. I I .
l“’
IE It
ullET‘ 4: f: «L

1‘1
.I'lll
I ll'l o“ .

ABSTRACT

THE STRUCTURAL CONTEXT OF MOBILITY;
A STUDY OF MIDDLETOMN'S COLLEGE STUDENTS

By

Paula Neinstein Heiss

In investigating the structural components which
generate social mobility, we have found that the mother is
often the most influential parent in promoting social
mobility. She is most influential because of her relative
position within the power structure, a position in the eyes
of her children, which rivals that of her husband for pres-
tige and esteem, and allows them to identify with her. Her
position in the conjugal power structure is greatly enhanced
by such factors as her educational and occupational attain-
ment, which is often SUperior to that of her working class
husband. Such differential achievement may cause her and
her husband to be dissatisfied with their present social
position. Moreover, the warm affectional ties she shares
with her offSpring also aid in their identification with her.
Furthermore, the factor of same-sex identification in-
tensifies her influence with her female offSpring. She is

thus able to transmit the values that lead to social mobility.

THE STRUCTURAL CONTEXT OF MOBILITY:
A STUDY OF MIDDLETOHN'S COLLEGE STUDENTS

By

Paula Neinstein Weiss

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Education

1969

 

tlan
Antfir

hours

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author would like to express her sincere gratitude
to Dr. Cole 5. Brembeck, Director of the Institute of
International Studies at Michigan State University, for his
continued interest, encouragement and patience during the
course of this study. His warm, human understanding
throughout this author's graduate experience has made its
completion possible.

I would also like to express my thanks to Dr. Richard
Sturgis, Department of Sociology, University of Tennessee
for his guidance in the formation of the questionnaire, and
help in regard to methodological considerations.

Thanks are also due to Dr. Charles Toto, Department
of Education, Sacramento State College, for his critique of
this work, and to Mrs. Brigitte Jordan for her guidance on
statistical matters.

Finally, I would like to express my deepest apprecia-
tion to Professor Melford S. Weiss, Department of
Anthropology, Sacramento State College, my husband, for the
hours of constant help and for his love and understanding

throughout the course of this thesis.

ii

T?

.8.

Ti

I.

 

n.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE
I. THE PROBLEM AND ITS THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE. . . . 1
II. METHODOLOGY, THE COHHUNITY, AND THE SCHOOL . . . . 13
Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

The Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

The School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

III. THE SAMPLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
IV. DISCUSSION AND RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
APPENDIX AND QUESTIONNAIRE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

 

Au‘v

Psi

Pa.

 

An.

Ihi
V‘

A. all
C ‘1‘

.2. IV
A/u

12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.

LIST OF TABLES

Educational Background for Sample (1967)
and 1935 Middletown Census . . . . . . . . .

Age and Class Rank . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Marital Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Religion and Ethnic Background . . . . . . .
Parent's Ethnic and Marital Background . . .
Residence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Father's Occupation . . . . . . . . . . . .
Parent's Income . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Residence and Ball State Attendance . . . .
Age at College Decision . . . . . . . . . .
Academic Performance . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ambitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reasons for Career Choice . . . . . . . . .
Reasons for Attending College . . . . . . .
Parental Power Structure . . . . . . . . . .
Parental Educational Levels . . . . . . . .
Differential Education and Power . . . . . .
Mother's Occupational Status . . . . . . . .
Comparative Educational-Occupational Levels
Parents' Feelings about their Education . .
Satisfaction with Father's Occupation . . .
Perceived Marital Happiness . . . . . . . .

iv

PAGE

17
21
21
22
22
23
24

26
26
27
28
29
29
33
36
39
42
45
47
49
51

 

R.

..4c
rib

 

 

 

«Kb
A<v

TABLE PAGE
23. Student-Parent Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . 53
24. Authority Patterns and Parental Influence . . . . 62
25. Decision Making and the Most Influential Parent . 64
26. Over-age Students and Hatricentrism . . . . . . . 66
27. Parental SUpport for College Ambitions . . . . . . 68
28. Parental Interest in School Performance . . . . . 69
29. Parents as Readers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
30. Family Size and Ordinal Position . . . . . . . . . 70
31. The Total Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

32. School Versus Home Environment . . . . . . . . . . 74

FIGURE
1.

LIST OF FIGURES

Mobility Producing Forces . . .

vi

PAGE
79

car]

Site

add
15 1

Witt

CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM AND ITS THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE

Lately it has been both fashionable and proper to con-
cern oneself with the problems of womanhood. It has also
been popular to direct one's research to the study of am-
bition and social mobility. I have chosen to combine the two,
for the problem of just how a mother affects the devel0pment
of college aSpirations within her offSpring has not been
adequately explored. Just how effective is a mother and
under what situations is she important? Furthermore, unlike
previous research which has dealt primarily with sons, I
have chosen to focus separately upon both male and female
offspring, for the modern female also has aspirations worth
considering.

This study, however, is not a mobility study in the
strict sense, since the sample is composed entirely of col-
lege students and does not include a non-mobile population.
Nevertheless, since over 75% of the students come from
working class or lower middle-class backgrounds, a study of
the structural factors in their family backgrounds should
add to our understanding of the processes of mobility. It
is therefore the purpose of this study to examine the home
situations, and to a lesser extent, the school environment,
with the h0pe of increasing the understanding of what

1

pm“

ti

 

3'1}

!

Kai‘

co‘

an

a“.

3C

an

2
prompted these students to develOp high educational aspira-
tions.

In the early 1950's, social scientists began focusing
upon the relationship between social class and the
achievement syndrome. It was well known by then that high
educational and occupational aspirations were directly re-
lated to social class. But it was not until 1953 when
Joseph Kahl presented his classic study of the aspirations
of "common man" boys that the role of the parents in pro-
moting aspirations in their offspring was established.

Kahl demonstrated that of those boys from minor white-
collar or skilled Tabor homes, who had college ability,
only 50% chose to attend college. When comparing the
college oriented group with the non-college group, Kahl
found that the intervening variable for the college bound
sons was parental pressure, particularly from the father.
These fathers demonstrated feelings of occupational failure
and educational deficiency, and stressed values of "getting
ahead“ in the home (Kahlzl953).

Psychologists, however, approached the problem of
achievement motive not so much in terms of social structure
and the transmission of values, but concentrated upon child
rearing practices and the performance of roles within the
home. McCIelland (1953) found that high achievement motive
was associated with earlier independence training by
mothers and by a higher degree of rejection from the

fathers. He also observed that paternal dominance in

.3“
ti

’3

ans

2
prompted these students to develop high educational aspira-
tions.

In the early 1950's, social scientists began focusing
Upon the relationship between social class and the
achievement syndrome. It was well known by then that high
educational and occupational aspirations were directly re-
lated to social class. But it was not until 1953 when
Joseph Kahl presented his classic study of the aSpirations
of 'common man" boys that the role of the parents in pro-
moting aspirations in their offspring was established.

Kahl demonstrated that of those boys from minor white-
collar or skilled labor homes, who had college ability,
only 50% chose to attend college. When comparing the
college oriented group with the non-college group, Kahl
found that the intervening variable for the college bound
sons was parental pressure, particularly from the father.
These fathers demonstrated feelings of occupational failure
and educational deficiency, and stressed values of "getting
ahead" in the home (Kahlzl953).

Psychologists, however, approached the problem of
achievement motive not so much in terms of social structure
and the transmission of values, but concentrated upon child
rearing practices and the performance of roles within the
home. McClelland (1953) found that high achievement motive
was associated with earlier independence training by
mothers and by a higher degree of rejection from the

fathers. He also observed that paternal dominance in

on!
file

WET?

Jrie

‘3
DU

4".

i.

:are

3
particular resulted in lower achievement motive.

If one were to draw any conclusion from these early
works about the type of home which produced mobility
oriented sons, it would be that it was father centered, but
not father dominated. But, one could not make any judge-
ments about how the mother functioned in such a home.

In 1952 Carson McGuire explored the mobility orien-
tations of conforming, mobile and divergent families. It is
within the divergent family where different normative values
are competing that identification with the “status" seeking
parent is germane to social mobility. It is h0ped that this
research will explain how this identification occurs.

Utilizing the structural approach of McGuire, Allison
Davis (1957) noted that mobility oriented children were
often the product of mixed-class marriages (McGuire's
divergent family).

The most common type of mixed class marriage is that
between a woman from the lower-middle class and a man from
the tap part of the working class. A lower-middle class
woman who marries from the t0p part of the working class
usually begins to try to recoup her original social-class
status either by reforming and elevating her husband's .
behavior to meet lower-middle-class standards or by seeking
to train and propel her children toward the status which
she once had or toward an even higher status, thus com-
pensating for her error (Davis. 1957:137).

Davis' work adds a great deal of understanding of the
psychologicaI mechanisms of mobility and suggests a key
role for the mother as a value transmitter.

Lipset and Bendix (1959) further explored the social,

structural and psychological conditions for social

mobility. Based on past work and from data gathered from

4
an Oakland, California labor force they concluded that:

...the upwardly mobile differ from the non-mobile and
the downwardly mobile in having been trained for indepen-
dence at an earlier time, in having heightened opportunities
for interaction with adults while they were children, in
having come from a family dominated by the mother rather
than the father, in having learned to defer present
gratifications in order to achieve later objectives, in
having the capacity to deal with others in an instrumental
rather than an emotional fashion, and in having higher
rates of certain mental disturbances (Lipset and Bendix 1959:
254-255).

They also noted a relationship between feelings of rejec-
tion, a relatively unhappy childhood, and social mobility.

Lipset and Bendix's data also reinforce Davis' cross-
class marriage hypothesis. Thus, if one were now to
hypothesize the theoretical mobility producing family,
based on the work discussed so far, we would expect to find
a household in which the mother has married downward, and
where she now dominates; a small nuclear unit; child rearing
practices which stress early independence and the delayed
gratification of needs; a somewhat rejecting father; and a
generally unhappy home situation. It is the purpose of our
study to test some of the aSpects of this model and to
determine if the families of the most mobile of Middletown's
college students exhibit these characteristics.

The work of Lipset and Bendix, however, does not
concur precisely with the earlier work of Strodtbeck (1958).
Strodtbeck had compared the family relationships of Jewish
and Italian boys in a Boston suburb and found that those

boys who demonstrated high achievement motive were apt to

come from families which were equalitarian rather than

5
mother or father dominated. Rosen (1959) and Elder (1965)
suggested that the authoritarian father may stifle a boy's
achievement motive by presenting himself as too great a
competitor, and by imposing himself and his will upon his
son. McClelland (1961) adds that the domineering father
makes decisions for his son resulting in his dependence.
While all authors seem to agree that the father who is over-
bearing in his relationship towards his son and his wife,
stifles achievement motive, we have conflicting opinions
about just how he actually functions. Kahl reported that
while not dominating his family, the father was certainly
of prime importance. Strodtbeck stated that an equalitarian
or democratic power structure would exist; Lipset and
Bendix states that the mother would tend to dominate. Yet,
this debate only concerns the effect of the father's re-
lationship to his son. Is it relevant in a discussion of
the socially mobile daughter? And furthermore, how does
the maternal behavior pattern affect the deveIOpment of
achievement motive in both her sons and daughters?

I therefore would like to present my first hypothesis:

The tendency toward matricentric households will be
inversely related to social class: the lower the social
class, the greater the tendency for the mother to wield
more power.

Ellis and Lane's work on the role of the mother of
socially mobile offspring suggested that “...a feature of
upward mobility is that the mother's educational or oc-
cupational attainments outrank those of the father" (1913:
744). They also suggest that her relatively high level of

6
achievement may cause the father to be dissatisfied with
himself, and that:

The impetus for mobility has its roots in the nuclear
family; but, contrary to Kahl's thesis, it is the mother
more often than the father whose reaction to the family's
status in life is the catalyst for mobility (Ellis and
Lane 1963:755).

Their work therefore substantiates Davis' theoretical
perspective.

Turner added: “...ambition was likely to be high...
when the education of the mother exceeded that of the
father" (1962:410).

Krauss (1964) further explored the nature of the
mother's background and found that the mother is particu-
larly important in influencing educational attainment when
she holds a non-manual job, or has had some college
training, while her husband is employed in manual labor
and has only a high school education. He also found that
if the mother was employed prior to her marriage, she was
more likely to be influential than those mothers who were
not employed. Thus the non-manual working mother, or the
mother who once attended college may be dissatisfied with
the status afforded her by her husband. She takes out her
frustrations by directing her ambitions toward her off-
spring. Furthermore, she has been exposed to a middle
class value system, and now transmits these values to her
children. Krauss's data further supports the ideas of
Davis.

Thus the mother's level of educational and/or oc-

cupational attainment is critical to the development of

ti:
inn

cl;

——0-—+~.——J
“11:3

aspirations in her offspring.

My second, and third, hypotheses are then:

The number of incidents of mothers with higher educa-
tional and/or occupational attainment than the father, is
inversely related to social class: The lower the social
class, the greater the mother's relative position.

The degree of dissatisfaction expressed by the
parents with their educational and occupational attainments
will be inversely related to social class: the lower the
social class the greater the dissatisfaction.

It has been noted earlier that the achievement syn-
drome has been associated with a higher rate of mental
disturbances, with a degree of paternal rejection, and with
an unhappy childhood (Lipset and Bendix, 1959; McClelland,
1953). Dynes (1956) investigated this affectional pattern
between parent and child, finding that:

Evidence obtained in this research essentially sup-
ports the relationship between unsatisfactory interpersonal
relations in the family of orientation and high aSpirational
Ievel. The high aspirors stated that they had experienced
feelings of rejection more frequently than did those in the
lower group (Dynes, 1956:213).

Rushing also came to a similar conclusion: "Evidence
supports the hypothesis that a depriving father is as-
sociated with females' aspirations“ (Rushing, 1964:166).

Such unsatisfactory relationships with the father help
to lend credence to the hypothesis that the mother is the
transmitter of achievement values. If the relationship with
the father is unsatisfactory, it is the understandable that
the child would turn to the mother for warmth and solace.
Moreover, when the mother is also the primary socializing
parent, and has been exposed to middle-class values, her

child views values of achievement in terms of a warm,

 

1H a PB .5. PEOPSEH.‘ .

8
affectionate relationship, and values of the working class
as being depriving. Furthermore, as the child clearly
identifies with the "alien" middle-class values (anticipatory
socialization), the rift between father and offspring in-
creases. However, Litwok (1960) found that occupational
mobility does not have to result in the severing of family
ties. Furthermore, Adam's extensive investigation of the
relationships between mobility achieving offspring and
their parents found that:

The experience of upward mobility tends to be as-
sociated with a close relationship between both sexes and
the mother, and often with a close relationship between son
and his father (Adams, 1967:370).

This information again assures the importance of the
maternal relationship, but does not completely agree with
the findings of Dynes and Rushing. Testing the next
hypothesis should clarify the debate.

Those students who have come from the lowest social
class, will have experienced the least satisfactory home
situations, as demonstrated by feelings of rejection and
unhappy childhood; the relationship with the mother will be
somewhat closer than with the father.

Adams also notes that:

Not only is the father's working-class position ac-
companied by less likelihood of identification with him than
with the mother, but conversely, the only categories in
which closer affectional ties are expressed with the father
than with the mother are males with middle-class fathers.
This may indicate the salience to these males of their
fathers as role models (Adams, 1967:369).

The importance of sex-identification with an adequate role
model cannot be overlooked. One usually eXpects sons to
identify with their fathers and daughters to identify with

their mothers. Therefore, the son may feel a closer tie

 

wi

f:

9
with his father and view him as more influential in the
formation of college goals, as Adams suggests for the
middle-class. Conversely, females would identify with their
mothers and view her as more influential. Yet if all the
postulates for the mobility producing home are true, that
is, if we are dealing with a matricentric household, then
the father's ability to serve as an adequate role model is
seriously hampered, and it becomes reasonable to assume that
the son may have difficulty identifying with him. The son
turns to his mother who not only provides a warmer relation-
ship for him, but also exposes him to the “proper values."

Therefore, we can postulate that in the lower-class
mobility producing home, the son's ability to identify with
the father as a role model is challenged by his view of his
mother's domination within the power structure. The father
simply does not provide an adequate image. At the middle-
class level, the father's position within the power struc-
ture allows him to provide an adequate masculine image and
his influence dominates that of the mother.

The reverse is true for the female. She, of course,
identifies with her mother. At the lower social levels, the
mother's position within the family power structure
strengthens this identification. She clearly is the most
influential parent. As one goes up the social class scale,
however, the father's position improves and the daughter
views him with great respect and values his Opinions. The
result is often a dual identification, both parents being

named as most influential, or a complete reversal, with the

10
father being named singularly. The next two hypotheses are
designed to test these assumptions.

The tendency for the mother to be named the most in-
fluential parent in the college making decision will be
inversely related to social class: the lower the social
class the more influential the mother.

The most influential parent in directing the for-
mation of college aspirations will be determined by the
resolution of the conflicting forces of same-sex identifi-
cation versus mother-father balance of power.

Besides the mother-father relationship and the parent
child relationship, there are other factors within the home
which influence the formation of achievement motive. Much
work has been done to indicate that ordinal position within
the family is also related to achievement. The works of
Bayer (1966) and Altus (1966) indicate that there is an over
representation of first born in the college population.

Last born are also likely to attend college. Consequently
middle born children are at a disadvantage. Furthermore,
family size is also critical. Rosen reports:

Generally, boys from large families tend to have
lower achievement motivation than those from small and
medium families (Rosen, 1961:349).

He concludes:

In small middle class families, for example, the ef-
fect of ordinal position seems to be relatively unimportant:
the oldest and youngest child in a two-child, middle class
family have almost identical motivation scores, but as the
size of the family increases the scores of the oldest child
in the middle class become higher than those of the youngest
child. However, in the lower class the reverse is true; the
youngest child has a higher achievement motivation score on
the average than the oldest child (Rosen, 1961:355).

If what Rosen says is true, then the influence of older
siblings on lower class students must be considered.

Lipset and Bendix(1959) have speculated that the

11
amount of adult-child interaction is critical to the for-
mation of achievement motive. In large families this
relationship is stymied. Therefore, hypotheses seven and
eight state:

The tendency toward small families will be directly
related to social class: the higher the social class the
greater the tendency. Nevertheless, even the working class
students will come from predominantly small families.

We should find a predominance of oldest and youngest
offSpring in our sample.

Other factors external to the nuclear family environ-
ment influence the formation of achievement motive. The
relationships to other relatives, adults, church and school
are important. But most critical is the school environment.
Much indeed has been written about the "peer group" or
"adolescent subculture." Turner tried to measure the effect
of this subculture and found:

...youth subculture probably has less effect in
modifying the mobility experience than many social scientists
suggest, but that the full impact of youth subculture may be
experienced in some middle-level neighborhoods (Turner, 1964:
170 .

Yet McGill and Coleman report: “...the social system of the
high school has more impact on college plans of boys than
of girls" (1965:119). Clearly the social system and the
peer group do have some effect on college aspirations.

In fact, Ellis and Lane conclude:

High school peers have a less direct role in the
mobility process. Rather than influencing the lower class
youth in their college goals, they provide a middle-class
learning environment where the mobile individual is exposed

to the norms and behavioral traits successful mobility re-
quires“ (Ellis and Lane, 1963:156).

12
Finally, Kandel and Lesser have recently reported:
Far from supporting the notion that adolescents are
influenced by their peers, more than their parents, these
data suggest the Opposite: namely, that parents are more

influential than peers as re ards future life goals"
(Kandel and Lesser, 1969:217)

But, according to Ellis and Lane, “The chief source of
outside support is the school teacher..." (1963:755).
Therefore we must assess the importance of the school en-
vironment upon the formation of college aspiration for this

study to be complete. The final hypotheses then are:

The peer group will serve to SUpport the formation of
college aspirations.

The school teacher will be the chief value trans-
mitter outside the home, and her influence will be most
critical for working class students.

The school environment will be more critical for
males than females.

There are still other important factors which affect
mobility orientation. For example, Italian Catholics have
been known to have low achievement motivation, while Jews
have been known to have high achievement scores (Strodtbeck,
1958). Racial factors also effect scores. Therefore,
ethnicity must be controlled for. And, of course, I0 or
ability influences college attendence.

The problem then, of understanding mobility, is
multifaceted. There are many influences within the home
which lead to the formation of achievement motive; there
are external influences. It is hoped that this study will

increase the understanding of how both function.

 

urn.“ 3‘1. habkgw.

n,.. Hr!

L1!

I.
.A TH-

hi

CHAPTER II

METHODOLOGY, THE COMMUNITY AND THE SCHOOL

The research technique of this study employed a ques-
tionnaire designed to measure students' feelings about their
family, childhood and educational backgrounds. It was also
designed to measure the students' perception of their
parents' attitudes and interactions, in order to understand
the social and structural factors which affected their be-
havior. The questionnaire was administered to a non-random
sample of college students and its responses were subject to
content analysis.

During the week of May 8, 1967, I administered the
questionnaire (see appendix) to a total of 236 students in
sections of introductory anthrOpology and sociology courses
at Ball State University in Muncie, Indiana. The students
were told they were to write in their own answers if they
found none suitable. They were also assured that they would
remain anonymous. I remained to answer possible questions.
The entire procedure lasted about forty-five minutes. At a
later date I coded the data and it was analyzed with the aid
of a computer.

The data was separated on the basis of sex and by the
occupational categories of the fathers. These categories
were established by the use of Ralph Turner's "prestige-

13

14

subcultural classification of occupation" (1964: 245-251).
However, for the purposes of this analysis, I chose later to
combine Turner's categories. Turner's lowest three groups,
unskilled, semi-skilled, and skilled labor, compose my
"manual laborer," or working class. Turner's groups four
through six (lesser white-collar workers; small-business
owners, managers, and salesmen; farmers; semiprofessional,
public administrators) have been combined to make up my
"lower-middle"class. Finally, Turner's categories seven
through nine (business agents, managers; professionals; large
business owners and officials) combine to form my upper middle
class.

For further information concerning the questionnaire

and its subsequent coding, see the appendix.
THE COMMUNITY

Muncie, Indiana, the home of Ball State University, is
“Middletown” of the famous study by Robert and Helen Lynd
(1929; 1937). For the Lynds, “Middletown” represented the
typical American community. And, if indeed this assumption
is correct, then the information gathered during this inves-
tigation may well have repercussions beyond its immediate
intent.

In 1929 when Middletown was published, Muncie had a
pepulation of some 30,000. By 1937, the time of publication

of Middletown lQ_Transition, the population was nearing

 

 

50,000. In 1967, thirty years later, the population had only

15

increased to about 70,000. Other changes in Muncie were
also limited. The downtown area was older and decaying, but
the Ball brothers' influence was still pervasive. The large
automotive factories were still the main industrial em-
ployers. The community was still essentially homogenous,
and the p0pulation of ethnic minorities were small. The
political climate was still quite conservative. Public
entertainment, apart from that brought in by the college,
and business sponsored softball leagues, was quite restricted.

The community was still divided into several sections,
with the northwestern part reserved for members of the upper
middle class. Yet the physical gap between the different
sections was not striking, and did not offset the feeling of
homOgeneity. The middle class sections were just "newer."

How does this knowledge of “Middletown” reflect upon
this study? Even though only 14 percent of the students come
from the immediate Muncie area, over 72 percent come from
within 100 miles of Muncie. It is not unreasonable to as-
sume then, even if one does consider the 15 percent from
urban Indianapolis, that the backgrounds of these students
are quite similar. 50 we can infer from the known back-
grounds of the Muncie pepulation, something of the back-
grounds of the parents for our entire p0pulation.

If one were to place the average age of the parents of
our students at 50, a reasonable guess, and subtract the

thirty years between the Lynds' last study and this one, then

16
the fathers of these students would have been around eighteen,
the age of high school graduation, when the Lynds completed
their research in 1935. Let us look at some of their
figures for the Middletown population and compare them to our
own.

It is obvious from Table 1 that the educational back-
grounds of our sample are not representative of the general
population. This is not at all surprising, when one considers
that college attendance selects for a middle class back-
ground. Yet while some 20.3 percent of our fathers have less
than a high school education, 41.5 percent of the fathers in
our sample are employed at manual labor. And, while 28.5
percent of the fathers have had at least some college, only
22.9 percent of them rank in the upper middle class. It seems
then, that many fathers in our sample had already started
their mobility climb educationally and had gone beyond the
general p0pulation in educational achievement. Yet they were
unable to complete that climb occupationally. They may well
have directed their frustrations toward their offspring.

Table 1 indicates that this differential between general

population and students' mothers is even more marked.
THE SCHOOL

Ball State Teacher's College officially became Ball
State University in 1965. Yet 168, or 71.2 percent of our
sample has indicated they intend to secure a teaching cre-
dential. How does this information influence the quality of

our study?

17

.mcowuouwpaam

mum—poo cog: comma mew >m>gsm :Zopmpuuwz cw mucoucmpua mmmP—ou sow mwgamwm .m

 

 

ca mom mzmcwu ommfi .N

.Akom-

mom .mmmnnmmfl

.ucag vcm vcxgv cowuwmcmcp d4 :zoum—uuwz eogw um>wemu mumu >m>sam czoumpuuws .H

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o.~m mu ¢.¢m mmH m.¢H mm 8mm ”.285802
Am>esm pcmmocL

m.m~ he m.m~ GNH m.o~ we 8mm m.em;paa
Am>eam pcmmmea

m.m we m.¢m Ham N.m¢ mmm CNN aa>e=m asepa_uewz

ilmrl,
pcmugma LmnE=z ucmucmnl gunmazi ucmucma smash:
«moppou mumcw memew cowuupaaoa
meaucapp< .ooeum ;m_= _oo;um gmwz-coz apasem

 

 

 

msmzmu =220ngoafixz emma oz< Ammaav mgaz<m mom ozzomw¥o<m 4<zouh<usom

H m4m<~

18

In 1951 Mulligan reported a strong attraction between
the teaching profession and farming and blue collar groups.
Pavalko added:

While aspirants of teaching come from higher socio-
economic origins compared to the total sample, girls
aspiring to teaching come from higher origins than boys.
Teaching appears to be an important avenue of upward
mobility among lower status youth who plan to go to college.

Rural youth planning to go to college select teaching
as their occupational choice at twice the rate of their
urban counterparts (Pavalko 1965:47)..

Moreover, Perrucci states:

It also appears that the different types of institutions
select students from different social and economic origin
(Perrucci, 1967:146).

If these reports are valid, it appears then that Ball
State University has selected for a certain type of student.
We would eXpect that student to be from a working class or
lower middle class rural background. We would not eXpect to
find many upper middle class males, for they would probably
have sought a more prestigious university. We would also
expect that those students with the best talents would also
go elsewhere for Pavalko also reports:

While aspirants to teaching come from the higher ability
levels (based on measured intelligence), teaching attracts a
relatively small pr0portion of the most able boys and half
of the least able girls who plan to go to college (Pavalko
1965:47)..

Thus we can conclude that Ball State University functions
to provide a mobility channel for aspiring youths of lower
and lower middle class backgrounds. There should, however,
be some class distinction based on sex, since the girls will

have come from slightly higher social origins than boys.

19
But the ambitions of our students should be somewhat
limited, since the most talented and ambitious tend to seek
their education elsewhere.

Nevertheless, our sample should be relatively homo-
geneous with the students sharing similar backgrounds.
Educational mobility should prove less of a traumatic ex-
perience for Ball Staters than for those students attending
the more prestigious universities, for the students will
share common values and aspirations with their classmates.
Furthermore, the gap between parent and student created by
the student's mobility, is apt to be small, since students
attending college are merely seeking the level of education
now necessary for middle class membership, a college
education, as compared to their parents' high school diploma.
Thus the discontinuities between home and school will be

minimized.

CHAPTER III

THE SAMPLE

We can ascertain from Tables 2 through 6, that the
majority of our sample is white and protestant; single, sopho-
mores, age 19 or 20; living with their parents; and from rural
communities within 100 miles of Ball State University.

Table 7 verifies our predictions about the social
class origins of our sample. The students come from pre-
dominantly working and lower middle class backgrounds.
Furthermore, as we suspected, more males than females are of
working class background. DeSpite the discrepancy in their
backgrounds, Table 8 shows that both males and females come
from homes of similar income levels. In fact, the majority of
our students come from homes where the income ranges from
$5,000 to $15,000 per year. Yet, despite the favorable income
range, 13.2 percent of the males and 8.8 percent of the
females would be unable to attend college if Ball State were
not located in Muncie. The importance of the college's
location for males hints that the variables affecting their
college attendance are more critical than those of females,
for they are already subject to the whimsy of an external
factor.

The critical nature of male college attendance is
further illustrated by Table.10, page 26. Here we see that

20

21

TABLE 2
AGE AND CLASS

RANK

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CATEGORY iALES n=76 FEMALES n=160
1. AGE NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT
16 - 19 27 35.5 77 48.1
20 - 23 39 51.3 77 48.1
over 24 10 13.2 6 3.8

. CLASS RANK

Freshmen 15 19.7 26 16.3

Sophomore 44 57.9 110 68.7

Junior 12 15.8 19 11.9

Senior 3 4.0 5 3.1

Graduate 2 2.6 O 0.0
TABLE 3

Single

Married

MARITAL STATUS

um er ercen

66

10

86.8

13.2

 

 

 

g...

TABLE 4

RELIGION AND ETHNIC BACKGROUND

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CATEGORY MALE FEMALE
RELIGIONT’ NUMBER PERCENT *NUMBER PERCENT’
Protestant 60 79.0 141 88.1
Catholic 14 18.4 17 10.6
Jewish 0 0.0 1 0.6
Other 1 1.3 1 0.6
RACE
White 75 98.7 156 97.5
Negro 1 1.3 2 1.25
Oriental 0 0.0 2 1.25
TABLE 5

PARENTS' ETHNIC AND MARITAL BACKGROUND

AMERICAN BORN SAME RELIGION LIVING TOGETHER

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Father 232 98.3

222 94.1 209 88.6

Mother 231 97.9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2

TABLE
RESIDE

3

6
NCE

 

 

CATEGORY

MALES

FEMALES

 

Number Percent

NUmber Percent

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. Living with both
parents 57 75.0 135 84.4
2. Community size
Farm 14 18.4 30 18.8
to 2,500 10 13.2 34 21.2
2,500 to 10,000 11 14.5 25 15.6
10,000 to 100,000 27 35.5 48 30.0
over 100,000 14 18.4 23 14.4
3} TDistance from Bal State
100 miles or less 57 75.0 114 71.3
101-250 12 15.8 40 25.0
over 250 6 7.9 6 3.7

 

 

 

 

 

 

24

 

HmminemueomH .mecap sock e

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N.mN nm e.- NH m u n Hmuopnam
m.H N m.H H HMHQHHwo use gonzo mmmcwman was“; m
m.m oH m.m a Hmcommmmmoca m
m.mH mN m.mH NH gmmmcms ecu pcmmm mmmcwmzm u
H.wm Hm m.mN om? m u a PMmounzm
H.m m m.m c owpnaa use Hmconmwwwamefiwm m
o.om m¢ ~.mH mH Lassa; .cmsmmHmm

.memcme .mezo .mmmcwmzauHHmEm m
e.¢ n m.H H EMF—coump_:3 gumm84 ¢
N.mm Hm» n.m¢ hm m n H Hmpommbm
m.m~ Ne m.Hm em gmeoan vaHme m
¢.m mH m.¢H HH emcoamp uwHHmeIHEmm N
m.m w m.~ N Logoan umHHmeca H

“coupon summaz acmugmm Emnssz
~4<z konP<¢=ouo 4m>m4

 

 

 

 

 

 

onh<azouo m.mmzh<m

n m¢m<h

 

25

 

 

 

 

TABLE 8
PARENTS' INCOME
CATEGORY MALES FEMALES

Number Percent Number Percent
Below 3,000 0 0.0 1 0.6
3,001 - 5,000 5 6.6 12 7.5
5,001 - 7,500 16 21.1 29 18.1
7,501 - 10,000 18 12.7 41 25.6
10,001 - 15,000 21 27.6 39 24.4
15,001 - 20,000 10 13.2 21 13.3
above 20,000 4 5.3 11 6.9

 

 

 

 

 

 

25
TABLE 9
RESIDENCE AND BALL STATE ATTENDANCE
DALE. FEMALE

Number Percent Number Percent

 

 

Could not attend college
if school were not 10 13.2 14 8.8
located in Muncie

TABLE 10
AGE AT COLLEGE DECISION

 

 

 

 

MALE FEMALE

 

NUmbér TPércent Number Percent

 

O - 13 22 29.0 67 41.9
14 - 16 36 47.4 80 50.0
17 - 20 16 21.1 12 7.5

20 and over 2 2.6 1 0.6

 

 

 

 

 

27

TABLE 11

ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CATEGORY MALES FEMALES
1. Grade School Number Percent Number Percent
Excellent 23 30.3 58 36.3
Good 32 42.1 79 49.4
Average 16 21.1 22 13.8
Poorly 5 6.6 1 0.6
L mghsamar
Excellent 5 6.6 38 23.8
Good 28 36.8 85 53.1
Average 37 48.7 36 22.5
Poorly 6 7.9 0 0.0
E=__r

 

 

 

m7

—ll

 

 

 

 

‘i
V.

 

 

#‘u

 

 

28
TABLE 12
AHBITIONS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CATEGORY MALE FEMALE
Number Percent Number Percent

1. College Major

education 5 6.6 56 35.0

science-math 10 13.2 8 5.0

humanities 9 11.8 23 14.4

social science 33 43.4 30 18.8

business 11 14.5 0 0.0

nursing 0 0.0 5 3.1

other 5 6.6 33 20.6

undecided 3 4.0 4 2.5
2. Teaching Credential 43 56.6 125 78.1
3. Career Choice

professional 52 68.4 139 86.9

business 12 15.8 1 0.6

semi-professional 8 10.5 14 8.8
4. Graduate School

yes 44 57.9 95 59.4

no 10 13.2 19 11.9

undecided 22 30.0 46 28.8
5. Seeks ambition in

Spouse 27 35.5 99 61.9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

29

TABLE 13

REASONS FOR CAREER CHOICE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REASON MALES FEMALES
Number Percent NUmber Percent
Aesthetic 28 36.8 92 57.5
Money 27 35.5 35 21.9
Both 15 19.7 20 12.5
TABLE 14
REASONS FOR ATTENDING COLLEGE
REASON MALES FEMALES
Number Percent_' Number Percen
Aesthetic 3 4.0 17 10.6
Getting ahead 63 82.9 105 65.6
The thing to do 5 6.6 14 8.8
Parents 4 5.3 22 13.8

 

 

 

 

 

30
males make the college decision at a much later age than
their female counterparts. Table 11, page 27, shows too,
that although the early academic record of our females is
only slightly better than that of our males, by high school
this gap has greatly widened. Therefore, male students, at
the critical age of college decision, are only achieving
moderate academic success. This must make their decision
even more difficult and dependent upon the right combination
of events.

Table 12, page 28, is concerned with the ambitions of
our students. We can see that 78.1 percent of the females,
as opposed to 56.6 percent of the males in our sample, are
striving towards a teaching career. Table 12 also indicated
that nearly 60 percent of the students have already decided to
attend graduate school. This is not surprising when one
realizes that some graduate school is required for the life
teaching credential.

Item 5 of Table 12 suggests that our girls are much
more concerned with finding an ambitious spouse. Again, if
one remembers that girls derive their status through marriage,
their concern is understandable.

Yet, Tables 13 and 14, page 29, show us that career
choice and college attendance are much more dependent upon the
need to get ahead, for males, than for females. In fact,
for both sexes, college attendance is seen predominently as
the means of achieving social mobility.

Our sample then, homogenous in nature, originates from

 

31
largely working class and lower middle class origins. The
students are attending a state teacher's college in
”Middletown," the typical American city, and seeking the
American ideal of social mobility through educational
achievement. Now let us see what caused them to have their

great expectations.

 

 

in

CHAPTER IV

DISCUSSION AND RESULTS

Mirra Komarovsky investigated marital power patterns

in her book Blue Collar Marriage (1962). She observed that: i
Glenton society is clearly no matriarchy; husband-

dominated marriages are twice as frequent as those dominated

by women. But neither is this a patriarchial group. In a

about one-half of the marriages the wives enjoy as powerful ,

a position as their husbands (Komarovsky, 1962:223). g
The results of this study, shown in Table 15, page 33,

confirm Komarovsky's observation, support the work of

Strodtbeck (1958), and challenge the conclusions of Lipset

and Bendix (1959). It appears that even among the lowest

social class in our study, the mothers' positions within the

power structure is only occasionally perceived as dominant,

and that marriages tend to be perceived as either equalitarian

in nature, or slightly patriarchial. Thus it appears that

hypothesis one: The tendency toward matricentric households

will be inversely related to social class: the lower the

social class, the greater the tendency for the mother to

wield power; is of limited value. The matricentric house-

hold appears to exist in only 13.5 percent of the families of

working class males and in 16.4 percent of the families of

working class females.

Nevertheless, it appears that the lower the social

class the greater the incidents of dominant mothers. For

32

 

 

L-.h-.roI-C+L ruin-u-‘c I‘+14~I-:-T~

CH u42<h

33

 

00000005 00-00053 0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OH":
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .0000 50-50
KN":
0.5 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 .0000 50-50
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00"0 00-00
0.0 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.50 0.00 00": 50-00
M00000
N":
0.0 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 .0000 50-50
OH":
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .0000 50-50
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00": 00-00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 50u0 00-00
I000 00. 000 00 00 0: 00 00.0 .000 0000
00000005 .00 000000 .00 00000T0000z 002.00 00000 000000

 

 

 

mmshuamhm mmzoa 4<hzmm<m

mH m0m<h

 

0.0.00.00v 50H «0.00:5»

Q o o
o o I
O C
0 o
I o I
o o o

34

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

00:050>000u0 0.000000 :0 000000 00 0000050050 000000000:0
00000000 00-00053 0
OH":
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 .0000 50-50
5000
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.50 0.5 0.5 .0000 50-50
5.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0000 00-00
0.50 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0000 00-00
0000000
N":
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 .0000 00-50
OH":
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 .0000 00-50
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 00...0 00-00
0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 5.0 0.00 5000 50-00
00 00
mm 00 .0000 0mm 00 00 00 .00000 00 000000 0: (00000
000000000 0.000000 .00 0000000000 .00 000000000 .00 00000 000000
50.00000 00 00000

 

35
both males and females the working class mother is more im-
portant in areas of discipline, budgeting and decision
making than her middle class counterpart. In fact, in the
area of discipline, the downward trend of mother's importance
is obvious. However, when this trend was tested at the 0.05
level (Chi Square), the trend did not prove independent of 0
sex. This is understandable. The mother is more responsible j
for disciplining her daughters than her sons. The view of
authority is also dependent upon the sex of the student.
Fathers are viewed as being slightly stronger by sons than by J
daughters.

Father's importance also appears related to social
class, with the father being strongest for the middle class
sons and upper middle class daughters.

In trying to derive a pattern of marital authority
based on social class, Komarovsky concludes:

In the population at large, the relationship between
socio-economic status of the husband and his conjugal power
appears to be cuvilinear-at the very bottom of the pyramid
there exists, perhaps because of the relatively larger pro-
portion of Negroes, a matriarchy by default. The power of
the husband rises in the low blue-collar and declines in the
high blue-collar classes. With ascending class status, the
husband's power rises again because once more he appears to
outstrip his wife in resources for the exercise of power
(Komarovsky, 1962:234)..

Thus, in conclusion our data seems to suggest that
hypothesis one, which is linear, may be better replaced with
one which is curvilinear, as suggested by Komarovsky. In
the working class the mother's position within the power

structure, while not dominant, appears to rival that of her

husband. In the middle class, the father appears to be

36

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.00 0.50 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.0 50u0 00-50
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 5.00 0.00 0000 00-00
0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 00u0 00-00
000000
0.0 0.50 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 50«0 00-50
0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 00»0 00-00
0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 5000 00-00
+.0000 + .0000 .0000 +.0000 + .0000 .0000 00000
0000000 0000 .0.0 0000.0000, 0000000 .0.:: .mu: 00.0 0000
000000 .50 000000 .00 00000 000000

 

 

 

 

m0m>m0 0<zo~h<ozom 0<hzmm<m
ma m0m<h

 

37

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.00 0.00 0.00 0000 00-00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0000 00-00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0000 00-00
0000200

0.00 0.00 0.00 0000 00-00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0000 00-00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0000 00-00
00:00: 000000 0000 00000:,000002 0000:
20000000 00000000 00000 000000

 

 

 

00.00000 00 00000

 

38

stronger; particularly to his sons. Finally, in the upper
middle class, while the father is clearly more powerful,
the areas of mutual decision are again increased.

Hypothesis two states: The number of incidents of
mothers with higher educational and/or occupational at-
tainments than the father is inversely related to social
class: the lower the social class, the greater the mother's
relative position.

From Table 16, Parental Educational Levels, (pages 36-
37) we can see that the majority of the parents in our
sample have graduated from high school. We can also see
that the number of incidents of mothers having a greater
educational attainment than fathers, is related to social
class. For males this relationship is inverse, as hypothe-
sized. However, 39.3 percent of lower-middle class mothers
have greater academic achievement than fathers. This
finding seems to disagree with hypothesis two. The mothers
we are apparently dealing with are high school graduates,
for only 8.2 percent of these mothers, as Opposed to 21.3
percent of their spouses, have not completed high school.
Furthermore, 29.9 percent have gone on to college, as 0p-
posed to 22.9 percent of their husbands. Since Ellis and
Lane (1963) have indicated that such educational discre-
pancies are associated with high aspirations, we can expect
the mother to be a particularly important influence upon
our middle class females, as well as upon those students

from the working class.

 

I" .‘Jii‘

{Q
i ., .0:

 

00000000 00-00003 0

 

 

39

 

 

 

 

 

0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 000000 “wuu00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0000 0200
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000000 ”Munoz
0000200
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000000 “MUH00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0000 0000
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000000 wwmuoz
00» 00 oz 00 00 00 00l, 00 oz 00, 00 00 0000:
000000000 .00 00000000 .00 000000 .00 m~000 00000 000.00 00000000

 

 

 

 

 

 

mmzom oz< zo~h<u=om 0<thmmumuuo
ma m0m<~

 

4O

 

00000000 00000003 «

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0000
0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000000 000000
0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0000 0000
0000
0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000000 00000
0000000
NH":
0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000000 000000
0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0000 0000
mfiflc
0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000000 000000
000, «000 000 00+ 00 00 000 00, 00 0:, w000
000000 000000
00000000000 0000 .00 -00 0.000000 .00 00000000

 

 

 

 

.00 0000000000

 

 

“v.0:ouv NH m0m<p

41

Just how does differential education affect the mother's
position within the power structure and her importance with
her children? To answer this question the data was broken
down by sex into three categories; mothers with higher
education, parents with the same achievement, and fathers
with higher attainments. The results are shown on Table 17,
pages 39-40.

DeSpite the differential perception of authority by
males and females, it is obvious that the mother's position

in the home is greatly enhanced when she has a higher

 

 

educational attainment than her husband. Furthermore, her
influence upon her child's college decision is significantly
greater than that of mothers whose education ranks equal to
or below that of their spouses.

Hypothesis two is also concerned with the differential
occupational levels. Table 18, page 42, deals with the oc-
cupations of mothers before and after marriage. One striking
difference that is immediately apparent is the fact that
mothers of sons are employed to a lesser degree than mothers
of daughters. This holds true, both before and after
marriage. Why this should be the case is not clear. But it
again suggests that the type of home that our male and female
students come from is different, and that the institution
itself is making a selection. It should also be noted that
Krauss (1964) stated that mothers who were employed prior to
marriage were more likely to be influential than those not

employed. Therefore we can expect mothers of daughters to

42

 

ammo—gem camp

Lm>m= was mgmspoe ppm yo pcmogma H.0H

we pmuop m >_:Ok

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

¢.Hm m.mH h.m~ ¢.m m.m~ ¢.m m.mm «.mfi km»: Am-~{

m.¢¢ N.m «.mm N.m N.Hm N.m ¢.mm m.HN “on: Am-¢v

¢.¢m m.m H.mm o.¢~ N.m~ m.m m.¢¢ «.mm Hm": Am-Hv
mmo<zm

H.~¢ o.o H.~¢ m.m m.mm o.o h.¢m 0.0 “an: Ao-hv

0.00 o.m o.mm o.o o.m¢ o.m o.o¢ o.o~ om»: Am-¢v

H.¢m o.o m.mH m.e~ ~.m¢ H.m o.- m.mH an»: Am-HV
eumsopgem poehm-mpww-~wlhm-wp .wwmxohmEm be: Hw-h~ Am-¢q “mlel mm~<

mu<Hmm<z mmpm< .aH mu<Hmm<z mmoaum .mH mm<ou 4<HQOA

 

 

 

 

 

 

m3h<bm 4<zouh<azuuo .mxuzhoz
ma mqm<h

. I O
a I l
a I
c o o
C O D

 

43

be more influential than those of sons. But it is also pos-
sible that if the students in our sample had been tested for
achievement motive, females would rate higher than males.
From Table 18 we can also see that 35.1 percent of
working class male mothers and 47.6 percent of working class
female mothers had a higher occupational level before mar-
riage. After marriage, the figures drop to 18.9 percent and
39.4 percent respectively. These figures compare with 38
percent for the American population (Barth and Watson, 1967:
393). Thus it appears from Table 18 that at least part of

hypothesis two is confirmed.

The comparisons in this study have been made primarily
on the base of social class. Social class is a definition
derived by social scientists. It is usually based upon some
prestige ranking of occupations. Certain social classes are
supposed to demonstrate certain subcultural traits. Yet,

because the definition of social class separates one group

from another, one gets the impression that we are dealing
with clearly defined and rigid social units. This is not
true. Other factors besides the husbands' occupation affect
the life style of the family. Education is not measured
within a social class framework. And we can see from Table
16, pages 36-37, that some 15 percent of working class
fathers have attended college. Furthermore, social class
definitions do not take into consideration educational and

occupational achievements of wives. When husband and wife

background conflict, we invent terms to explain them; we

Speak of divergent families, or cross-class marriages. But

 

 

44
we do not redefine social class. Yet these "divergent"
families comprise over one-fourth of our working class popu-
lation.

In an attempt to derive a class ranking which includes
both occupational and educational status, I have devised the
educational-occupational scale. A value of one to nine, as
indicated in the Turner scale, was given for occupational
status. A value of one to seven was given for educational
attainment. The lowest score possible then, is two, and the

highest score is sixteen. On an individual basis, a score

 

 

from two to seven was ranked as the (1-3) social group;
eight to eleven was equivalent to the (4-6) social group;
and twelve to sixteen was equivalent to the (7-9) social
group. Similarly the scores could be totaled to derive a
composite social class picture of a family.

This scale however, has several serious disadvantages.
For example, one problem would be the ranking occupationally
of a never-employed woman. (This was solved by ranking her
as a four. But even if she were a high school graduate, and
thus earned a score of eight, she would not be considered to
outrank her working class husband.) And more important, the
composite score of both parents tended to result in the
bunching of most of our families in the four to six range,
leaving little room for meaningful comparisons. Perhaps this
bunching of families into the middle class reflects what is
actually happening in society today.

Nevertheless, in an attempt to test hypothesis two, the

45

 

AF—m=0wpmu=um mzpmpm Lunar: um>owcuw appmzpom
no; menu mmmpca mucmnmas mmmpo mcpxgoz xcmgpzo no: upzoz mgospos nmaopqemca +
mmm_u Luna: Amuuv ”mmmpu mpuvpe Amuev “mmmpu mcvxsoz Amufiv ««
mgoom mufi covpanzuoo .mgoum mug co_pmo:uu .mucmscvmppm
pmcowpmaauoo can pmcoppmozum go» umpmcm_mmc mmspm> mo Ezm Scum um>wgmu m_mum «

 

 

 

 

 

 

o.m¢ H.¢m o.o m.¢m H.mm 0.0 m.mfi m.o~ m.oH hm": Am-~v
H.mH H.NN m.¢H o.o o.~m o.mH N.m m.mm m.H~ Hon: Am-¢v
o.H m.~m H.0m o.o m.m N.om m.H w.om m.~¢ Hm»: Am-Hv
\mm4<zmr
m.mm N.~¢ o.o ~.¢m «.mm o.o m.m ~.mm m.m NH»: Am-mv
o.m o.mm 0.0H 0.0 o.mw o.mH o.m o.om o.mH om": Am-ev
o.o m.o~ o.- 0.0 N.mH H.Hm H.m m.m¢ m.o¢ an": Am-fiv
Lazar: + mmsqz
tfifi mswmftfiwg oz Gut Em: hév 3-? St: 3.3-;
ZOHPHmoa m>HF<4mm mmzp<a mmzwoz mm<so 4<Huom

 

 

 

 

 

 

«mhzmm<m no m4m>m4 4<onh<m=uuou4<onH<uaom m>Hh<m<mzoo

ma m4m<h

 

46

educational-occupational rankings of parents were compared.
He can see from Table 19, page 45, that the percentage of
mothers outranking fathers steadily decreases as social
class increases. This trend is significant at the 0.05
level (Chi Square), and is independent of sex. Hypothesis two
is thus upheld.

Hypothesis three states: The degree of dissatisfaction
expressed by the parents with their educational and oc-

cupational attainments will be inversely related to social

 

 

class: the lower the social class the greater the dissatis-
faction. Questions forty, forty-one, and forty-two, were
designed to measure parents' feelings about their education

as perceived by their offSpring. Table 20, page 47, illus-
trates the results of these questions. We can see from this
table that more than half of all male fathers felt that their
education was insufficient, regardless of social class. The
predicted trend is not present. However, the trend is quite
clear in the case of girls' fathers. The difference in
feelings seems to be accounted for when one looks at Table 16,
pages 36-37, again. We are reminded that 46.0 percent of
girls' fathers as opposed to 29.3 percent of boys' fathers

in the (7-9) social class are college graduates. Furthermore,
30.0 percent of the fathers, males (4-6) have failed to
complete their college education, as Opposed to 21.3 percent
of the fathers of females (4-6). We are dealing with self-
made men who feel limited by their lack of education. The

differences in feelings between male and female fathers again

47

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o.o¢ H.em H.m N.mm ¢.Nm m.¢o um": Ao-~v
m.~¢ H.¢m m.- m.mm m.m¢ m.~¢ Hm": Ao-¢v
m.n¢ m.om o.~¢ “.mm m.~m o.~¢ Hon: Am-Hv
mmgezm
H.Ne «.mm m.mm w.wm m.~m N.H¢ “an: Aa-~v
o.mm o.mm 0.0m o.o~ o.mm o.m¢ om": Am-¢v
m.o¢ m.mm m.mH ¢.m~ H.¢m «.me emu: Am-flv
.wwsmcH .weam .wczmeel 4mc=m .ccamcH .cwem mmu<=
tagged
segue: .Ne ozone Lasso: .He emguma .oe mm<su 4<Huom
onp<o=om «Hum» F=Om< maz~4mma .mwzmm<a

cm ”.35:

 

I'li r

 

48

points out the diversity in our male and female sample.

It is also interesting to note that when the mother has
a higher educational ranking than the father, the father's
feelings of dissatisfaction with his own education rise to
over sixty percent for both fathers of sons and daughters. It
appears that the theory of Allison Davis is substantiated.

Mothers, however, are perceived as being much more
satisfied with their spouses' educational attainment. But,

mothers of daughters (42.6 percent) are more dissatisfied with

 

 

their husbands than mothers of sons (18.9 percent). This dis-
crepancy may be accounted for by the differential perception
of male and female students. Sons may be reluctant to view
their mothers as being dissatisfied with their fathers. But
it is also possible the difference is real. In that case, the
data again suggests that there may be some differential
achievement motive between males and females. Furthermore,
the data suggests that female mothers are stronger in their
feelings and perhaps may wield more power. Table 15, pages
33-34, confirms this suspicion.

The difference in feelings between fathers and mothers
about the fathers' education may be accounted for by the fact
that the father provides an adequate income despite his
educational disadvantage.

Finally, mothers' feelings about her own education, as
perceived by her offspring, do not seem to follow any pattern.
And, it seems that even if the mother is satisfied with her
Spouse's educational attainment, she may not be satisfied with

her own.

49

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H.Hm m.mH «.8H H.mm ~.m¢ m.mfi m.o¢ ~.me emu: Am-~v

N.Nm m.~m m.HN “.5m m.mm “.mfi m.~m m.u¢ Hon: Am-¢v

N.me m.om 5.5m H.0m «.mN m.Hm o.~¢ m.¢~ Hen: Am-Hv

mm4<2ma

m.~m ~.H¢ m.m~ N.H¢ m.mm ~.HH m.~m m.mm NH": Am-kv

o.mm o.m¢ o.m~ 0.0m o.mm o.m~ o.m~ 0.0m om": Ao-ev

m.~m m.om H.mm “.mu ¢.Nm N.m¢ m.¢~ m.¢~ emu: Am-Hv
.tmvpmm.em2pmm .tmppmm.wmvpom

.wmwumm1. .pmmeb .gmmea seemed .nsop .pmmcp »_+mmw .aemp mm4<

acmeagm .m¢ emcee: .mm tagged .mm mm<so 4<Huom

 

 

 

 

 

 

onh<maouo m.mm:h<m :HHz zo~hu<mmnh<m
HN m4m<p

 

50
The second part of hypothesis three deals with the

perceived feelings of dissatisfaction with the father's oc-
cupation. From Table 21, page 49, we can see that dissatis-
faction with father's job appears to be inversely related to
social class. The exception here is with mother's feelings
for males (7-9). This may be; in part, due to the number of 'L.:
traveling salesmen who leave wives at home. It should also
be noted that boys appear more sensitive to the nature of
their father's occupation than do girls.

Thus, it appears there is some support for hypothesis

 

 

three. There seems to be a relationship between social class
and feelings of job satisfaction. But, feelings concerning
educational achievement are more complicated. Therefore, any
conclusions regarding hypothesis three are at best limited.

Our next hypothesis is concerned with the emotional
climate within the home. From Table 22, page 51, we can tell
that the majority of students feel that their parents are
happily married, and that the percent of happily married
parents is directly related to social class. The lower the
social class, the lower the percentage of happily married
COUples. He can also see that for males, close family ties
are inversely related to social class. But for females, this
pattern does not hold. He can also see that most of the
marriages are compatible. Thus it seems that for an over-
whelming majority of our students the emotional climate is
stable.

He can further see from Table 23, pages 53-54, that the

 

.ompsgos zpwooog

ogo upcogoo pcopmouogo PF< .owpogpou oga Eon: mo —Fo u e mucmmmeoog a m.m~ «

51

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o.n~ o.m~ w.oH ~.mm ¢.m N.m¢ “.mw o.HN o.o emu: Ao-kv
w.~m N.~o H.mH m.om m.¢ m.¢e ~.~m m.HH o.fi “on: “o-¢v
~.oN m.m~ «.0H o.~o o.H ¢.¢m «.mm o.mH o.o Hon: Am-Hv
mmo<zm
“.mfi ¢.Nm em.mu em.ou o.o «.mm «.mm «.mm 0.0 “an: Am-~v
o.mN o.m~ o.m o.mm 0.9 o.m¢ o.m~ o.om o.o om": Am-¢v
H.mm m.¢o m.mH m.mo e.m “.me o.k~ m.oH ¢.m emu: hm-flv
.omm Fpoz mm4<§
oz mo> oz mo> lxt>Po acmp .o>< Ammo Loom
»_.sma voyage:
“vex “some .mm staae:.Nm ao_.vn_omaeoo _~p=mtea .Hm mm<4o 4<Hoom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mmmz~¢a<z 4<Hmm<z om>Hmommo
NN m4m<H

52

majority of the students in our sample, regardless of social
class, feel they have experienced happy childhoods. These
results conflict with the findings of Ellis and Lane (1967),
Lipset and Bendix (1959), Rushing (1964) and Dynes (1956),
and support the work of Litwak (1960) and Adams (1967). How
can we explain this contradiction? We believe that the ex-
planation lies within the nature of our sample. Ellis and r
Lane (1967) did their research at Stanford University, an

expensive private institution. In fact, they were hard

 

pressed to find a sufficient number of working class students,
and had to select specifically for them. It is no wonder
then that the disparity they found between student and their
families was great. There was a great difference between the
working class homes of these mobile students, and the en-
vironment of their college. But, as we have said before,
Ball State University tends to provide a continuous environ-
ment for its students. Its p0pulation stems from similar
backgrounds, and as we have seen too, the educational,
occupational and income variation of student's parents is
not great. Our students have not had to disassociate them-
selves (anticipatory socialization) from their backgrounds
in order to prepare for entrance into the middle class. Thus
the majority of our students' close family ties are maintained
and childhoods have been happy.

However, hypothesis four states: Those students who
have come from the lowest social class will have experienced
the least satisfactory home situations, as demonstrated by

feelings of rejection and unhappy childhood; the relationship

53

 

 

 

 

 

o.oe o.o~ o.o¢ o.o~ o.oo o.o~ 0.0m o.o¢ o.om o~u=.:pmo

N.eH m.Hm m.mm N.“ o.mo o.m~ m.mH «.mm N.m¢ -u=.ooea
um»: Am-uv
m.¢H o.m~ m.~o ¢.oH H.em m.m~ “.mH m.Nm m.~¢ gone Ao-¢v
“.mfl o.~m ¢.m¢ m.oH m.¢¢ m.hm N.m~ m.~m m.mm mo»: Am-Hv

mmw<2m

m.¢H m.oN H.Nm m.w~ m.m~ m.~¢ m.~¢ H.Nm o.o Nu=.;peo

0.0 o.on 0.0m o.oH 0.0“ o.o~ o.oH 0.00 0.0m oHu=.ooea
NH": Am-uv
o.mH o.o¢ o.m¢ o.oH o.mm o.mm o.mH o.oo o.m~ om": Ao-¢v
o.o¢ m.¢m ¢.Nm m.¢~ ~.¢m m.mH o.o¢ m.¢~ ~.mN hm»: Am-HV
omopu omopo mmopo (Noon: ammo: mm4<z

mwmoowmml arogoml Lo>mz mo: (moczoeom, Asm> ucbl zoom: xgo

cospomwom tmzoum.wm ammcmmo_o-eoeoma.om oooso_weo sage: .mm mm<oo Aqmoom

 

 

 

 

 

 

mu m4m<k

mouzmzomh<4mm hzmm<ouhzuoshm

 

54

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.0 0.0m 0.0m o.:e 0.0m 0.0m o.oe o.o 0.0m o.oe emu:.:mmo

e.m e.m m.mm m.:e m.e m.:: m.m: m.e m.:: m.m: eeu:.mo::
emu: “mue:
m.m m.m m.m m.mm m.mm m.:m m.mm m.mm m.mm o.mm emu: Amumv
m.m m.m m.em m.em m.:m m.mm H.:m ¢.HH m.mm m.mm mmu: emumv

mmmezm

0.: 0.0 m.e: m.em m.em m.e: m.m: m.:e m.mm m.em eu:.:mmo

:.oH 0.0 0.0m :.om 0.: m.:e 0.0m 0.0m 0.0m 0.9: oHu:.mo::
emu: emuev
0.: o.o 0.0m 0.0m 0.0m o.mm o.mm 0.: o.mm o.mm emu: em-¢v
o.o m.o~ H.m m.mm m.mm o.m: m.em m.0m m.em e.m: emu: emumv
om» omopo omopo omo_o mm4<z

om on. 05 oz numMomlxpmeom so>oz no: mmsszom xem>

:oemm:_:o: .mm :oemommomueu:eoz .mm mmu:umoeoucu:moz .em mmmoo o<eoom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

e:.e:oov me mmmme

55
with the mother will be somewhat closer than with the father.

From Table 23, pages 53-54, we can clearly see that the
second premise of our hypothesis is correct. In all cases
the children feel closer to their mothers than to their
fathers. He can also see that working class males feel least
close to their fathers. This relationship does not appear to
hold for females.

The relationship between student and mother, while
closer than that between student and father, again appears
to be related to social class. The lower class males and
females do not feel as close to their mothers as are their
middle class counterparts.

Feelings of rejection also seem to be related to social
class. Working class males have felt rejected by their
fathers in 40.6 percent of the cases sampled. For females,
this approaches 20 percent.

We can also see that feelings of rejection by the mother
are less frequent than rejection by the father. However,
contrary to the predicted pattern 21.3 percent of middle
class (4-6) daughters have felt rejected by their mothers.
This degree of rejection correlates with the low point for
these females of the sense of close knit family. This dis-
crepancy can be eXplained if one remembers that it is
precisely this group in which the number of mothers with the
greater educational attainment than fathers, is the greatest.

We believe these mothers are pressuring their daughters

to complete their education and not make the same mistake

56

they made. And, they are using the withdrawal of love, to
do it. To emphasize just how much daughters of mothers
with higher education than fathers are interested in getting
ahead, we need only note that some 70 percent, higher than
any other female reSponse, list ambition as a desirable
characteristic for a spouse. “

There thus seems to be pressure points of rejection.

For males, rejection is greatest by working class fathers,

 

and for females, rejection is greatest by middle class
mothers.

Response 54 deals with feelings of domination by parents.
Almost 25 percent of working class females feel they are
dominated by their mothers. To a lesser extent upper middle
class females also seem plagued by this feeling. The low
feelings of mother-domination felt by middle class females,
may be due to the fact that they have incorporated their
mother's values to a greater extent.

But, a real peculiarity exists in mother-domination for
Catholic males (7-9). We shall deal with this problem later.

In summary then, it appears that contrary to many pre-
vious findings, in our sample most childhoods are happy.
Furthermore, the relationship between mother and child is
somewhat closer than between father and child. It also
appears that hypothesis four is substantiated. Working class
students are not as close to their parents, and have ex-
perienced a greater degree of rejection, than those from

the middle class.

57

The original design of this thesis was to ascertain the
relative importance of the mother in influencing the for-
mation of college aspirations in her offspring. The next
hypothesis is meant to measure that importance and relate
it to social class. Hypothesis five states: The tendency
for the mother to be named the most influential parent in
the college making decision will be inversely related to
social class: the lower the social class the more influential
the mother. Response 48 on Table 24, pages 62-63, supports
this hypothesis. For Protestant youth, the mother's im-
portance in affecting the formation of college aspirations
is inversely related to social class. This trend is sig-
nificant at the 0.05 level (Chi Square) and is independent
of sex. Furthermore, for Protestant girls, the mother is
always more important than the father. But for Protestant
males, only amongst the working class does mother's impor-
tance equal that of the father's.

There exists a peculiarity in our data and this has
made it necessary to distinguish between Catholic and
Protestant youth. Originally this distinction was not made
because the total number of Catholic men and women in our
sample is only about 13 percent. But when the data was
analyzed it was found that more than one third of the (7-9)
men were Catholic and that Catholic reSponses differed from

those of Protestants. Similarly, the distribution of

Catholic females was again high in the (7-9) female group.

It again became necessary to distinguish them from the

58

Protestants.

The breakdown of Catholics by social class is as follows:

Catholics
Number Percent
Total P0pulation,

n-236 31 13.1
Hales, n-76 14 18.4
Females, n-160 17 10.6
Males: (1-3) n-37 6 16.2

(4-6) n-20 1 5.0

(7-9) n-17 7 41.1
Females:

(1-3) n-61 4 6.6

(4-6) n-61 3 4.9

(7-9) n-37 10 27.0

One cannot help wonder as to why Ball State has an over-
representation of upper middle class Catholic youth. It is
possible that either overt or covert discrimination at more
prestigious institutions may be the cause. In any event,
this may be a topic for further research.

Just how do Catholics differ from the Protestant popu-
lation?

On a national level, Catholic men tend to have higher
n achievement scores than Protestant men (Veroff, Feld
Girin, 1962:216).

We have no way of ascertaining if this is true for our sample.

But we would like to point to some of the differences found

between upper-middle class Catholic and Protestant students.

 

59

In the realm of strength in the power structure,
(Table 15, page 33, Table 24, pages 62-63), we can see that
Catholic fathers appear more powerful than their Protestant
counterparts. However, there is a direct conflict in re-
sponse 46, yielding, where 71.0 percent of the males report
the mother yielding to the father while 50 percent of the
females report the father yielding. I cannot explain this
conflict. From Table 22, page 51, we learn that all the un-
happy male marriages are Catholic. This may be due to
Catholic non-divorce laws. Table 23, pages 53-54, tells us
that Catholic students have less happy childhoods than
their Protestant counterparts. Furthermore, Catholic males
and females are not as close to their fathers and have felt
a greater degree of rejection from them. This is eSpecially
true for the females. The Catholics' relationship to
mothers also differs from that of the Protestant, for they are
closer to their mothers. Boys have experienced slightly
more rejection from their mothers than Protestant men, and
Catholic women. Catholic women have felt rejected by their
mothers less frequently than Protestant women. But, perhaps
the most interesting fact is that some 42.9 percent of the
men have said their mothers have tried to dominate them.
This startling fact is compounded when one sees that 71.0
percent of Catholic (7-9) men, as opposed to 20 percent for
Protestants, name their mother as the most influential
parent in promoting their college ambitions. Even more

surprising is the fact that Catholic females name their

60
fathers 50 percent of the time, while their Protestant peers
name him only 25.9 percent of the time. When this is added
to feeling of rejection felt by sons from mothers and
daughters from fathers, one gets the impression that there
is an unusual cross-sex relationship functioning here, per-
haps Oedipal in nature. This would certainly make a
fascinating future investigation.

Matthew Besdine (1969) has reported about a particular
type of mother, the Jocasta mother, who is talented, yet
frustrated. She takes out her frustrations by directing her-
self toward the education and develOpment of her son. This
type of mothering, Besidine reports, has resulted in the
development of creative genius. It has also produced ex-
tremely unhappy sons who are often maladjusted sexually. We
cannot help but picture our Catholic mother, often left alone
by a traveling husband, dominated by him, and frustrated by
her lack of education and position, devoting herself to her
son's future. But then, this is Speculation.

Perhaps it is the male-priest image that draws females
to their father; perhaps the virgin-mother image draws sons
to their mothers. But, whatever the nature of the bond, it
does seem to exist. And Catholic upper-middle class youth
do differ from Protestants.

Hypothesis six states: The most influential parent in
directing the formation of college aspirations will be de-
termined by the resolution of the conflicting forces of

same-sex identification versus mother-father power balance.

61
This hypothesis assumes that males tend to identify with
their fathers and that females would similarly identify with
their mothers. But, the intervening variable in this suc-
cessful identification with the same-sex parent is the
strength and competence the father demonstrates in performing
his masculine role. Hussen, Conger and Kagan report:

Those boys with the greatest preference for masculine
activities (high male identification) perceived the father
as more punitive, more threatening, more powerful, and more
nurturant than boys low in masculine interests. Thus, other
things being equal, it appears that the child identifies with
the same-sex parent when that parent is perceived as strong,
competent, and nurturant (1963:272).

When the father is not clearly dominant, which is more
likely to occur in the working class, both sons and daughters
are apt to identify and reSpond to the desires of the mother.

When both parents are perceived as nurturant, powerful,
and competent, the child will identify with both of them to
some degree (Mussen, Conger, Kagan, 1963:268).

When the father presents the dominant image, a charac-
teristic of the middle classes, the child, both male and

female, is likely to identify with the father. In fact,
Hussen, Conger, and Kagan report:

The lack of a clear-cut identification of girls with
mothers is taken to reflect that girls perceive the father
as more powerful than the mother, and are therefore, more
ambivalent (i.e., unsure) about choosing the mother as a

model for identification than are the boys about choosing
the father (1963:273).

While our study was not Specifically designed to measure
sex-identification, it does indicate which parent the child
deems more influential (question 48). If we take this
question to be an indicator of sex identification, and cor-

relate it with the questions on authority and parental

62

 

omcoomoe cpumuegz *

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.:000
0.00 0.0m 0.0m 0.0m 0.0m 0.0m 0.00 0.0m 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0mu: emuev
.00::
0.0 0.00 0.0m 0.0m 0.00 0.00 0.00 H.em m.em m.em e.e m.e emu: emuev
m.m m.0m m.mm 0.0: m.0e m.mm 0.0m m.mm 0.0m m.0m 0.0 0.0 mmu: emu00
0.m e.mm m.0e 0.00 ~.0m m.0m H.0m 0.0 m.0m 0.0m 0.0 m.mm mmu: emumv
mm0ezm
.:m:0
m.0m 0.0 m.0m 0.me 0.00 0.0m 0.0m 0.0m m.e0 m.:m 0.00 0.0 eu: emuev
.moe:
0.0m 0.0m 0.0m 0.0m 0.0m 0.0m 0.0m 0.0m 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0mu: emuev
0.0 0.mm 0.0m 0.0m 0.0m 0.m0 0.m0 0.0m 0.0m 0.m0 0.0 0.0 0mu: emuev
m.mm m.0m 0.0m H.0m m.0m 0.mm «.mm 0.0m m.0m e.00 e.e m.mm emu: emuev
0: 0: m00::
he.oz Thom on 0: cm mm a: nu ypzmcow om whomcow oz
commeumo mwwppou
co mocooewce .we mam—omomwo .00 mcoemeooo .eo mm<gu 4<Hoom

 

 

 

 

muzngqu 4<hzmm<m oz< mzmm~p<m >hHmozh3<
«N m4m<h

 

 

63

 

 

 

.cumo

 

 

 

 

0.0 0.0m 0.0e 0.0m 0.00 0.0m 0mu: Amuev
.moee
m.e m.00 m.m: m.e 0.m0 0.0m emu: emuev
m.mm m.0m 0.0m 0.0m H.0m m.0m mmu: emumv
0.mm H.0m 0.mm 0.0m m.00 m.em mmu: emumv
mummzm:
.:mm0
m.:m m.0m m.em m.mm 0.0m 0.m0 eu: emuev
.002:
0.0: 0.00 0.00 0.0m 0.0e 0.0m 0mu: emuev
0.0 0.00 0.mm 0.0m 0.mm 0.mm 0mu: emumv
0.0m m.em e.0: m.0m m.0m 0.mm emu: emumv
mmopu omopo mmo_u omopu omopo omo—o mmm<z
pm: rwmszosmw >Lo> uoz womzoaom xeo>
mm00um0e0 :u:00: .em mm000moeo :0:00: .mm mm<00 0:000m

 

 

 

 

 

A0.0:000 0m 00mme

 

64
warmth (Table 24, pages 62-63), we can clearly see that hypo-
thesis six is supported. Where the mother's position is
strongest, her influence is increased [males (1-3), females
(1-6)]. Because of same-sex identification however, she has
a stronger influence upon her daughters; Where the father's
competence is great, and is reinforced by same-sex identifi-
cation, his influence upon his offspring is increased. (Males
4-9). And finally, when the father's competence is great,
but not reinforced by same-sex identification and the mother
also presents an impressive image, both parents are considered
to be influential [females (7-9)].

The relationship between authority and the most in-
fluential parent is more strikingly demonstrated in Table 25,
which does not distinguish by social class.

TABLE 25
DECISION MAKING AND THE MOST INFLUENTIAL PARENT

 

 

 

 

PARENT NAMED HOST MOTHER FATHER BOTH

INFLUENTIAL

Hales: Mother 11.5 38.5 50.0
Father 10.0 70.0 20.0
Both 9.1 27.3 63.6

Females:Mother 29.9 37.3 32.8
Father 6.0 67.4 27.9
Both 7.0 41.9 51.2

 

 

DeSpite how much we talk about a strong mother in the

65
parent power relationship, we are really talking about
slightly stronger or equal mother. In most of these house-
holds, as we said before, we are not dealing with a
matricentric situation. The father is also strong. He is
providing an adequate role model. But what happens when he
fails to do so, when the situation is clearly matricentric?
In our sample there are sixteen individuals who are 24 or
older,--over-age for a normal college p0pulation. Of these
over-aged students, 10 are males and six are females. There
are only two graduate students, both males. 0f the remaining
eight male students, four, 50 percent, name their mother as
the exclusive decision maker in the family. (See Table 26,
page 66). Furthermore, 50 percent of the females name their
mother as the decision maker. Not one over-aged student
names the father as the exclusive decision maker. In view
of the statistics for the rest of the population, these
figures are startling. It is quite apparent that the adequate
functioning of the father as a role model is vital for the
normal development of college aspirations. This is particularly

critical for males because:

When the same-sex parent is regarded unfavorably (e.g.
weak, unskilled, unloved, alcoholic) and the social environ-
ment tells the child he is 'just like his father,| the child
will develOp an identification with the model's negative
qualities as well as with some of his rewarding, desirable
characteristics (Nussen, Conger, Kagan, 1962:271).

Without an adequate concept of self, it is readily under-
standable why the child has had difficulty in getting to

college.

The implications of these findings are particularly

66
TABLE 26
AVERAGE STUDENTS AND HATRICENTRISM

 

 

RESPONSE MALES n=8 FEMALES n=6

 

Number Percent Number Percent

 

47. Decision-Making

Mother 4 50.0 2 33.3
Consult, but

mo. 0 0.0 1 16.7
Both 1 12.5 3 50.0
Consult, but

Fa. 3 37.5 0 0.0
Father 0 0.0 O 0.0

 

 

43. Who wears the

pants
Mother 3 37.5 3 50.0
Father 4 50.0 2 33.3

Both 1 12.5 1 16.7

 

 

 

 

 

 

67
important in understanding the Negro male and his low as-
pirations. Negro families have long histories of being
matricentric (Parker and Kleiner, 1966; Gist and Bennett,
1963, 1964). Without an adequate male model, black youth
have difficulty making it in the aggressive, competitive,
academic world.

Apart from values and role playing, how much support
does the college aSpiring youth receive from his parents? We
can see from Table 27, page 68, that working class males
receive the least financial support. Lack of money is pro-
bably the reason, but then, why do 72.1 percent of working
class females receive financial support?

We can also see from Table 28, page 69, that the parents
of working class males are least interested in their sons'
academic performance. Table 29, page 69, also tells us that
the parents of working class males, particularly the father,
are least interested in reading. Thus it is the working class
male who has the greatest difficulty in fulfilling his college
aSpirations.

Hypothesis seven states: The tendency toward small
families will be directly related to social class: the higher
the social class the greater the tendency. Nevertheless,
even the working class students will come from predominantly
small families.

The data concerning family size is shown in Table 30,
page 70. We can see from the data that the above hypothesis
appears correct for males, but not for females (Protestant).

We can also see that the largest Protestant families are

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mm u4m<H

m.mm :.m m.mm m.0m 0.: 0.mm 0.0m mmu: Amuev
0.me 0.0 0.00 0.: 0.: m.m0 m.m mmu: e0-:v
m.me m.0 m.0m 0.0 m.0 0.00 0.: mmu: emumv
mummzme

0.mm 0.0 m.0e e.em m.mm :.mm 0.0 emu: emuev
0.m0 0.mm 0.0e 0.mm 0.00 0.0e 0.mm 0mu: “0-0V
m.mm m.0m 0.0e 0.m m.mm e.me m.0m emu: emumv
mom toqgmucoFbmwcmF spurns? tomommucozgmpcoz bmmlmmmfi mph—<2
mummmnw.mm mmze:: .mm mmze0: mm<00 0:000m

mz0eemm:: m0m0000 :0: m:0::0m 0:ezm:<:

 

 

“Saiblu hr..v.>..2....2......frflm. r 1%

 

69

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE 28
PARENTAL INTEREST IN SCHOOL PERFORMANCE
SOCIAL CLASS 34, INTEREST 35. PUNISHMENT
HALESE Very Int. Not Int. No Fa 4N0 580*
(1-3) n=37 48.7 37.8 10.8 70.3 18.9 2.7 5.4
(4-6) n=20 65.0 30.0 5.0 80.0 5.0 10.0 5.0
(7-9) n=17 88.2 11.8 0.0 88.2 5.9 0.0 5.9
FEHAEES
(1-3) n=61 75.5 18.0 4.9 91.8 1.6 1.6 3.3
(4-6) n=61 72.1 24.6 3.3 91.8 0.0 1.6 6.6
(7-9) n=37 81.1 16.2 2.7 81.1 8.1 2.7 8.1
* write-in response
TABLE 29
PARENTS AS READERS*
SOCIAL CLASS 36. MOTHER 37. FATHER
MALES TTes Yes
(1-3) n=37 62.2 40.5
(4-6) n=20 65.0 55.0
(7-9) n=17 76.5 76.5
FEMALES
(1-3) n=61 60.7 60.7
(4-6) n=61 65.6 45.9
(7-9)_ n=37 64.9 59.5

 

 

 

 

 

OuestTons 36,37

 

 

7O

 

 

.npmu

 

 

 

 

0.0m 0.0m 0.0m 0.0m 0.0m 0.0m 0.0m 0.0m 0.0m 0mu: emuev
m.mm m.mm m.mm 0.0: m.mm 0.0m 0.0m m.mm :.:m 0mu::0MM-e0
m.mm m.mm m.mm m.mm m.mm m.mm m.mm e.em m.mm emu: Amu00
m.0 0.0m m.mm 0.m: 0.0m m.0m 0.em m.mm m.0 mmu: Amumv
m.mm:
m.mm m.mm 0.0m 0.0m m.m: 0.0 m.mm 0.0m m.mm eum omm-e0
0.0m 0.0m 0.0m 0.00 0.0 0.0m 0.00 0.0: 0.0m 0mu:m Amuev
0.0 0.0m 0.m: 0.0m 0.m 0.mm 0.mm 0.mm 0.0 0mu: emuev
m.m 0.em m.mm m.00 e.0m m.mm 0.0m 0.em m.0 emu: emumv
0:0: mmmmx

m::0 mm00:00:| meeme: 0mm .305W 0 um mu 0
:00:0 zemem .00 mmem mmmzmm .00 mm<00 0<e00m

 

 

 

 

 

 

onhHmom 4<zHamo oz< mNHm >4Hz<m
om m4m<h

71

moreommpmo Pp: ooxooco mucooopm m e

 

 

 

 

 

m.mm 0.em e.m 0.0 m.mm m.mm e.me m.m emu: emuev
0.mm e.00 m.0 0.0 m.mm 0.0m 0.00 m.mm mmu: e0-:0
e.mm m.mm 0.0 0.0 m.m e.mm m.0e 0.0 mmu: emumv
m00:zm
0.m ue.:0 0.em 0.0 e.mm m.mm 0.0e 0.: emu: emuev
0.mm 0.0e 0.0 0.0 0.mm 0.mm 0.0e 0.mm 0mu: emuev
m.mm m.mm m.mm 0.0 0.0 0.em 0.00 m.mm emu: emumv
—oo:om mgooqlw o>eueom, mm4<5

cacao a mewsom mcmmmmmp mnwm mucmgmo nozmco: ougowcwme w>mm+umv

 

 

mmozngqu muzho

.mo

 

macaw mum; mzh .No

 

mm<4u 4<Huom

 

 

Hm m4m<H

hzmzzomm>zm 4<hop mzh

 

 

eo.0:oov mm umo<e

72

 

 

 

 

 

 

:.m 0.00 0.0 0.0 :.m m.mm m.:m m.mm emu: Amuev
0.m m.mm m.mm 0.0 0.0m 0.00 m.m m.mm mmu: e0-00
0.0 e.m: m.m 0.m 0.0 0.0 0.mm 0.mm mmu: emumv
mmmezm:

0.0 m.mm e.em 0.0 0.0 m.mm e.mm m.mm emu: Amuev
0.0m 0.mm 0.: 0.0 0.m 0.m 0.mm 0.mm 0mu: emumv
m.m e.mm m.mm 0.0 m.m m.m :.m 0.00 emu: Amumv
msmnuo mgmnummu mvcmwuc. mw>wumpmg mfican—wm Lmzpos Lucumev mucmswq mud;—
z0eme000 m0m0000 :0: z0m:m: :z:e:0::e em0: .00 mm:00 00:00m

 

 

 

 

e0.0:0ov mm mmm<e

 

.;
b,

a.

la

in
sc’:
nee

US

73
those of working class males. It thus appears that hypothesis
seven is only partly upheld.

Hypothesis eight states: We should find a predominance
of oldest and youngest offspring in our sample. Table 30
also lists the ordinal position of birth of our college stu-
dents. de can see that the majority of the students are
either oldest or youngest and hypothesis eight appears valid.
The working classes seem to have an over-representation of
first born, as do the upper-middle class. But (4-6) males
appear to have an over-representation of middle born students.

Hypothesis nine states: The peer group will serve to
support the formation of college aspirations. From Table 31,
pages 71-72, we see that the peer group does appear to sup-
port the aSpirations of our youth. However, it is least
supportive for working class males. It also appears that the
peer group is only occasionally the decisive factor for pro-
moting college attendance.

In assessing other external influences, Table 31 tells
us that the individual outside the home who is most important
in affecting the college aspirations of our youth, is the
school teacher. Furthermore, her influence is most important,
nearly 30 percent, upon the working class male. This infor-
mation can be most valuable to teachers who are working with
capable boys from the working class. The teacher should be
made aware that her influence may be critical in the
crystalization of college aspirations for her male working
class students. She should know that when she encounters

such capable youth in her classroom, the extra attention she

LI)

M

f\
H

 

SCHOOL VERSUS HOME ENVIRONMENT

74
TABLE 32

 

 

 

 

 

 

SOCIAL CLASS FAMILY SCHOOL OTHER
WALES

(1-3) n=37 40.5 45.9 8.1
(4-6) n=20 70.0 20.0 10.0
(7-9) n=17 64.7 29.5 5.9
FEHALES

(1-3) n=61 59.0 27.9 6.6
(4-6) n=61 68.9 29.5 1.6
(7-9) n=37 81.0 10.8 5.4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1r

0':

51

ill

ti

75
may devote to such a student may be the difference between
social mobility and frustration. Furthermore, teachers
should be complimented for the help they have given their
students.
It thus appears that hypothesis ten is substantiated.

The school teacher will be the chief value transmitter out-

 

side the home and her influence will be most critical for F
working class students.
Our final hypothesis was designed to assess the relative
importance of the school and home environment upon the stu- f
L

dents' formation of college aspirations. It states: The
school environment will be more critical for males than fe-
males. Table 32, page 74, shows the combined percentage for
home versus school responses on question 64. We learn from
this table that in only the case of working class males is
the school environment perceived as more important than the
home environment. It thus appears that it is the working
class males' decision to attend college that is most arduous.
He makes his decision at a later age than his female counter-
part (Table 10, page 26); he receives less support at home
for that decision both emotionally and financially; he may
lack an adequate male model from which to develop his own
self-image; and he is more dependent Upon the external factors
that school may or may not supply.

It also appears from Table 32, that hypothesis eleven
is substantiated. Males do seem to be more susceptible to
the influence that the school environment offers, than do

females.

(1:

all

to

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

This study was designed to add to the understanding of

the various structural components within the home environ-

ment that have led to the formation of college aspirations in

a particular sample of college students. Because of the
large percentage of working class students in our sample, it
was h0ped that it would also contribute to the understanding
of the processes of social mobility.

Because the process of social mobility is extremely
complex and involves many diverse variables, there still re-
mains much to be done. Nevertheless, we believe that this
study does show that the working class mother is extremely
important in the develOpment of college aSpirations in her

offspring, and that her role is often more important than

that of her Spouse. We have found that her importance as per-

ceived by her children is directly related to social class
and independent of the sex of her offspring.

But, within the context of social class, there appears
to be various subcultural factors which are functioning.

The first factor is the father-mother balance of
power. We have observed that the mother's position is per-
ceived strongest in the lower social classes. But, contrary
to previous research, we have found that matricentrism is

76

 

'I 13.9 J'JSEI"

rar

ha1
in'
um
ma
Fu

CY"

Cu
1's

Oi"

Oi

77
rarely the case. In fact, our data strongly suggest that
matricentrism may result in the frustration of college as-

pirations.

Another factor which is related to social class is the

mother's relative educational and occupational status. We
have observed that the mother's advantage in these areas is
inversely related to social class. We have also seen that

when the mother has an educational advantage, her position

within the father-mother power structure is greatly improved.

Furthermore, her influence upon her children is also in-
creased.

Another factor which affects the formation of college
aSpirations of youth is feelings of dissatisfaction with a
certain life style transmitted by parents to their children.
We have observed that fathers' dissatisfaction appears to be
inversely related to their social class. But mothers'
feelings do not follow any pattern. Therefore, we have been
unable to arrive at any definite conclusions regarding this
matter. This is perhaps an area for further research.
Nevertheless, the students' rejection of their fathers' oc-
cupation appears to be inversely related to social class and
is particularly acute for those students of working class
origin.

The emotional climate within the home is another sig-
nificant factor in the formation of college aspirations. We

have found that contrary to previous research, the majority

r!

 

l'”'" __ -—
1

IA

(7"

si
de

th

to

ma

10::

78
of the homes that our students come from are perceived as
stable and happy. But, it is the working class student who
feels least close to his parents and experiences the greatest
degree of rejection. This rejection is particularly acute for
the working class male. We have also learned that students
feel closer to their mothers than to their fathers.

We have observed that there is a definite relationship
between the mother-father power structure and the same-sex
identification. We believe that how a child perceives the
relative position of his parents within this power structure,
determines how completely same-sex identification will be,
and which parent will carry the most influence with the child.
We have noticed that Catholics differ from Protestants, and
appear to have an unusual cross-sex parent relationship.

We have tried to ascertain the importance of family
size and ordinal position, but have not come to any
definite conclusions on this matter.

Finally, we have tried to measure the importance of
the school environment and have found that it is critical
for the formation of college aspiration of working class
males.

In summary then, we would like to pr0pose the fol-

lowing schematic representation.

 

79

SOCIAL CLASS

dissatisfaction-—rparent balance4—-relative affectional

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

  

of power parental relation-
education ship
and

   
 
 
 

occupa-
tional
status

 

.L

same-sex
identification

1

influential
parent(s)

1

college
aspirations

school teacher
and peers

college

FIGURE 1
MOBILITY PRODUCING FORCES

80

In conclusion, for the working class student, the
mother is often the most influential parent in promoting
social mobility. She is most influential because of her re-
lative position within the power structure, a position in
the eyes of her children which rivals that of her husband for
prestige and esteem, and allows them to identify with her.
Her position in the conjugal power structure is greatly en-
hanced by such factors as her educational and occupational
attainment, which is often superior to that of her working
class husband. Such differential achievement may cause her
and her husband to be dissatisfied with their present social
position. Moreover, the warm affectional ties she shares
with her offspring also aid in their identification with her.
Furthermore, the factor of same-sex identification inten-
sifies her influence with her female offSpring. She is thus

able to transmit the values that lead to social mobility.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ADAMS, BERT
1967 Occupational position, mobility, and the kin
orientation.
American Sociological Review 32: 213-227

ALTUS, WILLIAM D.
1966 Birth order and its sequelae.
Science 151: 44-49

BARTH, ERNEST A. T., and WATSON, WALTER B.
1967 Social stratification and the family in mass
society.
Social Forces 45: 392-402

BAYER, ALAN E.
1966 Birth order and college attendance.
Journal of Marriage and Family 28: 480-484

BEILIN, HARRY
1956 The pattern of postponability and its relation
to social class mobility.
Journal of Social Psychology 44: 33-48

BELL, GERALD D.
1963 Processes in the formation of adolescents
aspirations.
Social Forces 42: 179-186

BERDIE, RALPH F.
1954 After high school--what? Minneapolis,
University of Minnesota Press

BESDINE, MATTHEW
1969 Mrs. Oedipus
Psychology Today 2, 8: 4O

BORDUA, DAVID J.
1960 Educational aspirations and parental stress on

college.
Social Forces 38: 262-269

BREMBECK, COLE S.
1966 Social foundations of education, a cross-
cultural approach. New York, John Wiley.

BURTON, R. CLARK
1960 The “cooling-out" function in higher education.
American Journal of Sociology 65: 569-576

81

Ci;

(1')

C)

82

BURTON, R. CLARK
1962 Education the expert society. San Francisco,
Chandler Publishing Company.

CHINOY, ELY
1952 The tradition of Opportunity and the aspirations
of automobile workers.
American Journal of Sociology 57: 453-459

CROCKETT, HARRY J. JR.
1962 The achievement motive and differential oc-
cupational mobility in the United States.
American Sociological Review 27: 191-204

CUTRIGHT, PHILLIP
1960 Students' decision to attend college.
Journal of Educational Sociology 33: 292-299

DAVIS, ALLISON
1957 Personality and social mobility.
School Review 65: 134-143

DONOVAN, THOMAS R.

1962 Socio-economic and educational factors in-
fluencing the achievement level of individuals
in large scale organizations.

Sociology and Social Research 46: 416-425

DRUCKER, PETER F.
1960 The new majority.
in Schuler, Hoult, Gibson, Fiero, and Brookover,
Readin s in Sociology. New York, Thomas Y.
Crowel? Company.

DUNCAN, BEVERLY
1967 Education and social background.
American Journal of Sociology 72: 363-372

DYNES, RUSSEL R., CLARKE, ALFRED C., and SIMON DINITZ
1956 Levels of occupational aspiration: some aSpects
of family experience as a variable.
American SociolOgical Review 21: 212-215

ELDER, GLEN H. JR.
1965 Family Structure and educational attainment:
a cross-national analysis.
American Sociological Review 30: 81-96

ELLIS, ROBERT A., and LANE, W. CLAYTON
1963 Structural supports for upward mobility.
American Sociological Review 28: 743-756

83

ELLIS, ROBERT A., and LANE, W. CLAYTON
1966 Social mobility and career orientation.
Sociology and Social Research 50: 280-296

1967 Social mobility and social isolation: a test
of Sorokin's dissociative hypothesis.
American Sociological Review 321: 237-253

ENPEY, LA MAR T.

1956 Social class and occupational aspiration: a
comparison of absolute and relative
measurement.

American Sociological Review 21: 703-709

GEZI, KALIL I., and MYERS, JAMES E.
1968 Teaching in American culture. New York, Holt,
Rinehart and Winston.

GIST, NOEL P., and BENNETT, WILLIAM S. JR.
1963 Aspirations of Negro and White students.
Social Forces 42: 40-49

1964 Class and Family influences on student
aSpirations.
Social Forces 43: 167-173

GOODMAN, PAUL
1960 Growing up absurd. New York, Random House.

HALLER, ARCHIBALD 0., and MILLER, IRWIN W.
1963 The occupational aspiration scale: theory,
structure and correlates. Technical Bulletin
288, East Lansing, Department of Sociology and
Anthropology, Michigan State University,
Agricultural Experiment Station.

HAVIGHURST, R.J., DUBOIS, MARIA EUGENIA, and M. CSIKSZENTMIHALYI
et al;

1965 A cross-national study of Buenos Aires and
Chicago adolescents. New York, S. Karger
Basel.

HERRIOTT, ROBERT E.
1963 Some social determinants of educational
aspirations.
Harvard Educational Review 33: 157-177

HOLLINGSHEAD, A.B.
1949 Elmstown's youth. New York, John Wiley and
Sons.

KAHL, JOSEPH A.
1953 Educational and occupational aSpirations of
"common man” boys.
Harvard Educational Review 23: 186-203

 

 

K i

L]

L)

KAHL, JOSEPH A.
1962 Motivation and education.
in Robert R. Bell, The Sociology of Education.
Illinois, Dorsey Press.

1962 The American class structure. New York, Holt,
Rinehart and Winston.

KANDEL, DENISE B. and LESSER, GERALD S.
1969 Parental and peer influences on educational
plans of adolescents.
American Sociological Review 34: 212-223

KELLER, SUZANNE, and ZAVOLLONI, MARISA
1964 Ambition and social class: a reSpecification.
Social Forces 43: 58-70

KOHN, MELVIN L.
1959 Social class and the exercise of parental
authority.
American SociolOgical Review 24: 352-366

1959 Social class and parental values.
American Journal of Sociology 64: 337-351

KOMAROVSKY, MIRRA
1967 Blue-collar marriage. New York, Vintage
Books, Random House.

KRAUSS, IRVING
1964 Sources of educational aspirations among
working-class youth.
American Sociological Review 29: 867-879

LIPSET, SEYMOUR MARTIN, and REINHARD BENDIX
1959 Social mobility in industrial society.
Berkeley, University of California Press.

LITWAK, EUGENE
1960 OCCUpational mobility and extended family
cohesion.
American Sociological Review 25: 9-21

LYND, ROBERT 5., and HELEN MERRELL LYND

1929 Middletown. New York, Harcourt, Brace and
World.

1937 Middletown in Transition; a study in cultural
conflict. New York; Harcourt, Brace and
World.

MC CLELLAND, DAVID, ATKINSON, JOHN W. et al.
1953 The achievement motive. New York,
Appleton-Century-Crofts.

85
NC CLELLAND, DAVID

1961 The achieving society. Princeton, 0. Van
lostrand.

MC DILL, EDNARD L., and JAMES COLEMAN

1963 High school social status, college plans, and
interest in academic achievement: a panel
analysis.

American Sociological Review 28: 905-918

1965 Family and peer influences in college plans of
high school students.
Sociology of Education 38: 112-126

MC GUIRE, CARSON
1952 Conforming, mobile, and divergent families.
Marriage and Family Living 14: 109-115

MERTON, ROBERT K.
1968 Social theory and social structure. New York,
Free Press.

MULLIGAN, RAYMOND A.
1951 Socio-economic background and college environ-
ment.
American Sociological Review 16: 188-196

PARKER, SEYMOUR, and ROBERT J. KLEINER
1966 Characteristics of Negro mothers in single-
headed households.
Journal of Marriage and the Family 28: 507-
513

PAVOLKO, RONALD M.
1965 Aspirants to teaching: some differences between
planning on a career in teaching.
Sociology and Social Research 50: 47-62

PERRUCCI, ROBERT
1967 Education, stratification, and mobility.
in Hansen and Gerstel, On educational-
sociological perspectives. New York, John
Wiley and Sons.

REHBERG, RICHARD A. and DAVID L. WESTBY
1967 Parental encouragement, occupation, education
and family size: artifactual or independent
determinants of adolescent educational ex-
pectations.
Social Forces 45: 362-374

REISSMAN, LEONARD
1961 Class in American society. Illinois, Free
Press.

:1.)

SC

SH

86

RIESSMAN, FRANK
1962 The culturally deprived child. New York,
Harper and Row.

ROSEN, BERNARD C.
1956 The achievement syndrome: a psychocultural
dimension of social stratification.
American Sociological Review 21: 203-211

1961 Family structure and achievement motivation.
American Sociological Review 26: 574-585

RUSHING, WILLIAM A.
1964 Adolescent-parent relationship and mobility
aspirations.
Social Forces 43: 157-166

SCANZONI, JOHN
1967 Socialization, no achievement, and achievement
values.
American Sociological Review 321: 449-456

SCHACHTER, STANLEY
1963 Birth order, eminence and higher education.
American Sociological Review 28: 757-768

SEWELL, WILLIAM H., and VIMAL P. SHAH
1968 Social class, parental encouragement, and
educational aspirations.
American Journal of Sociology 73: 559-572

SHOSTAK, ARTHUR B.
1967 Education and the family.
Journal of Marriage and the Family 29: 124-139

SIMPSON, RICHARD L.
1962 Parental influence, anticipatory socialization,
and social mobility.
American Sociological Review 27: 517-522

SMELSER, lEIL J., and SEYMOUR MARTIN LIPSET
1966 Social structure and mobility in economic de-
ve10pment. Chicago, Aldine Publishing Co.

STRODTBECK, FRED L.
1968 Family interaction, values and achievement.
in McClelland, David C. et al, Talent and
Society, Princeton, 0. Van Nostrand Company.

STRUCKERT, ROBERT P.
1963 Occupational mobility and family relation-
ships.
Social Forces 41: 301-307

87

SWINEHART, JAMES N.

1963

Socio-economic level, status aSpiration, and

maternal role.
American Sociological Review 28: 391-399

TURNER, RALPH H.

1962

1964a

1964b

VEROFF, JOSEPH,

1962

WHITE, CLYDE R.
1952

Some family determinants of ambition.
Sociology and social research 46: 397-411

Upward mobility and class values.
Social Problems 11: 359-371

The social context of ambition. San Francisco,
Chandler Publishing Company.

FELD, SHEILA, and GERALD GURIN
Achievement motivation and religious back-
ground.

American Sociological Review 27: 205-217

These will go to college. Cleveland, Western
Reserve University Press.

APPENDIX I

THE QUESTIONNAIRE

This questionnaire was originally designed to ascer-
tain the degree of importance of the mother in influencing
the college aspirations of her offSpring. It was also
designed to consider the other factors related to mobility,
discussed in the introduction.

Part I, 1 to 14, was designed to establish the
general background of the student.

Part II, 15 to 20, was designed to measure the educa-
tional and occupational levels of the parents. Mother's
OCCUpation was coded on the same scale as the father's (p.13).
The relative education of the parents when compared, was also
coded.

Part III, 21 to 30, was designed to measure the am-
bitions of the students. Questions twenty-four and twenty-
five were primarily coded in terms of aesthetic or monetary
interests. Question thirty was coded for ambition as a
desirable characteristic in a Spouse.

Part IV, 31 to 37, was designed to establish parental
interest and support of educational aspirations.

Part V, 38 to 43, was intended to establish the dis-
satisfaction of the parents with their present station in
life.

88

89

Part VI, 44 to 51, was designed to measure the power
structure within the home and the degree of influence exerted
Upon the child by each parent. Questions 49 and 50 received
a great number of write-in reSponses and the categories
(both) and (neither) were added in the coding.

Part VII, 52 to 59, was intended to measure the degree
of happiness within the home.

Part VIII, questions 60 and 61, was designed to
measure the importance of siblings, ordinal position, and
family size.

Finally, Part IX, questions 62 to 64, was designed to
measure the importance of outside influences, particularly
the school environment. Responses to question 69 were
grOUped in several categories, i.e., family, family and
school, school, peers, teachers, etc.

The student response to the questionnaire appeared
honest and frank. In fact, many students volunteered ex-
tremely personal and uncalled for information. One boy was
apparently so carried away by the questions regarding his
parents and his feelings toward them that he scribbled, "I
refuse to indicate the intelligence of my parents for I feel
that they know more than I suspect." And, when asked about
being rejected by his father, he scribbled in big capital
letters, "ALL THE TIME," and for his mother, "NEVER.“

One woman confessed her great resentment toward a father and
a deceased husband because they had curbed her educational
ambitions. Because this questionnaire elicited such frank

responses, I believe that it was an effective instrument.

9O

DEAR STUDENT:

This questionnaire has been designed in an attempt to
arrive at a better understanding of the factors that in-
fluence individuals to seek a college education. Please read
the questions carefully and answer them to the best of your
ability. Many of the questions concern the relationship
between your mother and father and their relationship to you.
Others are concerned with what you and your parents are
thinking. Should your parents be deceased, answer the
questions as you feel they would have felt. If you have any
questions please ask the instructor. If you feel any par-
ticular question is irrelevant to your situation please circle
it. Please print your answers clearly. While we are asking
you for your name you are to be reassured that you will remain
completely anonymous.

We thank you for your cooperation.

 

 

 

 

Name:
Home Address: city or county
state
PART I
General Information
1. Age:

 

2. Sex: ( ) male ( ) female
3. Marital Status:

( ) Single ( ) separated
( ) married ( ) divorced
( ) engaged ( ) widowed

4. My church preference is:

 

5. My race is:

 

6. My parents' church preference is:

 

7. Was your father born in the United States?

()yes ()no

If no, where?

 

F.‘

9.

12.

13.
14.

91

My parents are:

( ) both living together

( ) both dead

(

)

father dead

my regular home with:

both parents
mother

father
grandparents
uncle or aunt
Spouse

from a:

farm

rural area, but not a

village, under 2,500
town, 2,501-10,000
city, 10,001-100,000
city, over 100,000

Class rank:

( ) freshman

( ) sophomore

( ) junior

My home town is approximately

00 you feel that you would be able to attend college if

( ) mother dead
divorced

separated

friends

myself

remarried father

()
(l
( ) remarried mother
()
( ) other

farm

( ) senior

( ) graduate

miles from Ball State.

Ball State was not located in Muncie?

()yes

()no

 

92
PART 11
Parental Backgrounds

15. Father's educational attainment (check highest level
achieved):

( ) less than 8 grades ( ) some college (1-3% years)
( ) completed 8 grades ( ) graduated from college

( ) some high school ( ) holder of an advanced “-
(9-11 grades) degree (M.A.,PhD.,M.D.,etc.)

( ) graduated from High ( ) don't know
School

. "wl

( ) business or trade
school

 

5 cm -—‘

16. My father's occupation is (or was, if dead or retired): -
Indicate Specifically what your father's title is, the
kind of work he does, and the place of his employment.

 

 

 

If your father is a farmer, indicate if he is:
( ) owner ( ) renter ( ) laborer

The number of acres my father Operates is:

 

17. Education of your mother (check highest level attained):

( ) less than 8 grades ( ) some college work, inclu-
ding normal and nursing
( ) completed 8 grades school

( ) some high school ( ) graduated from college
(9-11 grades)
( ) holds an advanced degree
( ) graduated from
High School ( ) don't know

18. What was your mother's occupation before marriage?

 

19. Is your mother presently employed? If yes, indicate what
her occupation is and where she is employed.

()yes ()no

 

Occupation and employer

' ...c..*

—“...C

ova—u. .—

 

-— ---—

‘- -

“uH--~”

"con-..-

"\

a.»

*-

H

—----.'L

.~‘“_-\

u.‘ -‘ c.”

o« ---

*5.— a

.0-

r\')
C3

[‘0

20.

21.
22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

93

Please indicate to the best of your knowledge the ap-
proximate income, from all sources, of your family
(parents).

( below 3,000 dollars
$3001 to $5000
$5001 to $7,500
$7,501 to $10,000
$10,001 to $15,000
$15,001 to $20,000
above $20,001

PART III
Ambitions

College major:

 

Are you planning to obtain a teaching certificate?

( ) yes ( ) no

What kind of career do you plan to pursue? (Girls, if
you are not planning a career, please indicate. Give
reasons in question 36.)

 

List five reasons for your choice.

 

 

 

 

 

List five reasons why you decided to attend college.

 

 

 

 

 

Do you plan to go on to graduate school?
( ) yes ( ) no ( ) undecided
Please indicate how well you performed in elementary

school:
( ) excellently ( ) average

( ) good ( ) poorly
In high school I did:

( ) excellently (A's) ( ) average
( ) B work ( ) poorly

ho.-.

mun-.-“

9.-.-

a..-

~n.-.

-

- —~ .0

-.u-A.

-u_-

h

‘5-

MO.

..

O

u- w--- .— 0

-v ow
'- n
.- -_
..-
--¢

-

’“h-H‘

-~.-‘

- -0...-

. I-

.—

CA. .0 a
com

in

~--__ 0

. —¢—-¢

0.)

L0
(.0

O

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

94

Please indicate the earliest age at which you seriously
thought about attending college.

 

List five of the most important characteristics you would
consider, when choosing your future spouse.

 

 

 

 

 

PART IV
Parental support
How did your mother feel about your going to college

before you attended?
( ) insisted that I go ( ) was indifferent

T89.

 

( ) wanted me to go ( ) didn't want me to go

How did your father feel about your going to college
before you attended?
( ) insisted that I go ( ) was indifferent

( ) wanted me to go ( ) didn't want me to go
Please indicate how you are financing your college

education (scholarship, GI Bill, loan, parents, part-
time work, etc.). List all sources.

 

 

Please indicate the amount of interest your parents have
exhibited in how well you are doing in school.

( ) very interested

( ) interested, but tolerent

( ) don't care, as long as I pass

( ) not interested

Did(y3ur parents punish you if you received poor grades?
yes no
If yes, who did the punishing? ( ) father ( ) mother

Do you consider your father to be a "reader"?
()yes ()no

Do you consider your mother to be a "reader"?
()yes ()no

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

43.

44.

95
PART V
Parental Satisfaction
My father considers his occupation to be:
( ) completely satisfactory
( ) fairly satisfactory
( ) adequate
( ) not very satisfactory
( ) very unsatisfactory
My mother considers my father's occupation to be:
( ) completely satisfactory
( ) fairly satisfactory
( ) adequate
( ) not very satisfactory
( ) very unsatisfactory

My father thinks that the amount of education he at-
tained is:

( ) sufficient ( ) insufficient

My mother thinks that the amount Of my father's
educational attainment is:

( ) sufficient ( ) insufficient
My mother thinks that her own educational attainment is:
( ) sufficient ( ) insufficient
I often wish my father had a better job.
( ) true ( ) false
PART V1
Power Structure

Who wears the pants in your family?

( ) mother ( ) father ( ) they share responsibilities

46.

47.

48.

49.

50.

51.

52.

 

96
Which parent assumes budgetary responsibility?
( ) mother ( ) father ( ) both

If there was a disagreement between your mother and your
father, who would usually give in?

( ) mother ( ) father

Who makes important decisions in your home?

( ) mother ( ) they consult, but father's firm
opinion usually holds 3

( ) father : -
( ) they consult, but mother's f
( ) about equal Opinion usually holds '

Which parent has been more influential in helping you
decide to attend college?

 

TE “—h .
i.) _

( ) mother ( ) father

When you were younger, and even now, which parent acted
as your disciplinarian?

( ) mother ( ) father

My father wouldn't be where he is today if it wasn't for
my mother.

( ) true ( ) false ( ) mother helped, but Dad could
have made it alone

PART VII
Happiness
My parents have always gotten along:
( ) very poorly; they have frequent disagreements
( ) they have disagreements, but they get along okay

( ) they're an average couple; they quarrel oc-
casionally

( ) they get along very well; they quarrel rarely
( ) my parents are separated or divorced
DO you consider your parents to be happily married?

()yes ()no

fled
r3

H

Fad

I 0
:4

r3

57

AV.
r3

97
53. I consider my family to be a tight knit group.
( ) yes ( ) no
54. Has either parent tried to dominate you?

( ) yes ( ) no
If yes, ( ) mother ( ) father

55. I describe my childhood as being:
( ) very happy ( ) somewhat unhappy
( ) happy ( ) very unhappy
( ) average
56. My father and I have always:
( ) been XELX close
( ) been somewhat close
( ) tolerated each other
( ) disagreed
( ) I have resented him
57. My mother and I have always:
( ) been very close
( ) been somewhat close
( ) tolerated each other
( ) disagreed
( ) I have resented her

58. How frequently have you felt that you were not wanted by
your father?

( ) very Often ( ) rarely
( ) frequently ( ) never
( ) sometimes

59. How frequently have you felt you were not wanted by your
mother?

( ) very often ( ) rarely

98
( ) frequently ( ) never

( ) sometimes

PART VIII
Family size - birth position

60. In my family there are: (circle; 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
more children (include yourself .

61. I was the child to be born. (Indicate the position of
your birth.)
PART IX
External Influences

62. Please indicate yes or no, if the persons listed below
have been important in helping you decide to come to

college:

father ( ) yes ( ) no
mother é ) yes ) no
siblings ) yes ) no
other relatives ( ) yes ) no
adult club leaders ( ) yes ( ) no
school friends ( ) yes ( ) no
persons connected with

the church ( ) yes ( ) no
school teachers ( ) yes ( ) no
any other persons not

already listed ( ) yes ( ) no

63. From the above list, indicate the one category or person
who has been most important:

 

64. The group of kids you hung around with in high school:
(check one)

( ) made me decide to seek a college education
( ) reinforced my college ambitions

( ) made me feel like an outcast because I wanted to
go to college

( ) were indifferent to my plans for college

 

 

 

31293 02504 9960