,‘ I III IIISI I I l lIi'I'I” IIIIIIIII I MI I I I I I I 55% II THE EFFECT OF TRAINING IN HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY 0N ACCOMPLISHMEHT OF FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE THESIS FOR THE DEGREE I]? M. A. Tac Pu Gies T931 TH ETBIS o. I ‘ _ . #31 "..‘ a; " '- ‘ , 3w" - 4.1“ 7 ' f3. g" (“I - .."¢.>..--1"? .- 3“” fig, ,-. _ i |\.. {HF} :51, ' .3)" — ._ ‘2‘ . - ‘ -l' .. A: v ‘ ' '2T'.". L'va' .' I- ~, ~ . 5-“ ‘ T . f, JR. . ,- 1 —'l -‘.-.{’ f ‘ ' ,'r--21.v . .9 .w ' '2 - .r'r‘a *‘ v. ‘I "'!I,r¢:u$-tf.3vg '.’.' :v V 0' A'- I . T-(' 21;- - .‘ {g Mm; -- g-_ ?. Cu': a‘ fi‘ ; CD)“, - p - I _ -. ;“ .I - ..1-7' “353““ ' \;‘\ I."l.b < ; : '1 ‘7‘ - " ‘V O '_ ‘l '7 _ ‘ I. x9» «9: . - .I $ . "l‘; ‘9 5'51. . " _— . . I :7 ' , ... ',‘ '..I;_‘a.c¢§" «‘1'; _' . ~ 9. ‘ ' * . .f 49? 3’35? J- ”I .. f .0_ I l x" ‘ ‘ ".0 . 1' _ .It ’1 ' I '31: ' " Q “J", i‘. }“£::' :3"... ' [$1 w n: «.m- "' ‘“ Rafi" “MO , - ti!" (VI-:5" ‘ I z I. 9. ,: ' ”TH"? a. ”I-"9 >.'..73\5.'”’ #3,}; ‘ “‘Wfi ha ' ..c Lw'u - i,- 1 \ . 3 I' J.” . fif‘J.’ J“. o _3 fl, Q - I ”g -~:.-».9.¢4 . m .. . . .- fi" ,. . A. *I .“, .,.\‘\.I‘.k, ,' l_.‘e ' . -- s3." .-.9v:'-.‘.1'2$T~I".’>‘- '~’*9"§v:-‘I‘I""‘I°‘ - .M ~ .' - "~'¢3-$>*‘-';‘x§.‘).?., ’3' a" ww “it” . "~. .9.“ “~'\.).-.1~", .‘I : ‘,9 9. .\., 3' .~ }" .‘Ju'!\ fifi‘érh'é K53“"'P_f£@“’£f3'$fsr'fj\1; \r. J. I" ‘I «J ‘ .v' v, ,' ‘ 9 ' I)", - .h‘. f '-"-l}"-‘-. K; ' . 9 “a. 3-3879" ‘4 f.¥.‘f‘. I ,k . .: 93.9 €‘ijr"9'lf¢>§*¥-.‘S I4M—':;z‘-“*=:«‘S- ~i~ m s - ' . ' ;"; h- 1.." ‘9'},‘449‘g'5‘. I, 191:\*g:”‘.;l i?) . '3: 1?" .rl, TM‘ ‘4, “1‘6““ .- 1‘, 3- '.<5t‘¢..m ~. .'."_.' -I.'.;‘u- ”I9 '3; 9 :4” , '-" ,3“ ' '. ‘3”; “.:f\-\ . A ’3“ '5' ' ‘5 M .\ ~ - 0‘ . L -r.‘ L. 4 L \ H.“ ’I ‘ 2";‘9’ ‘. .' ‘ ~ I - O '01:." 4. - r ' '{1 . ”L 0-14. . i -a .9 I I ,‘x’ i "' I J. . n "7 '3’ o. 7' .‘ ,. \ a a 1 . ‘ a I The Effect of Training in High School Chemistry on Accomplishment of First Term Chemistry at Michigan State College A Thesis Presented for the Degree of master of Arts By w Tac‘ P". Gies MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE 1931 CONTENTS Page Intmd‘mtion .OCOOOOOOOQOOOCOOOOCOOOO00.00.00.000... Part One Part Two Part Three Part Four Summary Appendix Discussion Of Material 0000.00.00.00000 Determination of Differences in Grades of Students Due to Training in High SChOO]. Chemistry 000000....0000.000000. The Results of Differentiated Chemistry Course 101000.0.0000000000.000.000.0.00 Trend of Accomplishment of First Term Chemistry Students During a Ten Year PeriOd 00.000.000.00....000000000000000 .OOOOOOOO..OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.0.0.... 0....OOOOOOOOOOOOOCOOOOOO0.00.00.00.00. Bibliograplnr 000.0.00..0000.00000000000000...0000000 1 4 12 17 19 21a 28 .00000...0.000 Doogoov~00UIUOAOQV000Ggo Table II III IV VI VII VIII LI ST OF TABLES THE DISTRIBUTION OF GRADES OF FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY STTDENTS AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE DURING THE YEARS 1920-1929 INCLUSIVE. WHO HAVE HAD HIGH SCHOOL CWISTBYOOOOOCOOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO THE DISTRIBUTION OF GRADES OF FIRST TERM CWISTRY STUDENTS AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE DURING THE YEARS 1920-1929 INCLUSIVE, WHO HAVE NOT HAD HIGH SCHOOL CEMSTBYOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.00.... DISTRIBUTION BY POINTS MADE BY THE STTDENTS IN FIRST TERM CEMI STRY AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE WHO HAD HAD HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY DURING THE YEARS 1920-1929 INCLUSIVEOCOOOOO00.00.000.000... DISTRIBUTION BY POINTS MADE BY THE STUDENTS IN FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE WHO HAVE NOT HAD HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY DURING THE YEARS 1920-1929 INCLUSIVE................... DISTRIBUTION OF GRADES OF FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY STUDENTS WHO HAD THE DIFFERENTIATED CHEMISTRY COURSE 1019. AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE DURING THE FALL TERM 1930, WHO HAD HIGH SCHOOL CHEM- ISTBYOOOOOOQOOO00000000000000.0000.0000000.00000 DISTRIBUTION OF GRADES OF FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY STUDENTS WHO HAD THE DIFFERENTIATED CHEMISTRY COURSE 101 AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE DURING THE FALL TERM 1930. WHO DID NOT HAVE HIGH SCHOOL CWISTRYCOOOOOO.00.0.0.0...COOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO... THE DISTRIBUTION OF DIFFERENCES IN PERCERITAGES BE- TWEEN THE GRADES OF STUDENTS HAVING HAD HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY AND THOSE WHO HAVE NOT HAD HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY DURING THE YEARS 1920- 1929000000000000000000000.0000o0.000000000000000 THE DISTRIBUTION OF DIFFERENCES IN PERCENTAGE BE- TWEEN THE GRADES OF STUDENTS HAVING HAD HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY AND THOSE WHO HAVE NOT HAD HIGH SCHOOL.CmISTBYOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Page 10 10 13 13 14 14 0 0 ’ O ‘ I u b . v-‘ Table IX XII XIII XIV DISTRIBUTION BY POINTS MADE BY THE STUDENTS 111 FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY IN COURSE 101a u mom- GAN STATE COLLEGE DURING THE FALL TERM OF 1930. (STUDENTS mvmo mm HIGH SCHOOL CMISTRY0)000000.0000.00000000000000000.0000 DISTRIBUTION BY POINTS MADE BY STUDENTS IN FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY IN COURSE 101 AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE DURING THE FALL TERM OF 1930. (STUDENTS NOT HAVING HAD HIGH SCHOOL CEM- IflRY.).OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.00.0.0... COMPARISON OF AVERAGE POINTS MADE BY FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY STUDENTS AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE DURING A DECADE 1920 TO 1929 INCLUSIVE....... TABUIATED RESULTS FROM DR. WAEEHAM'S PAPER...... SUMMARY OF DATA COMPILED FROM THE FILES OF Tm CHEMISTRY DEPARTIIENT OF MICHIGAN STATE COLI‘EGEOOOOOOOOOOO.0.00.9.0....OOOOOOOOOOOOOO SUMMARY OF DATA COMPILED FROM THE YEARLY RECORD BOOKS OF THE CHEMSTRY DEPARTMENT OF MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGEOO00......OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. Page 16 16 18 22 24 25 LIST OF IILUSTRATIONS Figure . Page 1 HISTOGRAM OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY GRADES OF STUDENTS AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE 1920-1929 INCLUSIVE....... 8 2 FREQUENCY POLYGON OF DISTRIBUTION OF FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY GRADES OF STUDENTS AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE 1920-1929 INCLUSIVE.‘O...OCOCOOOOOOOOOOOOCOOOOO0.. 23 ACKN WLEDGEME‘I‘I‘I' S The writer is indebted to the following: Professor E. L. Austin Professor A. J. Clark Professor L. C. Emznons THE EFFECT OF TRAINING IN HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY 0N ACCOWLISEENT OF FIRST TERM CHEL'ZISTRY AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE INTRODUC T I OH Purposes of the Study In view of the fact that 73.2 percent (1) of the stud- ents who enroll for first term chemistry at Michigan State College have had a year's work in chemistry at high school, the Department of Chemistry at Michigan State College has differentiated the course of study for‘first term chemistry students. Students who have chemistry in high school are given a different course of study (2) than students who have no training in chemistry in high school. The purposes of this study are: 1. To determine statis- tically whether or not training in high school chemistry has any effect on accomplishment of first term chemistry students at Michigan State College. 2. To determine whether or not the plan of separating first term chemistry students into two groups. those having had high school chemistry and those who have not had high school chemistry. is of any significant value. 3. To determine the trend of accomplishment made during a decade (1920-1929) of the first term chemistry stud- ents at Michigan State College. 1 ( 3 Percentage figured over a ten-year period (1920-1929). (2) See page 5 for an outline of course of study. History of Problem In a paper relevant to this study. Dr. Glen Wakeham of the University of Colorado states. WA previous high school course in chemistry is Shown to have little. if any. effect upon the success of a college chemistry student." (3)Dr. Wakeham studied the situation in chemistry at the University of Colorado for eight years and.has pointed.out that in the University of Colorado. than the study of chemistry is contin- ued. there is very little difference between the grades of col- lege students the have had high school chemistry and those who have not had high school chemistry. The grades considered in.the above report were freshman grades of the first term.only. (4)The results of the research at Michigan State College Were based on first term only and Show a significant difference between.the grades of the first term chemistry students who have had.high school chemistry and those Who did not have high school chemistry. The difference between the results of this paper and the results obtained at the College of Colorado might be due to any of a large number of causes. such as:- difference in aims of the courses of study in chemistry in the high school from Which.the students come: differences in the aims of the college chemistry courses; (3)c1en Wakeham. School and Society. JOOCII (August 9th.. 1930. pg 206—208 SSee tables in appendix p. 22 methods of teaching in both the high schools and the college; difference in the personnel of the high school teachers. and other causes. Source of Material Used The data were collected from the permanent record files of the Department of Chemistry of Michigan State College. Every student who has taken chemistry at Michigan State College has a permanent record card on file. These cards were consulted and the following information recorded from the cards covering the years 1920-1929 inclusive; (a) date. (b) grade of each student for the first term. The data were then classified and condensed to the form shown in the appendix (see page 24). The total number of grades used in the computations was 6.817. It would seem that this number of grades is large enough to be representative. The Effect of Training in High School Chemistry on ‘Accomplishment of First Term Chemistry at Michigan State College Part I Through the courtesy of the Department of Chemistry of the Michigan State College the permanent record files and the yearly record ledgers were made available for this study. The permanent record files contain some 18.000 personal record cards arranged alphabetically. There is a permanent record card.for each.student that takes a course in chemistry. who had taken first term chemistry during the years 1920—1929 inclusive. a. Whether or not the student had taken two semesters of chemistry in high.school. b. The student's grade for first term chemistry, the course number being 1 for the years 1920 to 1924 inclusive. and 101 for the years 1927 to 1929 inclus- ive. ' This information was then classified and totaled in the different groups as follows: Ea. Students Who had taken first term dhemistry at M.S.C. at some time during the years 1920 to 1924 inclusive and who had taken two semesters of chemistry in high school. b. Students who had taken first term chemistry at M.S.C. at some time during the years 1920 to 1924 inclusive and did not have two semesters of chemistry in high school. c. Students who had taken first term chemistry at some time during the years 1925 to 1929 inclusive and had two semesters of chemistry in high sshool. d. Students who had.taken first term chemistry at some time during the years 1925 to 1929 inclusive and did not have two semesters of chemistry in high school. The following cases were not recorded and do not enter into the computations: a. Students having had more than two semesters of cheap istry in high school. b. Students having had the Short course in agricultural chemistry. c. Students receiving an "incomplete" grade in chemistry. An ”incomplete” is. '.......given only when a student :zmgizziflgegigngiifes?13r other fortuitous circumstances from The grades for the fall term courses 101 and 101a in 1930 (2) were recorded from the permanent record ledgers. For students not having had.high school chemistry. the plan used for first term chemistry course 101 at Michigan State College consists of: a. lectures-three. fifty minute periods per week b. quizzes-two. fifty minute periods per week 0. laboratorybtwo. fifty-five minute periods per week For students having had.high school chemistry. the plan ‘used for first term chemistry course 101a at Michigan State College consists of: a. lectures- two. fifty minute periods per week b. quizzes- one. fifty-minute period per week c. laboratoryb two. fiftybfive minute periods per week The same subject matter is covered in both courses 101 and 101a. ( 1)Michigan State College Catalog Number 1929—1930 p.24 2>See appendix. Table XIII and Table XIV for summary of data. PART II DETERHINATION OF DIFFERENCES IN GRADES OF STUDENTS IN FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY.AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE DUE TO TRAINING IN HIGH SCHOOL CHEEISTRY 1. Differences ggsed.gg_Percentages Table I. page 7. Shows the percentages of students who had two semesters of high school chemistry and continued the study of chemistry at Michigan State College. The distribup tion approaches a normal distribution.(1) Table II. page 7, shows the same information for the students who did not have high school chemistry. and who took the same course as the students who had.high school chemistry. In this table the percentages of students' grades approaCh a normal distribution only as far as the satisfactory grades (A. B and C) are con- cerned. The number of failures for students who did not have high school chemistry was mmch larger than would be indicated by a normal distribution. The mean grade of the students who have had.high school chemistry is 79.71 and the mean grade of the students who did not have high school chemistry is 72.20. This difference of 7.51 is significant of the assumption that two semesters of (1) See appendix. Fig. 2 for Frequency Polygon of the distribution. TABLE I. THE DISTRIBUTION OF GRADES OF FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY STUDENTS AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE DURING THE YEARS 1920-1929 INCLUSIVE. WHO HAVE HAD HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY Grades and their Number of Percent of numerical value students students .A 95 to 100 462 10.54 B 85 to 94.9 1381 31.51 C 75 to 84.9 1595 36.39 D 65 to 74.9 552 12.59 - F Below 64.9 393 8.97 Total 4383 100.00 TAHLE II.‘ TEE DISTRIBUTION OF GRADES OF FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY STUDENTS.AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE DURING THE YEARS 1920-1929 INCLUSIVE, WHO HAVE NOT HAD HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY Number of Grades and their Percent of numerical value students students A. 95 to 100 49 2.98 B 85 to 94.9 ‘ 246 14.94 D 65 to 74.9 352 21.39 F Below 64.9 425 25.82 Total 1646 100.00 Gee. Well. Penn-Is. Aww Anon. lien. chemistry in high school is an aid for higher grades in first termtchemistry at Michigan State College. On page 23 of the appendix is a.frequency polygon of the two distributions. This graph Shows again that the number of failures is relatively high for the students who did not have high school chemistry. and the number of exceptionally good grades is relatively low. 2. Differences Based _O_I_1' the Number 9}; Points Made .As a means of comparing the two groups in another manner. the point system was used. The point system as explained in the Michigan State College catalog is as follows: I'Three points are allowed for each credit of work of .A grade; two points for each credit of B grade; one point for each credit of C grade. No points are allowed for work of D grade or lower. Grades of X or F will be given one negative point for each credit.“ ( The approximate numerical values given the letter grades is given below: 95 to 100 85 to 9409 75 to 84.9 65 to 74.9 Below 640 9 mudwb u u u u u Tables III and IV. page 10. Show the distribution by points made by the different groups over a period of two. ten year periods. (2)Michigan State College Catalog Number 1929-1930. p.24 TABLE III. 10 DISTRIBUTION BY POINTS MADE BY THE STUDENTS IN FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY.AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE WHO HAVE HAD HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY DURING THE YEARS 1920-1929 INCLUSIVE Number of Number of Aggregate .A and B .A. B and C Grade points students number of only points A. 3 462 1386 1386 1386 B 2 1381 2762 2762 2762 C 1 1595 1595 1595 D O 552 9;! -; .393 -393 Eotals 4383 5350 4148 5743 W 112.§__.___.L_§__Jz 2 TABLE IV. DISTRIBUTION BY POINTS MADE BY THE STUDENTS IN FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE WHO HAVE NOT HAD HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY DURING THE YEARS 1920-1929 INCLUSIVE Number of Number of Aggregate A.and B .A. B and C Grade points students number of only minim A 3 47 147 147 147 B 2 246 492 492 492 C l 574 574 574 D O 352 __L__J -1 gas as; Totals 1646 788 639 1213 v umb nt .4787. 2.16 9 11 The most outstanding difference in the average number of points made was found when all grades were considered. The average number of points made by the students who have not had high school chemistry is .478 while the average number of points made by the students who have had high school chemistry is 1.22 or more than 2.5 times as many as those who did not have high school chemistry. The average number of points for the superior grades (A and B). do not vary greatly nor do the average number of points for the good grades. (A. B and C) but in each and every case the average number of points of the students who have had high school chemistry is greater than the average number of points of the students that did not have high school chemistry. From the above facts it would seem that some measures should be taken to overcome the 47.21 percent of unsatisfactory grades in first term chemistry of students who had no chemistry training in high school. The Department of Chemistry of Michi- gan State College initiated a course of study. in the fall term of 1930. to fit the needs of such students. The course number is 101a and is outlined on page 5. A discussion of the success of the course 101a follows in Part III. PART III THE RESULTS OF GIVING A DIFFERENTIATED COURSE OF STUDY IN CHEMISTRY AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE TO STUDENTS WHO HAD NO CWSTRY IN HIGH SCHOOL 1. Comparison of Percentages of Students' Grades in Course 101 and 101a during the Fall Term of 1930 In tables V and VI. page 13. are computed for compari- son and contrast. the percentages of students taking chemistry courses 101 and 1018.. Course 1010. is the course offered for students having had two semesters of high school chemistry. Course 101 is the course offered to students who did not have two semesters of chemistry in high school. A greater percentage of students in course 101a received higher grades than the students in course 101 but the difference between them is slight when compared with the percentages of students of both groups before they were separated. 2. Comparison of Differences in Percentages of Grades before the Two Groups were Separated and a Comparison of Differences in Percentages of Grades after the Two Groups were separated Tables VII and VIII. page 14. show the distribution of differences in percentages of the two groups of students' grades. during the years 1920 to 1929 inclusive and also for the fall term of 1930. The differences between the two groups during 1920 to 13 TABLE V. DISTRIBUTION OF GRADES OF FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY STUDENTS WHO HAD Tm DIFFERENTIATED WISTHY COURSE 101a AT M.S.C. DURING THE FALL TERM 1930. 'H0 HAD HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY ; Grade Number of students Percent of students A 82 g 13.5 D 205 33.8 C 193 g 31.9 D 81 13.4 F 45 . 7.4 Totals 606 100.0 TABLE VI. DISTRIBUTION OF GRADES OF FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY STUDENTS WHO HAD THE DIWIATED CHEMISTRY COURSE 101 AT M.S.C. DURING THE FALL TERM 1930. WHO DID NOT HAVE HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY Grade Number of students Percent of students A 16 8.8 B 54 V 29.6 C 64 35.1 D 26 14.4 F 22 12.1 Totals 182 100.0 14 TABLE VII. THE DISTRIBUTIONS OF DIFFERENCES IN PERCENTAGES BETWEEN THE GRADES OF STUDENTS HAVING HAD HIGH SCHOOL CENISTRY AND THOSE WHO HAVE NOT HAD HIGH SCHOOL CWISTRY DURING THE YEARS 1920-1929. Grades Percent of Percent of Difference Students with Students with- of percents H. S. Chem. out 3.8. Chem. A 10.54 2.98 7.56 A and B 42.05 17.92 24.13 A. B 8: C 78.44 52.79 25.65 A. B. C a. D 91.03 74.18 16.85 D and F 21.56 47.21 25. 65 Fai lures 8.9 25. 82 16. 85 TABLE VIII. THE DISTRIBUTION OF DIFFERENCES IN PERCENTAGES BETWEEN THE GRADES OF STUDENTS HAVING HAD HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY AM) THOSE WHO HAVE NOT HAD HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY DURING THE FALL TERM 1930. Grades Students . Students Difference with without of percents H.S. Chem. B. 8. Chem. A 13.5 8.8 4.7 A and B 47.3 38.4 8.9 A. B & C 79.2 _ 73.5 5.7 A. B. C 8: D 92.6 87.9 4.7 D and F 20.8 26.5 5.7 Failures 7.4 12. 1 4. 7 15 1929 is relatively large while during the fall term the differ- ences are relatively small. The probable error (1) was com- puted for each.difference and was found to be so small (less than .01 in each.case) that all differences were certainly sig- nificant. Tables IX and X. page 16. show the same results in general. viz. that the chemistry course 101 has increased the average number of points made by the students who have not had high school chemistry from..4787 to 1.088. This is shown more clearly When the following data are compared. These data were taken from tables III. IV. IX and X. When first term.chsmistry students who have not had.high school chemistry are competing in the same classes with students who have had.high school chemistry. the average number of points made by the former are .478. while the students who have had high school chemistry average 1.22 points. over two and.one-half times as many. The above averages were for the years 1920 to 1929 inclusive. After the classes were separated into two groups. those taking course 101 and those taking 101a. the average numbers of points were nearly equal because the average number of points made by the students taking course 101 in.the fall term of 1930 was 1.088 while the students taking course 101a averaged (1)5ee Appendix. Page 27-28. for probable errors and method of computations. TABLE II. 16 DISTRIBUTION BY POINTS MADE BY Tm Hummus m FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY IN COURSE 101. u MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE DURING THE FALL TERM or 1930. (ssunms HAVING HAD HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY.) t ‘— Number of m magi-Em A. s and C Grade points students number of only points A. 3 82 246 246 246 B 2 205 410 410 410 C l 193 193 193 D 81 F 21.; j 4%? Totals 606 805 656 847 4% LS3...ng 2 __1..22____J+ TABLE I. DISTRIBUTION BY POINTS MADE BY STUDENTS IN FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY IN COURSE IOIIAT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE DURING THE FALL TERM OF 1930. (STUDENTS NOT HAVING HAD HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRI.) ;;======F; " Number of Number of Aggregate A and B A. B and C Grade points students number Of only ~ ints A 3 16 48 48 48 B 2 54 108 108 108 C 1 FE 64 64 64 D 26 r -1 22 -22 Totals 182 198 156 220 Ame: 1.388 4.2.9.3 2 ___l..§43._.., 17 PART IV DETERMINATION OF Tm TREND OF ACCOMPLISHMENT OF FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY STUDENTS AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE DURING A TEN YEAR PERIOD, 1920 to 1929 INCLUSIVE Table XI. page 18. is compiled from table XII in the appendix and shows that the trend of accomplishment over two five-year periods is for first term students to average a smaller number of points during the second five-year period than during the first five-year period. The difference in the average number Of points earned is slight. being .0385 for the students having had high school chemistry and .0731 for the students not having had high school chemistry. Perhaps this means that there is not any significant difference. A difference might be due to any of one or a. combination of the following factors: (a) difference in the aims of the cause of study of the high schools or the college. (b) differ- ent text books. (c) a more comprehensive course in the college. (6.) more activities in the high school. (e) lower standards in teaching arithmetic in the grades and other reasons not known. 18 TABLE XI. COMPARISON OF.AVERAGE POINTS MADE BY FIRST TERM CHEMISTRY STUDENTS AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE DURING.A.DECADE 1920 to 1929 INCLUSIVE Average points made Average points made by students having by students not had chemistry in having Chemistry in high school high school ve—year eriod 1.242 .524 920-1924 ve-yaer erLOd 1.2035 .4409 925-1929 19 SUJIARY Conclusions Students who have had two semesters of chemistry in high school receive better grades in first term chemistry at Michigan State College than those who had no chemistry in high school. when no differentiation is made in the course of study. In the latter group there was 25.82 percent of failures. while in the group that had two semesters of chem- istry in high school there was 8.97 percent of failures. The differentiated chemistry course 101 for students who have had no chemistry in high school is valuable as far as the percentages of failures and the percentages of better grades are concerned. The percentage of failures of the students who had no chemistry in high school was reduced from 25.82 to 12.1. The percentage of failures of the stud- ents who had two semesters of chemistry. course-101a. reduced from 8.97 to 7.4. The plan of differentiating the first term chemistry classes was found to benefit both groups as far as better grades were concerned. The trend of the accomplishment of first term chemistry students at Michigan State College (during a ten year period) is in the direction of lower grades. The difference is very slight and perhaps has no significance. 20 Limitations of this Study Although the conclusions arrived at in part two were derived from a study over a ten year period and considered the grades Of 6.817 students. the study'of the success of the course 101 adOpted in the fall of 1930 is limited to one term and considers the grades of only 788 students. The fact that students with a definite predilection for chemistry will elect the subject in high school while others not interested in science will not elect it. will probably have some weight on their success in the subject in college. The students with an interest in science should earn better grades than those who must take the subject as a course requirement.“ These conditions would tend to increase the percentage Of failures of the students who did not have chemistry in high school and to decrease the percentage of failures of the other group. The study of high school physics and of high school mathematics is pointed out by Dr. WakehamU) to aid students in first term chemistry. These factors were not considered in this study. Suggestions for Further Study To determine whether or not the study of chemistry in high school has any effect on accomplishment of students (1) Glen Wakeham. School and Society. XXXII (August 9th. 1930) p. 207 21 taking advanced work in college chemistry. To determine the trend of accomplishment of first term chemistry students during a period of years based on one year periods. This study covered a period of ten years and the con- clusions were based on two. five year periods. To study the accomplishment of students in first term chemistry from individual high schools. To study the effect of high school physics and high school mathemtics on accomplishment of first term chemistry students. 21a APPENDIX TABLE XII. TABULATED RESULTS FROM DR. WAKEHAM'S PAPER(1) Number of Average Number of Average students grade students grade Year having had first not having first high school quarter ‘high school quarter chemistry chemistry 1922-23 243 77.3 194 77.1 1923-24 251 77.6 185 76.8 1924-25 218 77.3 192 77.5 1925-26 228 77.9 178 76.8 1926-27 231 77.7 181 77.2 1927;28 212 78.3 176 77.3 1928-29 208 78.5 183 78.1 d929-30 212 81.4 176 80.3 (1) Glen Wakeham. School and Society XXXIII (August 9th. 1930) p. 207 13m ‘lossv luv ‘IIIII'IIOJ ‘II" was 24 TABLE XIII. SUMMARY OF DATA COMPILED FROM THE FILES OF THE CHEMISTRY DEPARTMENT OF MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE Grades of first term Grades of first term chemistry students who chemistry students who have had two semesters did not have two semester of high school chemistry of high school chemistry 1920-1924 1925—1929 1920-1924 1925-1929 inclusive inclusive inclusive inclusive .A 165 297 24 25 B 628 753 108 138 C 747 848 283 291 D 224 328 157 195 F 137 256 178 247 Total 1901 2482 750 896 25 TABLE XIV. SUMMARY OF DATA COMPILED FROM THE YEARLY RECORD BOOKS OF THE CHEMISTRY DEPARTZENT OF MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE Grades of students taking Grades of students taking chemistry course number chemistry course number 101 101a A 16 82 B 54 205 C 64 193 D 26 81 I 22 45 Tot a]. 182 606 Note: Chemistry course 101 is a 4 credit course for students who did not have chemistry in high school.Ohemistry course 1018, is a. 3 credit course for students who have had two sem- esters of high school chemistry. For a. brief description of the two courses. see page 5. 26 LETHOD USED TO COMPUTE THE PROBABLE ERROR OF DIFFERENCES OF PERCENTAGES From Table V. page 13 was found that the percentage of students receiving a grade of A in course 101a was 13.5 and from Table VI. page 13 the percentage of students receiving a grade of A in course 101 was 8.8. The difference in per- centage was 13.5 - 8.8 or 4.7. Using the following formula.(1) P. E. difference in percentages 8 i .674a/(I’41;NZ1-21§f + (Btu-23)); Nib Substituting P. E. = _+.5745'V(._1§56x_.865)‘ (.0433 1 82.91.21)” Solving P. E. = .000315 the difference of percentage 8 4.7 2". .000315 Jones. D. R. A First Course in Statistics. London. G. Bell and Sons Ltd.. 1921. p.159. 27 PROBABLE ERRORS DISCUSSED ON PAGE 15. The probable errors for the difference of percents in Table VII are given below: . Grades Difference of Probable percents Error A 7.56 i .002 A and 3 24.13 1. .0000038 A. B a. 0 25.65 t. .0001 A. B. o a. D 16.85 1'. .000067 D and 1' 25.65 1: .000000016 Failures 16.85 1'. .0000047 Probable errors for Table VIII Grades Difference of Probable percents Error 1 4.7 3 .000515 A and 3 8.9 .t .00092 A. 3 and. 0 5.7 1 .00072 A. a. c and D 4.7 .t .00000023 D and r 5.7 1. .000415 Failures 4.7 .t .000595 28 BIBLIOGRAPHY Jones. D. R. .A.First Course in Statistics. London: G. Bell and Sons Ltd. 1921. p. 286. Levitt. William Vernon and Helyzclaw, Henry F. Statistics. New York Prentice-Hall. Inc. 1929. p. 299. Michigan State College Catalog. Number 1929-1930. East Lansing. Michigan. p. 342. School and Society. Lancaster Pennsylvania. The Science Press. Volume XXXII Augumt 9th. 1930. Number 815. ROOM USEONLY, ' ‘ _. M3715 g. I. met: 'I'LJMUIbiV r ' ' 2. - ' ' . . "x .. ' . I "J 7 ~l ’¢ .3! ',( . “:'~ * K t. 1..“93'7' I'VIu'IILJ' .F’.‘ '- s“ ‘ , 9 ' I 3.," . . Lanai, -vn Vein“: 5’;.(.:‘91;'C.:‘:'. . _ 75‘: 33.31.8357. +3.10 3'7“", '1 3.5.3.9 .55 . -‘ ‘. "'3'. *3. a a... VA 3.‘ ' Ila»: :{Jé 3" - V} II ‘ n I I \ '. _ ' 3 _ . I :3- x_ fez? my; 3/ . n -. 1 36.7,». 2. 5'. ’ +4.3». ‘34. e, ‘. . . WU (3‘: Ila-1‘37"!” .‘ .{ "a "E ‘.'*.‘q_#,"".". '5“ a; 2. 1“pr i“ J 3' .‘n p . . ,. . 5 if) b '."$. \vg‘fl? ‘- ‘Hk‘flt ..cfldév- J‘ .. 3:3 ”.1417;,;.;.;.;.»_~g$+.z. .. -. e"; 'd v .. .. o. .- I 0.: ’ - I .5. 55¢: a .- o" n, $;;/‘ '64:: '1'... .1“. I :‘r. XIII gI-.-r:~,}_. 3 . -. ‘.-_ ‘ ‘u 33-; ' r .‘7 .3 ‘K ‘. ”t we V3 '5 ”I '5" 5.; m ."e ..I ’4 '5 F l 3) 504- In“ ’ '.."\ rt. '3. I d ~ 1’ 0 la. b k, rt C. . ' ’8 .r‘; A .- ‘_ .1. ’5. .. ' . , , ‘.'-,'I .,'I' I. 1‘ .. I. . 3 I r hl ' . ."3' :i‘ -. ., tun». 2... ..~... ,..—._«. ~. .. ... I I p ., ‘n ‘ o .a‘ " I l ".0 ‘ ‘ ) . ‘- ft . J - :21 II... “‘-‘.I . v #9. .. I‘,’(.<’I':J‘)1.£IS§ I ’1 | '6‘;}.. c. a “a .I' I‘. .b_ .s.. . .0 3, (SIM 1L ' IVI-L .C’. . I -. , [Adi-r" 34.4322 ', ,.?IF.":-“~.f.!f. . . .0' II!" _ . . "n. It“ . OIJ‘IIII‘f-I \3. ‘I‘ 7 _ P4. )1 r. N"’ on I I. - -- .m. o, 2.. -- -' - P: 3’ z" ' ‘1' ‘1' I ‘ 3" 3' '3 ' ' i ' .. - ‘. ..-' » . ‘ ' ‘ _‘ t‘ . H I i ‘ . I - .._ . '_"'-" ‘,..'~ . ., '. ' " T; -._“ g. ’ r In, . . ,r..‘.' . o 5““, A ,- ‘ \ . 3" I‘ . ~' (I _ .\. ., "if Jif": ‘3... ‘$ I“.'?I- .- -'. 3‘ ".t'IV‘, 3‘, ". [rev ',Il. (5‘ -_' DI‘ ' ...- a“ 1;» - ».- .-; -. . . .- (g. a - ~32» .. .. ,.-...;v.21r;.;.'.._,:3?2,4»: ~-R«.t;~»w;»,¢-.~.m,§. 3 . .I '.I J. ' I 3' ‘- ._&’ .L“ ..' fl. .' I;.:.:'.“r '4‘. a: In! 3 IL' V\' {'11“; . 2.3:". ’ "y Lat. q 'tfl' I" . ' ”3’.” 'fl‘. J‘ ' " '. . ' 3 ' . I - " "f'f ' 3v. '3 3 J 1“ (0". '4 . 3‘12".“ LIV t: “.3 h ""l. "2"! fi-‘3';-‘ -r-' A- ‘f‘I‘i‘ A”. u. l ‘luoi I‘ ' , 1"? ,‘s‘.' I. .fi . . II .5 _ . '-1.. . p l « .' .. . 2!}. I - . r — , 9:; ..' T . 3; y . .., ., j". _ '~. '; S.» ' . o » . . J .’ .. . '33:.” '5‘ ' 3 ° ..‘0 ' ",‘w' ..W? "-‘ ”s- - I A" . 3- II - o“. " x .- f r". . 3.} -_ . n . \. . . . 3" \ 1 , I J. - ' {..o'dl ." I ‘n.' , ; \v"1“.° "IO“' “ .53 .A. I. .. _. '-. I. . . a“? .. .‘H a". V- .N» . \ . . V .s , I ' ~t I ‘3. s '3 I. I “F. ~' U" ‘f‘ ‘ >- ' ‘l ”a, .r‘. ‘ '}o"\ ’ a . ' . .. I N . . ’I. a, . §‘ . ~‘ 9 . v33“ 3». 2Q?“ "'.«'.;Y{3133’$3f¢ 6.1.2214; «1"t-‘3’3Q'2mfi”FT-'23‘3'; "'3'. .a.‘ I”. .. _r I. . H3 ’ ”:1 ' ' ’. Itir‘ ~v“>.. ‘. p ‘I_ .t' "3'“ ‘ 3‘ . | . « .. t” . «.3. ., ' - w'.' ' ,~« 4‘32: p.4i’3‘fi‘”&' LS“ 0? {”9" “(1%; I 3 I $3 \ A3 I -- I if: .. i 3 HA) '3') 3 .-. s . l '. mu. -. ;.' ~ "21.33%" )3! ,..'.¢- 55;; ‘. u '.. .57". .5 '17:?“ E.‘;,...~f. ,‘v p- 3‘41? .4 ,a . . f . I- I . h.“ J V ‘.'I f". #31" (D 'I-’u ‘Ip e", 'I‘.‘l‘} -'. I] . '1! ’, ..V'v 5" _ -.".""" .2 . - . 1].} (.‘u‘-k'.).m<; ';’,.I: f“ "1" . ’.. ..I‘d filial ,“,".. I... I’_ I‘k‘“ TO ‘2 [‘11" I" {If (J gm .1. V2 3!";‘7' ,- ..w .2 ' - .‘,‘ "-i'..~,..'»1’»,l ~ .f - 3‘. -.‘ stilt” (in): ‘, '- 7‘ I" 71.1%...“ n4‘-:‘t ; y. ‘ . ‘33: Ilf’rpwpfl c‘ ‘5_ .’ ‘1. it”? ‘ .'. A "w\‘ ' "3"-‘.'?'.§t'.-'- , -.. fi .. '4» "31'3"" .. Mg‘.‘4.-1.;-.q..fr . I”; a - g m..- 1:12;}: . stint ~.‘.~»., .4 ft 2».- :12" . t. m- .~ . I I, J“ .3 {“J‘ :.-‘\‘~ ‘ . w, I .l . ‘ v IOL {' f '5 [ . ‘I‘ ‘ ' \‘t .‘f I .~'.‘ t . O “_ _ . g $113.1 '7“ wag, (r. g; {1:7 -, _2 33"“ 3*}: ..I.~. 1"».o'u-Tfl4 1t 3'""'3.-'.I'I'." .- . . . "P 3. '3. w." ‘ Rm. .:. ,I 7.... a I‘” I ' ‘\ _:I ""I a'.‘ '. ~ ..4I‘ ' _' -' .' _ . L-. . . . I '. . . . ' I: III 0"“. I III-C .V.. -"..::‘.',“v' .$»_‘4‘.£g-£‘F“T£J‘ _ tfif‘KaI‘fiIJp? éba‘7(":" 1::"‘v:{ I. '. I, — H -I II:I , ._ . ',Q . I, ‘ ' '- .' 5.; II. . . '34:“ J I" ’ V ,-l\’vI:~"’ I" 3 S. ' ‘ ‘_...-- P .‘ O". 3“(fl '(‘ézuu‘y k." “Fell. '{mbfl ‘I"I'-‘I‘I‘ ‘h‘ V. ‘9‘! i" .2", If.) . (:J': ‘ I’- - .1"~..‘ ' " 2 WM» :5 2:372. 2' .2; it 171%?» $32.9?- 3.2-» W ..a: , -.3. vf-Jk-Vm.“ 2’ 2.2 ' ' ' - ' ' .‘fi': “2.1“ if..'-7:"'.' " '7 [WWH‘ .‘ 3‘. [3M 3“ -"H‘ 3 :2 ‘ ‘ '3'”! "l' ‘ " ' {' '3 “Jr _ . h ' j.) : o u U h v 34 .31 I . - ‘ 5 3’ 3' ' r ' ’ I ‘ 1' $‘ I ~. ID I 1‘ ‘ i , I { D- ‘ r - - ’ n . I IA‘Y, ’ . ',.'» . .1: 5‘! 3 t”. . ‘~ "I '3). r ~ I.‘ -(._{ ”fig 5‘}. .I\ .3." 1,. . -.. .- 31' "\fi . J1». : .; t - z. . .‘ .MS' -.‘~-: ~' ".r'xwfi' . ‘-‘.'- ‘-°.'I'. .226.- - 25.1.9». ..I» ».. . . I'l“ '\ __ (I II |.'»‘ ". v ”I..- ; ‘I \' ' . PX. ‘l. .I' "'0 '-_ ,7. . 1" . Q! q“ . . .I . r... .I‘ a . (I 4" c Q -‘.V\-A _‘)I.. _v a . . 5"”. '- . 03. 4' 3 31:23,} ,II-.‘ {I S3 ,P. 35?“: “H” , U. '. , IJ’J . I I. ’0 “’i . I v. L9! :12“. _ . ‘w 4.2: ; '. ..a. 1"» ‘3 :3“ ‘ «.23-’?-~.t'~."2‘64 “first? It ' M' l '1, ' c: .- , r ’(’. .» , ‘. ' ’ C ' “"0. 1‘ .‘ . u - ‘ - ) I" 0v .21." r_ .7 .‘I'\. . H.151. 2* 2:; ,4. «' ‘4‘, .h f’."'- .» . . .f V- t .. . ,-' -. ’1 ‘. '10 .,- .71. w- S - ‘9” " \ ‘5'0‘3‘. ‘§I&3M‘. \ . II.‘ ’L'IIAJI '1‘ 'I J .. ‘4 . . VIII V” “I. :I I.\ ~#;n;.‘ ,l‘xézi‘t‘ Iv. é MI !I .VIL."%I I,” I . -§‘a ,X .A'I ‘ ' k - L'.» ~.“‘.’)-‘ a“: f -‘ .‘ "3" . L- I _ . 5*: ' 4 . - I #2515382.» «.2. 1!.«3‘ . «twists-$3.2??? “3&2?” -. - 8'. '3 3 ’ 2"’:\"1'-"5.""~" 8' u," ‘- ' s u h '---‘-.'" 39' ‘nv- .n g. at. 2 '.';V \‘d .. y. - s, ,vva-,.¥».,'( . v‘I ',-. Iv'IJI .‘II .‘3 '.' 6'0.).$";".‘~'-. 4.0" ;.I. Am. r I ‘.' 2.. ‘.'. u 'r'.‘ III 'i' 'I‘.I‘."$I.'2 r. Win-.1}; 'r- : "i .- ‘. it!“ - r,-.t.,I‘II' \k.‘-‘\‘;‘E‘L‘fl" .: . 334‘." ‘7 7'? i 3 r 7' ,. ' P34“. " I" 2, ". , ‘l‘ . In AI“..J ‘rv'r'1lbrll‘r‘ ." 7‘ .‘5 IV; "i?" ‘3‘. ‘2': . 9' ?:,I I.’ ‘t. $’:£c‘.‘ $.' '12.»: f.‘ ..c» r 0'» 7w -2- . -: fits-,5, in a . ~. ‘ W 4 A 3W" V :5. 1| ' 1.9.3.“ ' Jr"-‘;7Qi;.}k" 31‘" ' ' 3. V' 0 [5 V be.‘ ‘ t..' » "“"1 '-'.. h “‘n - 3‘ "‘3‘“. I. ‘ ‘ ‘1?-".." .‘1 H "‘ C ..I 5" ".h'o‘ 3""~:." 3‘ " ‘ J$|£}‘:; \‘J' '\ '. it‘d“: Y. ’3???) !I{&’E.%»J?o "A‘i‘) ‘. N . .' I I t 3" 3“"..I ’ '3 '0' ' " I -.;' '. 'I.,g'-I. .‘L‘.I 3'... 'If‘l .".a.'I" I‘II ‘ a: 2.6.2.1.) A. " ..- »“.. 3w. 2:5 ,.-‘,i-'. «‘3': 3"" 3"‘3‘343 “#431333-32’233.» 3 \ "36‘3”" . WWW-"$11.". :1- ,-‘;{§., 6-83.2er- ._ 1.x, -. " .;.- f. '33 H‘\I".'\--.)3.E"0 .,,-~' .I . ”apt“. 7: ”U5! ., «if» .v'.‘ 3-,; ’ L ‘ lb)-..- ” u. . .‘ .. II,» {V 3‘31". 1:. L‘- t‘. t‘ .. .. “A. t} ‘Pf'? “’II‘. tQI-J 3.1.3:“ I p w 'h‘ “ ‘ I '. I . . I" “'I.‘ y ' -I| rf‘tr\.‘l If.‘ J 1:537“ ‘0‘ .‘ axe“! ' I. ,. «Lg In-M‘ ‘."‘1-."‘.IIL of. ';*~ 3‘1” 5.. n't' _ ‘ . ' l"? 3"": .‘ ..’ . ...A i ‘55, ‘ . r3 9,2»; 7’.) .. "..'A s , II, I .NYI".H:31.J:.C‘:V. II-.III 3.“ "‘1'“. 3 , ‘f’l‘fi :“F;y'."'. J'u’ '33:“ V , L ‘3 _°I 'L -‘..-.. ~l ~.",vr“ “ 1., "g V " ,' ‘ JQ‘J' " ’3'. ' '. . ’1"'.‘:wt=‘»h '3 ~". '. -' . -' _.- f 7.3 "|>‘ 3"!) d ".n 364 . t. .133”. . 33v. :‘ . .1 3'. Affiifld‘. rift; . .'- b I o' i O 1 . ' .w‘f'} 2.. :.W"~ 7...». -..’~.‘«,-+ » ~2- 1...? s’ Na. 1 2‘ ~r'_ I." I .1 <~ ||H||l|l||||||||III||l|l|llIlllllflfljlflllfljlfllfllfllllll\I 3 1293 03