistants are not very in tere s ted in my w e lfa re . 10. The superintendent and his assistants tend to ignore my suggestions and complaints. 11. The board members should r e ly more on the professional s t a f f . 12. My immediate superior does his best to get me the professional help I need fo r my b u ild in g . 13. The superintendent keeps me informed about school plans and developments. 14. My immediate superior does a poor job o f handling complaints and suggestions. 15. The c itiz e n s in th is community are generally glad to give time and energy in order to help the school program. 16. I'm often bothered by unexpected extra assignments. 17. I believe the present grievance or adjustment procedure gives me a f a i r opportunity to get a problem s e ttle d . 18. I am convinced th a t my work is r e a lly worthwhile. 19. I have l i t t l e opportunity to use my own judgment in my work. 20. In general, the o v e rall curriculum in th is school system is on the r ig h t trac k . 21. The longer you work fo r th is school system the more you feel you belong. 240 i PRINCIPAL JOB SATISFACTION - Page 2. 22. There is plenty o f opportunity fo r professional growth in th is school system. 23. The people who get promotions in th is school system usually deserve them. 24. A dm inistrative meetings, committee meetings, and other e x tra -c u rric u la r a c tiv itie s take up too much of my tim e. 25. The board does a ll th a t i t can to give p rin cip a ls good working conditions. 26. The work we do in building our own curriculum m aterials is worthwhile. 27. Most o f the m aterials and teaching aids provided fo r the teachers are useful. 28. In my opinion, the s a la rie s in our school system are lower than in most other school systems. 29. Most of the people I work with are very cooperative. 30. My immediate superior is always breathing down my neck, he watches me too c lo s e ly . 31. My immediate superior r e a lly t r ie s to get my ideas about improvements. 32. The superintendent and his assistants do everything they can to see th a t I am treated f a i r l y on the job. 33. Local pressure groups have too much influence on board members' decisions. 34. The board members are generally in terested in my w e lfa re . 35. My immediate superior does his best to see th a t I have the equipment I need to do an e ffe c tiv e jo b . 36. The school system generally operates e f f ic ie n t ly and smoothly. 37. The board keeps me in the dark about things I ought to know. 38. I fe e l th a t I know how I f i t in with the to ta l program in th is school system. 39. Often I fe e l obliged to p a rtic ip a te in too many unrelated community community a c t iv it ie s . 40. Some p rin c ip a ls who have fa ile d could have been saved by more s k ill f u l handling during probationary or c r it ic a l periods. 241 PRINCIPAL JOB SATISFACTION - Page 3 41. My work in th is school system is well suited to my tra in in g and c a p a b ilitie s . 42. I am doing the kind o f work in th is school system th at I lik e best. 43. This school system is doing a b e tte r than average job in preparing pupils fo r l i f e . 44. I have a great deal of in te re s t in th is school system and it s fu tu re . 45. The a v a ila b le f a c i l i t i e s fo r pupil counseling and guidance services are adequate. 46. The in -s e rv ic e tra in in g program in th is school system helps me do a b e tte r job. 47. I have l i t t l e opportunity to use my real a b il it ie s in th is school system. 48. I am s a tis fie d with the way my sick leave and b e n e fit programs are handled. 49. My immediate superior is too concerned with his own career to care about my needs. 50. My immediate superior g enerally keeps his promises. 51. I f I have a complaint to make I fe e l fr e e to t a lk to the superintendent about i t . 52. The board members do everything they can to see th a t p rin cip a ls are treated f a i r l y . 53. My immediate superior keeps pu tting things o f f , he ju s t le ts things rid e . 54. The superintendent and his assistants are r e a lly try in g to bu ild an integrated school program and make i t successful. 55. I have to depend on the grapevine as my source o f inform ation. 56. I fe e l there are too many re s tric tio n s on my personal a c t iv it ie s . 57. The adults in our community are not p a r tic u la r ly interested in the schools. 58. I am confident I can keep my present assignment as long as I do a good job. 59. My work in the school system c a lls fo r the best I have to o f f e r . 242 PRINCIPAL JOB SATISFACTION. - Page 4. 60. Sometimes I fe e l th a t my work counts fo r very l i t t l e program. in the school 61. Generally speaking, th is school system is doing an e x c e lle n t jo b . 62. I am proud to be a p a rt o f the educational program o f th is community. 243 i APPENDIX H Fact Sheet Survey 244 FACT SHEET SURVEY ____ % 1. What percent o f your teachers reside in the school d is tr ic t? 2. What has been the percent o f teacher turnover in the d i s t r ic t fo r each of the la s t three years? % 1968-6 9_____ % 1969-7 0___ _% 1967-6 8_____ 3. How many rrtillage defeats has the d i s t r ic t experienced in the la s t three years? 1967-68._____ 1968-69_^___ 1969-7 0_____ 3a. 4. How many mi 11 age electio n s has the d is t r ic t had? __ How many bond proposals fo r new schools or additions to present schools have been defeated in the d i s t r i c t fo r the school years 1967-6 8_____ 1968-6 9_____ 1969-7 0____ _ 5. 4a. How old is your oldest building?______ 4b. How new is your newest building?_____ 4c. Why do you think the bond issues fa ile d ? __________________ How many teachers do you have in Grades K-8 th a t have ____ 3 years' teaching experience 5 or more years of teaching experience Total number o f teachers in Grades K-8 5a. Is i t your policy to h ire experienced teachers? Yes No 6. During the school years 1967-68, 1968-69, and 1969-70, did the d is t r ic t experience any teacher strikes? Yes No 6a . I f yes, how many?_____ 245 FACT SHEET SURVEY 7. - Pjage.2. During the school years 1967-68, 1968-69, and 1969-70, was i t necessary fo r any grade o r part o f a grade (1 through 8 ) to be on h a lf days? Yes _No 7a. I f answer is Yes, please l i s t what grade or grades and fo r how long. 8 . Has the d i s t r ic t experienced any student s it - in s or disturbances during the school years 1967-68, 1968-69, or 1969-70 a t the elementary or secondary level th a t led to loss o f school or class time? No Some 8 a. 9. 10. I f answer is Some, please give amount o f time lo s t by number o f h a lf days. __________ What was the d is t r ic t 's to ta l enrollment fo r the 1969-70 school year? What was the enrollment o f each school in your d i s t r ic t fo r the school year 1969-70 th a t housed seventh grade students? School A School B_j School C School D_____ 11. What was the d i s t r ic t 's teacher-adm inistrator r a tio fo r the school year 1969-70? (A dm inistrative personnel to mean superintendent, assistan t superintendents, d ire c to rs , adm in istrative assistants in central o f f ic e , and a ll p rin cip a ls and assistan t p rin c ip a ls .) 12. What was the d i s t r ic t 's teacher-pupil r a tio fo r the school year 1969-70?_____ 13. 12a. Classroom pu pil-teacher r a tio _____ 12b. Ratio of pupils to a ll teacher c e r t if ie d personnel____ How many hours o f in s tru c tio n per day did the seventh graders in your d i s t r ic t receive during the 1969-70 school year?______ 13a. How many days o f in stru c tio n were there in the 1969-70 school year?_____ 246 APPENDIX I Socioeconomic Background o f Students 247 SOCIOECONOMIC BACKGROUND OF STUDENTS The best sing le c r ite rio n in determining the socioeconomic background of children is the occupation of the fa th e r or other head o f the fa m ily . The occupation of the fa th e r or other head o f the fam ily is usually included in each p u p il's CA 60 fo ld e r. Occasionally, you, as a teacher, w ill know more precisely the occupation o f the fa th e r or other head of the fa m ily . Please check the occupation o f the fa th e r or other head o f the fam ily by placing an "X" mark in the box below the proper category. OCCUPATION OF FATHER OR OTHER HEAD OF THE FAMILY Profes­ sional Semi Professional Physician Executive in Industry Teacher Engi neer e tc . Banking Finance S k ille d Labor Semi S k ille d Labor Salesman Truck d riv e r C le ric a l Service Station Technician F ire Depart­ ment e tc . Insurance Armed Forces Business Owners . etc. e tc . . 248 Common Labor APPENDIX J A Rating Schedule 249 A RATING SCHEDULE I Please ra te the importance o f the follow ing fa c to rs . How important to pupil achievement: 1. Is the superintendent's complete knowledge of the school's curriculum a .__ Absolutely essential \ b. \ Fa ir ly important c . __ Unimportant d .__ Could have a negative e ffe c t 2. Is the superintendent's re la tio n s h ip w ith teachers a .__ Absolutely essential b .__ F a irly important c .__ Unimportant d .__ Could have a negative e ffe c t 3. Is the superintendent's re la tio n s h ip with p rin cip als a .__ Absolutely essential b. ___ F a irly important .c. d. 4. Unimportant Could have a negative e ffe c t Is the superintendent's re la tio n s h ip with students a .__ Absolutely essential b .___F a ir ly important c .__ Unimportant d .__ Could have a negative e ffe c t. 5. Is the superintendent's re la tio n s h ip with the community a .__ Absolutely essential b .__ F a irly important c .__ Unimportant d . __ Could have a negative e ffe c t 6. ^ Is the superintendent's previous school adm in istrative experience. a .__ Absolutely essential b . __ F a ir ly im po rtant_ c . ___Unimportant d .__ _Could have a negative e ffe c t 250 A RATING SCHEDULE - Page 2. How important to pupil achievement: 7. Is the superintendent taking a strong stand on school issues a. Absolutely essential b .__ F a irly important c. Unimportant d . ;__ Could.have a negative e ffe c t 8. Is the superintendent using his influence behind the scenes to insure the selection o f competent board members a .__ Absolutely essential b .__ F a irly important c ._ Unimportant d .__ Could have a negative e ffe c t 9. Is the involvement o f s t a f f , p u p il, and parents in a ll possible decision making regarding curriculum a .__ Absolutely essential b .__ F a irly important c. Unimportant d .__ Could have a negative e ffe c t 10. Is the involvement of s t a f f , p u p il, parents, c itiz e n s in a ll possible decision making a .__ Absolutely essential b .__ F a irly important c . __ Unimportant d .__ Could have a negative e ffe c t 11. Is the organizational s tru c tu re o f the school d i s t r ic t a .__ Absolutely essential b .__ F a irly important c .__ Unimportant d .__ Could have a negative e ffe c t 12. Is the length o f service provided by the superintendent to the d is t r ic t a .__ Absolutely essential b .__ F a ir ly important c .__ Unimportant d .__ Could have a negative e ffe c t 251 I A RATING SCHEDULE - Page 3. How important to puil achievement: 13. Is the superintendent's a v a ila b ilit y to students a ._ Absolutely essential b .__ F a irly important c . ___ Unimportant d .__ Could have a negative e ffe c t 14. Is the superintendent's a b i l i t y to keep student rules and regulations to a minimum a .__ Absolutely essential b.__ F a irly important c .__ Unimportant d .__ Could have a negative e f f e c t 252