University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The relationship between the distribution of campus newspaper content and the college environment

(USC Thesis Other)

The relationship between the distribution of campus newspaper content and the college environment

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE DISTRIBUTION OF CAMPUS NEWSPAPER
CONTENT AND THE COLLEGE ENVIRONMENT
By
William W arren Noah
A. Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirem ents for the Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(Education)
September 1980
UMI Number: DP24789
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
Dissertafie n Publish* ig
UMI DP24789
Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
TH E GRADUATE SCHOOL
U N IV E R S ITY PARK
LOS ANGELES. C A LIF O R N IA 9 0 0 0 7
This dissertation, w ritten by
..............................................
under the direction of h.is .... Dissertation Com
mittee, and approved by a ll its members, has
been presented to and accepted by The Graduate
School, in p a rtia l fu lfillm e n t of requirements of
the degree of
D O C T O R O F P H IL O S O P H Y
*6 ...........................
Dean
Table of Contents
List of Tables v
I. Introduction
1
Background 1
The Importance of Environmental Assessment 2
Theoretical Framework 4
The Student Press as a Force on Campus 4
The Contents of the Campus Press 5
Summary 9
The Research Problem 10
II. Review of the Literature 12
Assessment of the Campus Environment 12
Perceptual Measures 12
Behavioral and Objective Measures 13
Student Subcultures
17
Summary 18
The Campus Press 20
Governance of the Campus Press 20
Purposes of the Campus Press 24
The Student Staff 26
Summary 30
Some Notes on Content Analysis 31
Summary 32
III. Methodology 36
Sample 36
Data Collection 38
Predictor Variables 38
Criterion Variables 40
Procedure 41
Content Analysis 41
Statistical Treatment 43
Limitations 46
ii
IV. Results 48
Hypothesis 1 48
Results 48
Discussion 57
Summary 59
Hypothesis 2 60
Results 61
Discussion 63
Summary 64
Limitations on Interpretation of Hypotheses 1 and 2 64
Research Question 65
Data for the Sample 66
Public and Private Institutions 75
Four-Year and Two-Year Institutions 80
College and University Enrollment 84
Governance Style 89
Publication Frequency 94
W AUPM Members 95
Summary 101
V. Summary, Conclusions, Recommendations 105
Methodology 109
Sample 109
Data Collection 110
Procedure 111
Statistical Treatment 112
Results 114
Hypothesis 1 114
Hypothesis 2 115
Research Question 115
iii
Discussion 119
Hypothesis 1 119
Hypothesis 2 121
Research Question 122
External Validity: Hypotheses 125
External Validity: Research Question 125
Recommendations 126
References 130
Appendices 138
I. Content Categories for Student Newspapers 139
II. Institutions in the Sample 144
III. Questionnaire 146
IV. Flowchart for Governance Determination 148
V. Distribution of Degrees Awarded in
Holland Personality Orientations 149
VI. Correlation Matrix 151
iv
List of Tables
1. Characteristics of the Sample 37
2. Inter-Rater Reliabilities 42
3. Relationship Between Holland Personality Orientation
Scores and Content Indices 49
4. Correlations Between Individual Holland Personality
Orientation Scores and Content Indices 51
5. Relationships Between Investigative Personality Orientation
Score and Content Indices 52
6. Analysis of Variance of the Investigative Personality Orientation 53
7. Analysis of Variance for the Investigative Personality
Orientation Score— Main Effects 54
8. Relationships Between the Social Personality Orientation
Score and Content Indices 55
9. Analysis of Variance of the Social Personality
Orientation Score 56
10. Relationships Between the Individual Content Indices
and Holland Personality Orientations 57
11. Regression Equations for the Investigative Personality
Orientation Score and the Social Events Index
at Three Levels of Governance 61
12. Content Analysis of Selected Campus Newspapers 67
13. ! Newspaper Content Indices 68
14. Frequencies of Rank Order Profiles of Indices 69
15. Numbers of Newspapers Associated with Each
Pair of Variables 73
16. Associations Among Pairs of Institutional Variables 74
17. Content Analysis of Newspapers from Public
and Private Institutions 76
v
18. Content Indices for Public and Private Newspapers 78
19. Frequencies of Profiles of Content Indices of Public
and Private Newspapers 79
20. Content Analysis.of Newspapers from Four- and
Two-Year Institutions 81
21. Content Indices of Two- and Four-Year Newspapers 83
22. Content Analysis of Newspapers from Institutions
in Four Size Ranges 85
23. Content Indices of Newspapers in Four Size Ranges 87
24. Content Analysis of Newspapers with Three
Governance Types 90
25. Newspaper Content Indices for the Three Types of Governance 92
26. Frequencies of Profiles of Content Indices for
Three Types of Governance 93
27. Content Analysis of Newspapers with Daily and Weekly
Publication Schedules 96
28. Content Indices for Newspapers Published Daily and Weekly 98
29. Content Analysis of Newspapers from WAUPM Members
and Non-Members 99
30. I Newspaper Content Indices for W AUPM and Non-WAUPM’ Institutions 102
31. Frequency of Content Index Profiles for WAUPM Members 103
vi
Chapter I
Introduction
Inglehard (1973) has stated that there are over 2,500 student newspapers serving colleges
and universities around the country, a literary tradition which predates the American Revolu
tion (Brubacher and Rudy, 1976); however, there has been little systematic research exploring
the contents of these publications and the relationship between the contents and the environ
ments of their host campuses. This deficiency continues despite the potential role of the stu
dent press in the evolving educational specialty that Sanford (1963) has called the "student
development profession." This developing field, the origins of which were signaled by the
publication of The Student Personnel Point of View by the American Council on Education in
1937, incorporates a growing concern with the assumption of a proactive stance by student
services educators, which involves a continuous process of monitoring the social forces at
work on the campus which affect the course of student growth (Miller and Prince, 1977). This
study is concerned with describing the themes represented in the student press, the use of
the student press in the characterization of the campus environment, and the relationship be
tween the way college newspapers are governed and their ability to represent their home en
vironments. These issues are of importance to those working in the field of student media
advisement and to those who are concerned with measuring the campus environment and
managing its effect on student growth.
Background
Historically, student development professionals have tended to have little to do with the
campus press. Weisinger (1976) attributed this to court decisions regarding freedom of the
student press, the trend toward independence in college newspaper governance, and the
lack of experience with journalism among most student personnel workers.
Indeed, as Politella (1965) observed, the collegiate press has only recently begun to be ex
amined by researchers and writers in the field of mass communications. Rivers and Sellers
(1972) have described research on the student press as limited and uneven.
Rubin (1976) has described the growth of the campus press and its achievement of more
professional staff attitudes, greater interest in investigative reporting, and concern for sound
management after a decade of turmoil. According to the American Newspaper Publishers
Association (1979), journalism school enrollments were at a record 70,601 at the beginning of
1
academic year 1978-1979, an increase of 7% over 1977-1978. This growth emphasizes the im
portance of familiarizing the student development profession with the the material contained
in campus newspapers and its relationship to the climate of institutions of higher learning.
! The Importance of Environmental Assessment
The non-academic climate of colleges and universities has been found to have an influence
on the development of student attitudes and values (Lehman, 1965; Walz and Miller, 1969;
Drum and Fiegler, 1973). Indeed, Jacob (1957) asserted that the academic program of a college
is relatively ineffective in changing values and attitudes in comparison with certain types
of extra-curricular experiences. Jacob noted that certain types of college environment seemed
considerably more powerful than others in achieving this type of influence. College choice
and retention have also been shown by such researchers as Medsker and Trent (1965), Chick-
ering (1966), and Pervin (1966) to be related to perceived climate. Pullias (1966) has described
how the campus ambience can, over a period of time, evolve into a “spirit of place" that be
comes characteristic of the institution and influences the perceptions and behavior of those
experiencing the environment.
Baird (1973) noted that the actual measurement of college environments is a complex issue
that has not been satisfactorily resolved by any of the techniques which have evolved for this
purpose over the past fifteen years. The measurement of campus climate has several poten
tial benefits, among which Baird lists the following:
1. To guide potential students in college choice.
2. To prepare student expectations regarding college life so that they can better adapt to
the experience.
3. To allow colleges to identify where growth-enhancing change in their environments is
needed, and to evaluate the effectiveness of these changes.
4. To characterize the environmental features which are related to various aspects of stu
dent growth.
5. To assess significant aspects of student and faculty interpersonal relationships on cam
pus.
6. To identify institutional differences in policies, goals, facilities, and priorities.
Miller and Prince (1977) have also discussed the importance of campus environmental as
sessment as it relates to the choice by students to enter a particular milieu and the manage
2
ment of the milieu by the administrator for the achievement of student development goals.
These authors cite studies by such scholars as Pace (1967), Astin (1968), and Chickering
(1969) on the effect of physical factors, such as size, on student perceptions of and reactions
to college; Newcomb (1962) and Chickering (1969) on the impact of living arrangements on
social exchange; and Pervin (1968) and Feldman and Newcomb (1969) on the relationship
between environment and student self-perception. They conclude that an understanding of
the environment is a fundamental step in designing strategies to influence student
growth— one which should precede attempts to modify the conditions under which learning
and college life take place. The role of environmental assessment is also emphasized in the
ecosystem model developed by Aulepp and Delworth (1976) for the Western Interstate Com
mission for Higher Education.
Baird (1973) has criticized current environmental assessment techniques as too far removed
from both theory and practice. As Freedman (1967) has noted, an additional problem is the
static nature of most methods, which contrasts with the dynamic nature of American seats of
higher learning as described by Kerr (1968). As Miller and Prince point out, the process of as
sessment must be ongoing and reflect changing conditions. What is needed, then, is a mea
suring instrument which is able to represent the flow of events and the interpretation of
which is grounded in student development theory. In addition, Aulepp and Delworth (1976)
have detailed the importance of flexibility in such an instrument, which should be adaptable
to particular problems or areas of interest.
Institutions of higher learning publish a student newspaper which is intimately concerned
with the campus and which depicts the continuously shifting ambience of the institution as a
whole as well as that of significant microenvironments. Estrin (1974) has written that the
contents of these newspapers reflect "the hopes, the anger, the joys, the fears, the anxieties,
the accomplishments, and the frustrations of the collegians." While not conceived of as an
assessment tool, the campus paper represents a continuous attempt on the part of residents
of the institutional setting to capture the essential features of their environment in print; at
many institutions, it may be the only ongoing process of examining campus events, services,
and structures from the point of view of students trained in the art of observing and report
ing. There is support for the notion that the content of the campus paper may represent
3
dimensions of student, staff, and faculty experience which can be utilized in an environmen
tal assessment process.
Theoretical Framework
The Student Press as a Force on Campus
McCleneghan (1975) has shown that, on some campuses, the student paper is the principal
source of campus news for college students. As such, it exceeded peers, academic advisers,
staff, and other sources. This position has been supported by research by Wanty (1969). Fur
ther, Darrell (1975), based on a survey of media habits of college students conducted by Bel-
den Associates for CASS Student Advertising, noted that college students are highly recep
tive to the campus paper, with younger students more involved with contents than older
ones. Politella (1965) has stated that studies of the college press should view it as socially sig
nificant to its readers, economically influential within the campus community, and a voice to
reflect the positions of campus constituencies. As Evans (1975) pointed out, the contents of
the campus press have attracted sufficient attention to cause court actions, suspensions of
publication, student expulsions, and disciplinary action against faculty advisers. Evidence ex
ists that the choice and manner of portraying events and topics considered newsworthy de
pict or subtly influence the normative structure of the institution's cultural setting(s). As
Newcomb (1943) demonstrated, new students tend to converge on the norms of their college
group.
Lipsett (1965) studied the effects of the commercial press on disturbances at the University
of California. By statistically controlling for attitude, and thus newspaper selection, Lipsetf
demonstrated that the content of particular papers read by students influenced their opinions
of the upheaval. In fact, Cockburn and Blackburn (1969) summarized a pattern described a s
journalistic agitation in the student press throughout the decade of the sixties.
Kitzes (1968) illuminated how activist students sought out publications (notably "under
ground" newspapers) distributed on campus which were congruent with their attitudes to
ward the disruptions at Columbia University when the campus press lacked such congru
ence. Similarly, Evans (1975) detailed the rise and fall of an alternative, independent student
newspaper at DePaul University founded in response to dissatisfaction with the official cam
pus newspaper in the 1968-1971 period. It seems reasonable to assume that a predisposition
________________________________________________________________________________________4
toward certain beliefs or behaviors in a reader enhances the potency of a publication which
has similar inclinations.
Atkins (1974) surveyed students of voting age at a Midwestern college following an election
which dealt with local offices and the national primary. The majority of students contacted
indicated that their votes in the local contest had been swayed by the editorial position of the
campus paper. With respect to national issues, however, the position of the campus press
was not reported as influential. Atkins suggested that students turn to the campus press
for resolution of issues which are complex, ambiguous, and not well covered by other media.
Politella (1969), for instance, has put forth the opinion that much of the furor and resultant
changes over the doctrine of in loco parentis have resulted from articles published in the stu
dent press.
The Atkins data suggest that the campus press may be regarded as having an actual influ
ence on selected attitudes or opinions of the campus community. Zimmer (1975), however,
has indicated that many editors of campus publications view their papers as reflections of
campus conditions, rather than as causal agencies.
Regardless of whether campus papers are capable of exerting a direct effect on the campus
environment, a variety of basic studies suggest that a more subtle influence may exist in
the form of the depiction of norms, sanctions, and expectations for behavior within the envi
ronment. Among these are the classic conformity studies of Asch (1961) and Krech, Crutch
field, and Ballachey (1962); and the social balance studies of Heider (1958) and Newcomb
(1953).
The evidence that campus publications may influence campus conditions, reflect them, or
both suggests that the relationship between campus press contents and the campus environ
ment merits further investigation.
The Contents of the Campus Press
Although few thorough and methodologically rigorous contemporary content analyses of
the student press have been published, the contents of campus newspapers have been the
object of some attention and controversy. Bing (1955) reported two types of campus newspa
per— those devoted to building school spirit and promoting athletics, and those that were
further concerned with interpreting the institution to students. According to Bing, the second
type was dominant by 1955. Greenfield (1966) described the contents of most of the campus
5
________________________________________________________________________________
papers of the mid-1960's as "trivial" and "timid." He noted a dichotomy between newspa
pers that were an extension of the university's public relations efforts and those that took an
activist stance. Mencher (1971) reported that the student press challenged issues in such
areas as inequities in the Greek system, civil rights, foreign affairs, politics, and education.
While international politics received some coverage in the campus press of the 1950's, it was
not until the demonstrations at the University of California in 1964 that student newspapers
began to focus on potentially dehumanizing aspects of higher education (Evans, 1975).
Estrin (1974) listed ten categories of content in campus newspapers during the 1970's: com
mitment to the community, sex on campus, advertising information, campus security, stu
dent demands for decision-making powers, the employment outlook, the international scene,
new courses, student rights, civil rights, and popular culture.
VanTurbergen (1970) opined that while campus newspapers prior to 1970 were concerned
mainly with campus gossip, they began to move toward more serious reporting at the begin-
ing of the decade. This sentiment was echoed by Montgomery (1971), who noted that the
campus press was, by the late 1960's, routinely taking on such issues as war and injustice.
Montgomery saw this as a response to student activism and the desire of students to become
involved in the decision-making machinery of higher education.
The data provided by these and other studies emphasize the need to examine how the con
tents of the student press have changed in the late 1970's— a period generally characterized,
in comparison with the late 1960's and the earlier part of the decade, as one of relative calm
and a return to more traditional academic and vocational concerns. Mencher (1971), whose
opinion of the student press of the 1960's held that there was greater concern for significant
issues than did that of some of the other researchers cited, described a retreat from stridency
as early as 1970.
In one recent study, Good (1977) analyzed the contents of editorials in the newspapers
of twelve institutions. Most of these were found to deal with campus concerns. The editorials
sampled from the papers of private institutions and those newspapers published less fre
quently than once a month were exclusively devoted to this area. Comparison of newspapers
which are supported by their campuses with those supported by paid subscriptions indicated
that the editorials of the former had a greater emphasis on campus life, while those of the
the latter focused more on the administration of the campus. Papers financed mainly through
6
advertising revenue had the most editorial content on off-campus topics. In decreasing order
of frequency, the topics covered within the total sample were administration, campus life,
apathy, athletics, non-campus news, academics, and education. Good's sample was quite
small; only four issues were analyzed for each of a limited number of institutions. It must
also be recognized that editorial content does not necessarily reflect the structure of the con
tent of the entire paper, since students are more free in editorials to explore their own inter
ests and concerns as opposed to the events and issues confronting the campus that make up
the “hard news."
Hewison (1977) surveyed editorials in campus newspapers from five liberal arts colleges
covering the period 1963-1973. Consistent with Good's findings, editorial content was de
scribed as highly campus oriented, with university governance issues the leading topic. Atti
tudes expressed generally challenged the status quo, and editorials were consistently critical
of the American role in Vietnam. The civil rights movement found support in these editori
als, while the Greek system was criticized.
Evans (1975) conducted a highly detailed analysis of the content of selected student news
papers from 159 four-year universities. Newspapers reviewed were published during 1974.
Content was reported as being largely student-oriented with coverage generally confined to
the campus, although concern was found for such special issues as ecology and inflation.
Weeklies were found to offer more depth reporting than papers published daily.
Evans found that newspapers that were editorially and financially dependent on the host
institution tended to be ''bulletin boards," heavily loaded with administrative news. The to
tally independent newspapers tended to be searching for a balance between off-campus and
on-campus concerns. The editorially independent, but financially dependent, papers were de
scribed as a coalescence of these two positions.
The Evans data provide a useful overview of newspapers in 1974. Evans did not, however,
attempt to identify underlying factors among the categories of student press contents, nor
did he attempt to link variations in content to environmental or other factors that are signifi
cant from the standpoint of student development. Unfortunately, the study utilized only four
issues of the campus newspaper from each institution studied, which raises concern about
the reliability of Evan's methodology. Statistical treatment of inter-rater reliability and valida
tion of the content analysis against meaningful external criteria were not described. Further
more, the scoring method used seemed to categorize story length (a continuous variable)
into a very limited range of discrete, values, even though article placement and headline for
mat were emphasized. These factors, which are often governed by advertising availability,
aesthetic and production concerns, or the ease of drawing reader attention, do not seem as
representative of content as does precise measurement of article length.
In discussing his findings, Evans noted the need for a more statistically sophisticated re
view of the campus press and for continuing studies probing editorial content. With respect
to the latter, Evans recommended greater attention to the balance between on-campus and
off-campus coverage. He also suggested a more rigorous focus on a smaller number of sub
ject institutions.
The extent to which the contents of the campus paper should be confined to the campus
has been debated in the literature. For example, Oliker (1972) proposed a descriptive defini
tion of campus newspapers which emphasized the restriction of content and circulation to
the campus. Some student newspapers, however, are virtually community newspapers, sup
plying small college towns with the only local news coverage available in print.
Windhauser and Lattimore (1973) surveyed 270 students, 89 faculty members, and 12 stu
dent editors at Colorado State University regarding interest in content areas and satisfaction
with campus paper coverage in those areas. More interest than satisfaction was found for the
following categories: national and international news, state news, news of other universities,
news about individual students and faculty, academic activities, and intellectual concerns.
In general, more serious news and off-campus coverage were favored.
Stempel (1964) and Lyle and Wilcox (1963) contended that readers of the student press
attributed greater importance to serious news than did student editors. Bornholdt (1966) also
found that students on two large university campuses (situated in population centers well-
covered by the commercial press and other news media) preferred more serious news in the
campus press.
The content of the campus press is influenced by other variables in addition to the nature
of the campus which forms its major target. One of these is the nature of the relationship be
tween the newspaper and institutional administration— whether that of publisher, teacher,
support base, or total independence. The relationship between this variable, the structure
of newspaper content, and the "fit" between content and the campus environment is of in
8
terest to those who are charged with the responsibility of administering or advising the colle
giate press. Consideration to aspects of this relationship, given in the following chapter, is
essential to the development of a content analysis technique which accurately portrays the
campus.
It can also be argued that the contents of the campus press are influenced by the personali
ty characteristics and interests of the student editors and reporters. Indeed, an association be
tween newspaper contents and the campus environment (particularly if the environment is
measured in terms of the distribution of characteristics in the student population) could be an
artifact of a random sampling of newspaper staff (who pursue their individual interests in
print) from the general campus population. There is, however, some evidence from a pilot
study by the author that newspaper staffs may be more homogeneous in perception of their
purposes for attending college and goals than student bodies as a whole. Evidence also
points to personality and demographic differences between student newspaper editors and
their student bodies. It is expected that the values taught in journalism programs and the
ethics of the journalism profession will have a substantial mitigating effect on biases introd
uced by the personal interests of an editorial staff. Indeed, Kochersberger (1972) has de
scribed the campus press as a “microcosm of the world of professional journalism." These
areas will be further explored in the next chapter.
Summary
Research has not only shown the campus press to be an important source of campus infor
mation, but a potentially influential medium as well. Evidence exists of instances in which
student opinion was affected by newspaper content and, conversely, of instances in which
newspaper choice was affected by student opinion. While some of the classical studies in
social psychology involving conformity and social balance theory suggest that the press may
have an actual impact on members of the campus community, some scholars feel that the
campus press mainly serves to reflect campus conditions, rather than to determine them.
A few studies are available which characterize the contents of the campus press. Although
student newspapers tend to be strongly campus oriented, there has been a trend toward
greater coverage of off-campus and "serious" news. While this trend is still subject to debate,
the shift has been welcomed by some of the campus constituencies that have been surveyed.
Given the importance of the environmental assessment phase of milieu management in
________________ 9
student development work, the potential for a relationship between the contents of the cam
pus press and the campus environment merits investigation. Furthermore, the salience of
the student press as a campus stimulus condition indicates the importance of a continuing
examination of how its contents change and what meaning they have for professionals in the
field of student affairs.
The Research Problem
The purposes of the present study were to describe the contents of the campus press at the
close of the 1970's, note changes in emphasis that may have taken place over the five years
since Evan's (1975) study, empirically examine the relationship between student newspaper
contents and other established measures of campus environments, and assess the impact of
styles of newspaper governance on the ''fit'' between the newspaper and the campus. The
ability to generate assessments of campus conditions using the student press would prove
useful in determining the distribution, timing, organization, and nature of specific student
personnel services or student development interventions.
The application of newspaper content analysis to the problems of describing campus envi
ronments could result in a measure which is low in cost, objective, requires no instrument,
and predicts changes. These are the criteria which Baird (1973) and others have used to eval
uate current assessment strategies. The technique potentially embodies the best properties
of existing environmental assessment methodologies, as it incorporates student opinion, fac
tual information, and stimulus conditions. It could also be adjusted to varying assessment
goals by altering the content categories, which gives the method an adaptability that is in ac
cordance with the use of instruments in Aulepp and Delworth's (1976) ecosystem model.
Furthermore, the technique could be used in reverse to rate newspapers with respect to
sensitivity to the needs and issues of concern to their readerships and host institutions. This
method for rendering judgments about individual newspapers gives greater consideration to
differences in readership interests and the unique attributes of each institution than do the
rating methods currently in use, such as the Associated Collegiate Press scoring system
which rates newspaper coverage against a presumed common norm.
The size of the sample of the present study, which was kept small to permit a highly relia
ble sampling of each subject institution, limited the ability to review the contents of the stu-
%
10
dent press and compare different newspapers in other than a simple descriptive manner.
Comparisons of newspaper content on the basis of institutional characteristics, and of institu
tions based on newspaper content profiles were made a posteriori to address the following
research question:
Research Question. How may the contents of the student press in 1980 be described, and
how do the contents of the newspapers with different characteristics and from different
types of institution compare?
The data obtained were compared with that published by Evans (1975) to determine
whether the contents of the student press have changed over the past five years. Potential re
lationships which were identified form a basis for future discussion and experimental re
search.
With respect to the campus environment, the following hypotheses, involving contempo
rary environmental assessment techniques and a method of content analysis that will be dis
cussed subsequently, were offered:
Hypothesis 1. There is an association between the distribution of student newspaper
content among various categories, representing dimensions of idea involvement and
campus loyalty, and the distribution of students in Holland's personality orientations,
as determined by degrees awarded in major fields associated with those orientations.
Hypothesis 2. The association between the distribution of campus newspaper content
and the distribution of students into Holland's personality orientations is greater for cam
pus newspapers which are incorporated independently from the host institution's admin
istration and academic departments, less for newspapers which are not independently
incorporated but are, by policy and practice, editorially independent, and least for news
papers whose content is potentially dependent on the editorial judgment of representa
tives of the administration or faculty.
11
Chapter II
Review of the Literature
In order to explore the student press and its relationship to campus climate, it is necessary
to review some of the currently available approaches to the measurement of the college envi
ronment and their theoretical roots. It is also necessary to examine some of the evidence
regarding the influence of student press governance styles and philosophies on the operation
and structure of the campus newspaper.
Assessment of the Campus Environment
One of the first attempts to describe colleges was the American Council on Education
guide, American Universities and Colleges, first published in 1928. Similar publications, such
as the College Entrance Examination Board's College Handbook and the Counselor's Guide to
American Colleges and Universities shared the style of listing information concerning readily
obtainable demographic variables— size, location, governance, admission requirements, aca
demic programs and standing, general cultural features, and so on. These raw data were
unanalyzed, however, and the prospective student, counselor, or administrator had no
meaningful guidelines for interpretation. Efforts have therefore been made to identify mea
surement strategies which are more closely connected to student development theory, which
can be validated, and the results of which can be used in decision making processes.
Perceptual Measures
Pace and Stem (1958ab), using Murray's data relating personal "needs" and environmental
"press," developed the College Characteristics Index (CCI) which, combined with Stern's
personality test (the Activities Index), was used to study college-student "fit." Among the
limitations of the instrument is the fact that the CCI is basically an opinion survey, or "per
ceptual measure." As such, it taps only one set of observations and behaviors in a complex
setting. Further, the forced parallel between the CCI and A I resulted in the inclusion of items
on the CCI which seem inappropriate to the study of institutional environments.
Pace (1969) turned to cluster analysis to devise the College and University Environm ent
Scales (CUES), which statistically reflected the ways that campuses differ from one another.
To establish the measure's validity, Pace related these scales to other measurements of col
leges (as by comparing the scholarship scale to the percent of faculty holding Ph.D.'s). Fur
12
thermore, while Stern had averaged his measures for individuals (limiting their ability to
characterize institutions), Pace averaged his scores for institutions.
Aulepp and Delworth (1976) described several other instruments that rely on some form of
polling of students or other campus subgroups. Among these are Peterson's College Student
Questionnaire, the Institutional Functioning Inventory, the Institutional Goals Inventory, Stu
dent Orientation Survey, Student Reactions to College, University Residence Environment
Scale, the College Characteristics Analysis, and Campus Environment Scale.
Baird (1973) has pointed out that scales comprised of opinions drawn from the campus
population must focus on items common to most colleges, phrased in ways that can be ad
dressed by members of the diverse subgroups on campus. Many of the important factors,
however, seem to be elusive and best grasped by asking for a subject's overall impressions,
which makes test items vague and ambiguous. Furthermore, problems are introduced by
summing the scores of members of heterogeneous subgroups to arrive at an institutional
score. Baird also criticized the fact that such measures often focus on the gathering of data,
rather than the utility of the information that is collected.
Hyne (1976), however, has described the approach represented by CUES and the other
perceptual scales as sensitive to environmental change, easy to understand, and readily
available. Hyne acknowledges potential problems with this approach due to inaccurate per
ceptions by subjects resulting from outdated or traditional views of the institution, a selected
or limited view of the institution, or a tendency to overrate the institution.
Behavioral and Objective Measures
Some of the problems that tend to be associated with the perceptual approach are avoided
by behavioral measures, which utilize objective observations of specific behaviors on the part
of significant campus sub-populations. According to Hyne (1976), these measures can provide
a more accurate and detailed account of activities within the campus setting and can indicate
specific areas where interventions may be profitable. Some of the available behavioral instru
ments are the Inventory of College Activities, Experience of College Questionnaire, Unstruc
tured Student Interview, and Participant-Observer Debriefings. Hyne notes the need for fur
ther development of the behavioral approach. Suitable instruments could, according to Hyne,
make a significant contribution to the assessment of university environments in outreach pro
_________ 13_
gramming. Since the student newspaper is a record of campus events, the form of content
analysis described in the current study can be viewed as a behavioral measure.
Astin and Holland (1961) developed a technique which uses objective measurements to
quantify behavioral and institutional components of the environment. The Environmental As
sessment Technique (EAT) is based , in part, on the assumption that the qualities of an envi
ronment depend on the personality characteristics of the people who make it up— chiefly
students, in the case of colleges. Among the data used is the distribution of students into the
six categories devised by Holland (1966) for his theory of vocational development. The per
centages of students fitting into these categories (to which individuals may be assigned on
the basis of the strengths of their preferences for hypothetical occupational environments,
as measured by the Strong Vocational Preference Inventory) can be estimated by reference to
the number of students pursuing degree objectives associated with these orientations.
Holland's (1966) descriptions of the six orientations may be summarized as follows:
1. Realistic (motoric): Characterized by aggressive behavior and an interest in activities re
quiring motor coordination, physical skill, strength, and masculinity. Preference for "acting
out" of problems. Avoidance of tasks involving interpersonal and verbal skills. Seek concrete
rather than abstract problem situations. Score high on such traits as concreteness, strength,
and masculinity, and low on social skill and sensitivity.
2. Investigative (intellectual): Main characteristics are thinking rather than acting, organiz
ing and understanding rather than dominating or persuading, and asociability rather than so
ciability. Prefer to avoid close interpersonal contact, although the quality of the avoidance dif
fers from that of the realistic type.
3. Social (supportive): Characterized by satisfaction of needs for attention in teaching or
therapeutic situations. Seek close interpersonal situations and are skilled in interpersonal rela
tions. Avoid situations requiring intellectual problem solving or extensive use of physical
skills.
4. Conventional (conforming): Show a tendency toward great concern for rules and regula
tions, self-control, subordination of personal needs, and strong identification with power and
status. Preference for structure and order; seek interpersonal and work situations where
structure is readily available.
5. Enterprising (persuasive): Typically demonstrate verbal skills used in a manipulating or
14
dominating way. Concerned with power and status, but differ from the conventional type in
that these qualities are sought, rather than honored in others.
6. Artistic (esthetic): Characterized by strong self-expression and the maintenance of rela
tionships with other people indirectly through artistic expression. Dislike for structure but
preference for tasks emphasizing physical skills. Intraceptive and asocial, more feminine than
masculine, show little self-control, and express emotion readily.
Osipow (1973) pointed out that while these categories began as descriptions of vocational
behaviors, Holland subsequently expanded his theory to behavior in general. The six types
became styles of living, only one facet being vocational. They became a "theory of personal
dispositions and their outcomes" (Holland, 1962). Osipow notes that data support relation
ships between the personality orientations and familial patterns, particularly parental beliefs,
behaviors, ambitions, and goals for their children. The orientations are closely related to vo
cational choices made by students and the stability of these choices.
In a study involving 3,500 male college students from 28 colleges and universities, Holland
(1963, 1968) accumulated extensive data on self-perception with respect to competencies and
traits among subjects who were assigned to an orientation. The realistics rated themselves
high on technical, athletic, and mechanical abilities and practical mindedness. They rated
themselves low on leadership, originality, expressiveness, perserverence, and sociability.
The investigatives rated themselves high on scientific and mathematical abilities and origin
ality. They rated themselves low on leadership, popularity, achievement drive, sociability,
aggressiveness, practicality, expressiveness, self-confidence, self-understanding, and perserv
erence. Social students had higher self-ratings for social-educational competencies, under
standing of others, popularity, dependability, self-understanding, and perserverence.
Conventionals rated themselves high in business competencies, conservatism, dependabili
ty, and neatness.
The enterprising types rated themselves high in leadership, popularity, originality, drive to
achieve, expressiveness, self-confidence, and perserverence.
The artistics rated themselves high in artistic competencies, originality, and schol
arship. They rated themselves low in leadership, popularity, aggressiveness, neatness, con
servatism, practical mindedness, cheerfulness, and self-confidence.
In another study, Holland (1962) found that hobbies and extracurricular activities varied ac
15
cording to orientation among males, although only activities were associated with orientation
among females.
The EAT approach of using these orientations as a means to characterize the college envi
ronment has been supported by a variety of studies. Astin and Holland found that their
variables correlated with the CCI. Astin (1963) showed that the EAT correlated with seniors'
subjective ratings of their campuses at 82 different institutions. Astin (1972) and Holland
(1968) successfully used the EAT to examine the 'fit' between student vocational choices and
college satisfaction. Baird (1973) reported that Astin and Holland developed considerable evi
dence that student body characteristics have a substantial influence on college characteristics.
There are some flaws that should be noted in Holland's theory. Aspects of the theory,
according to Holland himself, are too ambiguous to be tested. Further, as Osipow notes,
the categories themselves may not be specific enough, although some of the data that have
been collected relating to the categories ameliorate this drawback. A different formulation
seems to be in order for females, whose developmental tasks and objectives differ from those
of males. Holland, according to Osipow, does not propose what directions this reformulation
should take. Finally, there seem to be difficulties in describing the level of career choice with
in the theory. Nevertheless, the properties associated with Holland's orientations should be
useful in the college setting in determining the distribution and magnitude of specific student
services and academic programs.
Astin (1962) has used another factual environmental assessment technique involving the
factor analysis of information from college directories (tuition, number of books in library,
etc.). He identified six factors which accounted for 80% of the between college variance: afflu
ence, size, private / public control, proportion of males in student body, technical emphasis,
and homogeneity of curriculum and EAT scores.
Astin (1972) also investigated an approach which sought to identify salient "stimuli" to
which students react. While his results were limited, the concept suggests the potential use
of the campus newspaper as a measuring tool, as it is both a stimulus and a documentation
of stimuli.
While the behavioral and objective measures that have been cited are cost effective, do
not require instruments, are parsimonious, and have been obtained for many colleges (Astin,
1965ab), they often offer little to the individual who wants to assess a particular college
16
and plan for change. As Feldman and Newcomb (1969) have stated, it is important to discov
er the conditions that the factual variables create. By themselves, the characteristics provide
little understanding.
Student Subcultures
Clark and Trow (1962) developed another approach to the description of colleges in terms
of student subcultures which, with the Holland work, is particularly relevant to the theoreti
cal rationale of the present study. Using two dimensions, campus loyalty and involvement
with ideas, four subcultures were characterized: academic (high idea involvement, high loyal
ty), nonconformist (high idea involvement, low loyalty), vocational (low idea involvement,
low loyalty), and collegiate (low idea involvement, high loyalty). Gottlieb and Hodgkins
(1963) found differences in socio-economic status, religion, and rural/urban origin among
the subcultures, membership in which was determined by student self-description. Differ
ences in academic performance, attendance, and attitude change were also found to be relat
ed to subculture identification.
Recently, Sloan and Brown (1978) found that subculture membership was a successful
predictor of personality differences among college students with a homogeneous career goal.
These authors summarized findings which characterize vocational as conventional, pragmat
ic, and relatively uninvolved in extra-curricular activities. Academics tend to be more cultural
ly sophisticated and intellectually and socially concerned. Collegiates tend to be the highest
in social extroversion and peer dependence, and are least concerned with academic matters.
Nonconformists are typified as independent and least motivated to achieve in traditional
ways.
Although the validity of the typology has been supported by several investigators, includ
ing Apostal (1968,1969), Kees and McDougall (1971), Lange (1972), Peterson (1968), and Wil
liams (1972), there have been some objections to the underlying theory. As Frantz (1967)
noted, the idea of a subculture requires, among other properties, endorsement of member
ship and interaction among members. Research has not established that these criteria are
met by the Clark-Trow subcultures, which thus might be better termed "role orientations."
Although it has not been explored, there may be a tendency for role orientations to congeal
into actual subcultures as a result of unifying influences that develop in response to certain
17
jconditions, such as vigorous dissent on campus. The campus press might be capable of e-
volving into one such influence.
While no comparison between the Clark-Trow subcultures and the Holland personality de
scriptions has been published, the data on these schemes suggested that such a comparison
jwas feasible. Cole, Whitney, and Holland (1971) represented the six types spatially on two
I axes along with the occupations associated with them. Distances between points were taken
|to reflect the degree of association between occupations and the types. Whitney (1973), using
data on degrees awarded in various fields, plotted colleges and universities on these axes.
'Superimposing the Clark-Trow dimensions of campus loyalty and idea involvement on the
:axes yielded the relationship depicted in Figure 1. The correspondence between the Holland
■ categories and the Clark-Trow subcultures was consistent with the descriptions provided in
the literature.
The artistic type, for example, is clearly within the region representing the nonconformist
subculture. By comparison, the conventional personality type is spatially identified with the
collegiate subculture. The enterprising type is most closely related to the vocational subcul
ture, and the intellectual type is associated with the academic subculture. While the location
of the realistic and social types would seem to place them in the academic and vocational
subcultures, respectively, the published descriptions of these types do not compellingly lend
credence to the association. Examination of the types of vocations connected with the realistic
type requiring a college education (such as engineering, mathemtaics, and statistics), howev
er, supports the relationship. The social type has been correlated with responsibility and with
hobbies and activities involving paid or volunteer work and community service. This pro
vides limited support for the association of this type with the vocational subculture. Perhaps
the social type is more concerned with nature of the work and intrinsic sources of satisfac
tion, while the enterprising is more concerned with the tangible fruits of labor.
As will be seen, the relationship between the Holland types and the Clark-Trow subcul
tures was useful for developing a theoretical basis for comparing campus press contents and
the campus environment, and for validating the method of content analysis.
; Summary
< A variety of means has been used to characterize colleges, beginning with the compilation
of raw demographic data. More sophisticated techniques have evolved that are derived from
: 18
High Idea Involvement
Investigative
Academic Subculture
Non-Conformist Subculture
High Realistic
Artistic
Low
Campus Loyalty
Social Campus Loyalty
Collegiate Subculture Vocational Subculture
Conventional
Enterprising
Low Idea Involvement
Fig. 1 Superimposition of Clark-Trow subcultures and Holland types (adapted from Cole,
Whitney, and Holland, 1971).
19
theoretical models. One of these is Pace and Stern's CUES, which was derived from Murray's
concepts of personal needs and environmental "press." The instrument uses the opinions
of significant campus populations, and is representative of the class of perceptual measures.
Another technique is Astin and Holland's EAT, which was derived from Holland's theory of
vocational development. This instrument uses objective observations of behavior on campus
(such as the number of degrees awarded in various major fields), and is representative of the
class of behavioral or objective measures. Clark and Trow developed a theory of student
subcultures which can be used as a campus assessment technique. All of these measures
have been extensively validated against objective criteria.
The literature on campus environmental assessment indicates the importance of continued
development in the field. The existing approaches are limited in flexibility, are often not root
ed in student development theory, and are frequently subject to the methodological limita
tions and problems associated with survey research. Those with a basis in student develop
ment theory have tended to be static in nature, providing little meaningful guidance to the
counselor, potential student, or administrator in making important decisions. Despite these
limitations, the current approaches are readily available, easy to interpret, and have been
validated.
The Campus Press
Although the mutual impact of the campus press and campus environment has not been
clarified in the literature, institutional variables exist which would be expected to affect the
content of the campus press, and thus whatever relationships are hypothesized. They must
be taken into account in any study of these relationships. Of primary importance are the
philosophy and style of governance of the newspaper and the nature of the student staff.
Governance of the Campus Press
Campus newspapers are subject to a variety of administrative forms. These depend on
the purpose attributed to the campus newspaper by the institution and the students. A re
cent trend, currently being considered by a number of colleges and universities, has been for
student newspapers to become independent non-profit corporations, separate administrative
ly and financially from the institution.
VanBremmen (1975) surveyed 188 four-year colleges and universities and found that about
10% were served by independent student papers. Whitting (1973) notes that greater inde
20
pendence for campus newspapers was endorsed in 1967 by a committee representing several
national education associations, and again in 1973 by the American Association of State Col
leges and Universities. Representative independents include the Stanford Daily of Stanford
University and the Daily Californian of the University of California.
Duscha and Fischer (1973), in their report on the campus press for the American Associa
tion of State Colleges and Universities, point out that the move toward independence has
been encouraged by legal decisions regarding responsibility for the campus press. In the cele
brated decision in the case of Tinker vs. the Des Moines Independent Community School District
(1969), the right of student free expression was upheld, provided that such expression does
not materially disrupt classwork or involve substantial disorder or violation of the rights of
others. Although not directly related to the issue of the freedom of the collegiate press, Tinker
was the basis for a decision by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in 1970 which reversed
earlier decisions that impinged on the freedom of the student press in public institutions.
Prior censorship of student newspapers was limited by a Second Circuit Court of Appeals de
cision in 1971 to cases involving anticipation of substantial disruption of school activities.
Prior restraint was also restricted as a result of the decision in Jujishima vs. the Board of Educa
tion (1972), although the publishing of libelous or obscene material was declared to be pun
ishable after the fact.
In the case of Antonelli vs. Hammond (1970), the Massachusetts Federal District Court ruled
that prior censorship by an advisory board could not be achieved by any means, including
the withholding of funds derived from student activity fees. It was determined, however,
that "reasonable" regulations could be established to adjust freedom of speech rights to the
college environment.
Freedom of the campus press at public institutions was also upheld in the case of Bazaar vs.
Fortune (1973) by the Appellate Court of Mississippi. In Papish vs. University of Missouri Board
of Curators (1973), the Supreme Court ruled that a public institution cannot withdraw funding
of the paper because of the presentation of ideas offensive to traditional democracy. It should
be noted that court decisions protecting freedom of the student press have applied only to
public institutions, the status of private institutions remaining unclear.
Despite limitations on prior restraint on the part of an administration, responsibility for
the campus press is generally attributed to the institution, which is regarded as the publish
er. In some cases, as in Langford vs. Vanderbilt University (1958), the absence of prior censor
ship and administrative advisers, coupled with the financial independence of the paper, has
resulted in rulings freeing the institution from responsibility. In the instance of student news
papers supported by the institution, however, the doctrine of in loco parentis has protected
student editors while making the institution liable for actions involving obscenity, libel, inva
sion of privacy, or contempt (Smith, 1964).
A 1969 study by the Natonal Council of College Publication Advisers involving 46 colleges
and universities found that a majority of respondents felt that the student body "in general"
is accountable for the student press. There was agreement that student editors should accept
legal responsibility for publications. Some advisers felt that responsibility should be shared
with publication boards, and students generally supported the use of student activity fees to
support publications. Student editors tended to favor independent incorporation, which was
largely opposed by administrators. Faculty 'were split on the issue.
Hotchkiss (1977) has summarized the major legal positions influencing newspaper gover
nance:
1. Colleges and universities are often not the legal publishers of the campus newspaper.
2. Student editors cannot be suspended or expelled because of their writing.
3. No prior censorship is permissible.
4. Conventional professional standards regarding obscenity and libel apply to the colle
giate press.
Some observers, such as Ebert (1972) have stated that the move toward independence has
not only clarified the legal status of campus newspapers, but has resulted in a better educa
tion in responsible journalism. Further, staff are better able to learn management skills. Al
though scholars working in the field of the campus press, such as Estrin and Sanderson
(1966), have urged that student staff have complete independence, the vast majority of stu
dent newspapers have not taken the step toward total legal separation from the parent insti
tution. Mencher (1973) has noted that insufficient local advertising revenues exist to permit
most papers to incorporate. It may be added that many communities in which seats of higher
learning are located already have a local newspaper, to which the college publication can
add little in terms of community coverage.
The amount of freedom allowed papers that are not independently incorporated varies
22
greatly among different universities and colleges. One of the more independent governance
models was described by Barnum (1966). According to this author, Northwestern University
maintained a board of publications to oversee financial solvency and insure staff continuity.
This board did not, however, influence content, even in an advisory capacity. Similarly, the
Daily Trojan of the University of Southern California is largely independent of the governing
Journalism Council, although advertising policy is formulated by representatives of the ad
ministration. The editor is elected by the previous year's staff, subject to ratification by the
Journalism Council. Yet, the Daily Trojan is often referred to by students and faculty alike as
a laboratory for journalism students and the School of Journalism.
On the other hand, Sanderson (1966) described a different model exemplified by the Daily
Iowan of the University of Iowa. The newspaper was under corporate control, the governing
body of the corporation being made up of both faculty and students,the latter elected by
the student body and the former appointed by the president of the university. Supervisors
from the School of Journalism advised each major department of the newspaper.
Duncan (1971) described a model of governance which openly lacked student editorial in
dependence. The Daily Universe at Brigham Young University was governed by a Board of
Student Publications composed of the Dean and Assistant Dean of Students, two student
body officers, and three members of the faculty or administration. The executive editor of the
paper was a professional journalist and journalism instructor, and the paper was considered
a laboratory in journalism education. All staff received contracts specifying the remuneration
(credit or salary) and policies to which all were to subscribe. It was universally understood
that the university owned and controlled the paper, and that all staff had a responsibility to
the university community.
Grubb (1966) has described a similar governance system at Northern Illinois University,
in which a journalism instructor served as adviser to the campus paper, assigned beats to re
porters, and corrected their copy as part of the program in journalism education.
VanBremmen (1975) surveyed the opinions of the chief student personnel officers and stu
dent editors regarding governance styles at 188 four-year institutions. Upon assessing the
data supplied by respondents, he devised the following three level classification (similar to
that utilized in the current study):
1. Type "A" newspapers— editorially, financially, and legally dependent on the institution.
2. Type "B " newspapers— editorially independent but financially dependent.
3. Type " C " newspapers— independently published.
The type "C" newspaper was reported at only 7% of the private institutions and 13% of
the public institutions sampled. Approximately 40% of the student personnel deans and stu
dent editors, however, advocated such a structure.
Bert (1951) summarized some attitudes held by administrators toward administration of the
campus press. Some saw the university as the publisher of the paper, and therefore responsi
ble for its content. Others based the right of control on the fact that non-independent papers
are supported, in most instances, by an activity fee paid by all students or by general univ
ersity funds. Another position was that the student newspaper constitutes a laboratory for
journalism education, and is therefore subject to control. Wilcox (1966) has stated that stu
dents generally view the newspaper as their official publication and oppose administrative
control. Clearly, positions regarding the appropriate form of governance for campus newspa
pers are related to perceptions of the purposes of the student press.
Purposes of the Campus Press
In examining the positions of various constituencies on campus, Hopkins (1957) identified
several tendencies: administrators view the newspaper as an official campus publication; fac
ulty view the newspaper as a medium for publicity, both friendly and unfriendly; the student
government views the newspaper as a house organ for student government; the journalism
department views the paper as a laboratory; and journalism students view the paper as their
own. A survey by Moore (1975) at Texas Technological University indicated that campus con
stituencies generally agreed that the most important purpose of the campus newspaper was
to serve as a journal of student comment and opinion, while the least important purpose was
to act as the voice of the administration.
The attitudes of college presidents, advisers, and student editors were surveyed by Evans
(1975), who found that these officials considered "reporting campus news" the most impor
tant function of the campus newspaper. At private institutions, the second most prevalent re
sponse was the provision of experience for future journalists. At public institutions, it was
the provision of an open forum for the expression of ideas and opinions. Over 70% of Evan's
respondents stated that promoting good public relations for the administration was not a
L
24
function of the paper. Estrin and Sanderson (1966) have stated that the majority of faculty ad
visers see the main function of the campus press as helping the students and the institution
understand each other, a position reflected in the rationale of the present study.
According to Ross and Selmeyer (1974), another function of student newspapers is the gen
eration of a record of student activities. Estrin (1956) has stated that informing the communi
ty about the institution is a major purpose of the campus press. Yablonsky (1966) has sug
gested that the campus press further serves to influence the growth of the journalism
profession. This can be seen today in the great concern expressed by professional journalists
over the celebrated court battle involving a search of the newsroom of the independent stu
dent paper at Stanford University (Czerniejewski, 1978). It can also be seen in the pioneering
work of some institutions in the application of the "new technology" of computerized pro
duction (Noah and Anderson, 1979). Other authors have emphasized the role of the student
press in giving students an opportunity for personal growth, leadership development, and
the acquisition of poise, tact, initiative, and resourcefulness (Estrin and Sanderson, 1966).
According to Conn (1969) the major development in the campus press during the 1960's
was the movement away from the campus as the primary, or only, object of attention. Poli-
tella (1967) stated his expectation that the college press of the seventies would little resemble
that of the mid- to late-sixties. He pointed out that student newspapers were becoming less
like a conventional extra-curricular activity and more like their commercial counterparts. In
creasing support among student editors for the notion that off-campus coverage is a major
purpose of the student newspaper was documented by Mencher (1969). The point of view
adopted by the students producing the newspaper regarding its purpose, combined with the
style of management favored by the administration, seems likely to have an impact on the
content that appears in print.
In an attempt to link governance style and content, Wilson (1971) compared six independ
ent student newspapers with six papers operated as journalism laboratories. Content was
reviewed in terms of the Associated Collegiate Press (ACP) evaluation categories. Few signifi
cant differences were found. The independents were superior in the editorial leadership and
opinion categories, while the laboratory papers were superior in photography, art, and
graphics. No significant differences were found in news coverage, writing and editing quali
ty, or quality of design. Graduates who worked on laboratory papers rated the value of this
25
educational experience higher than did graduates who had worked on independent papers.
While useful, the Wilson study suffered from a small sample size and the fact that editions
from but a single week (for daily papers) or three-week period (for weeklies) were analyzed.
It has been the experience of the author that campus papers can vary dramatically over the
course of the academic year, which underscores the importance of utilizing a temporally
broad sample when analyzing an institution.
The absence of significant differences in the Wilson data supports the use of a more so
phisticated instrument in rating different classes of newspapers. Presumably, the ACP catego
ries are well known by student journalists and advisers, and a conscious effort is made to
meet their expectations. Papers rated using this method are assessed without reference to
prevailing conditions on particular campuses, knowledge of which might lead an observer to
expect deviations from the idealized norm.
The present study seeks to measure the degree to which newspapers with different gover
nance structures are sensitive to the special conditions that exist on their campuses, and the
different needs and interests of their readerships. If independence is advantageous from the
standpoint of journalistic sensitivity as well as legal liability and economics, the tendency
of the contents of a newspaper to vary with the campus environment should be inversely re
lated to the extent of administrative control. This position is addressed by the second hypo
thesis of the current study.
The subjective rating method used by Wilson to determine the quality of the educational
experience at different kinds of newspapers must also be interpreted with caution. Wilson
did not validate his subjects' evaluations against objective measures of educational quality,
and other factors (such as cognitive dissonance or self-serving rationales promulgated by the
journalism school) may have been responsible for the more favorable assessment accorded la
boratory papers.
The Student Staff
Like governance structures, the personality traits, interests, and other characteristics of the
student editors and reporters might be expected to have an influence on campus press con
tents. The selection of staff from the student population naturally favors individuals whose
values and attitudes are congruent with the often exhausting demands of the job. Thus, it is
26
probably unrealistic to expect the staff of a campus newspaper to resemble the general stu
dent body in distribution of attributes.
Mencher (1971), for example, in a study that contrasted student editors with the activists of
the 1960's, described the former as liberal-intellectual gradualists who leaned toward psycho
logical explanations of social events. The Isaacs Report, sponsored by the American Commis
sion on Education (1978), described student editors as unusually dedicated, often neglecting
academic responsibilities for the sake of producing a paper. This characteristic has been ob
served by the author, who has witnessed the dedication of student newspaper staff under
conditions of maximum stress and minimal tangible rewards. The report further characterized
student journalists as having a high tolerance for resistance from potential sources and for
continual criticism. They were also described as idealists, tending to intellectually gravitate
toward liberal causes.
The author, in a pilot study that sheds some light on the distinguishing features of student
newspaper personnel, surveyed fifty members of the staff of the spring, 1978 Daily Trojan at
the University of Southern California. Student editors and reporters were asked to assign
themselves to one of the Clark-Trow subcultures which they felt most accurately reflected
their attitudes toward college attendance. Descriptions of the subcultures were taken from
Trow (1960) and were written with consideration for the problem of variation in the social de
sirability of responses. The vast majority placed themselves within the vocational (70%) and
academic (25%) subcultures. Given this finding, and the homogeneity of career goals among
the members of the Daily Trojan staff (who were almost invariably specializing in journalism
or a related business field, such as advertising or public relations), it is reasonable to assume
that student newspaper staff members are not randomly sampled from their student bodies.
Rather, they potentially represent a special group with attributes which may be more consist
ent across different newspaper staffs than across different student bodies.
It should be recognized that students probably become involved in a student newspaper in
ways that are influenced by the role of the paper in the life of the institution. For example, at
the University of Southern California, the student newspaper was physically located adjacent
to the journalism school and was closely associated with it. The vocational goals of nearly all
of the student staff surveyed by the author reflected specializations supported by the Journal
ism School (including such fields as public relations and broadcast journalism). On the other
27
hand, the University of California at Los Angeles had no journalism program, and the stu
dent newspaper was located amidst student affairs offices. According to the Publications Di
rector, career goals among the newspaper staff members at this institution were considerably
more heterogeneous than those of their counterparts at the University of Southern California.
Recruitment inducements for student staffs vary among different institutions. Reuss (1975)
reported that eighteen of twenty-eight schools sampled granted credit (limited by most to
six units) for work on the student newspaper. The responsibility for assigning grades or cred
it rested with instructors, based on scrapbooks or copies of stories. On twelve papers, partici
pation by journalism students was mandatory. Twenty-four of the institutions granted some
form of payment to at least some staff members. Payment practices were similar in situations
in which credit was or was not offered. Some schools granted neither credit nor payment.
Reuss concluded that the issue of credit was related to the degree of association between the
paper and school of journalism. The question may be raised of the effect of a posteriori meth
ods for rating student work on perceived freedom of speech, content, and the style of writing
which results.
On occasion, newspaper staff positions have been assumed by groups whose notion of
the purpose and scope of the campus press differed radically from that of the administration
or student body. A shift of content away from an association with the campus environment
would be expected under such circumstances. This may not always be the case, however.
One such situation was studied by the author at a major public university in the Pacific
Northwest during 1978. Considerable criticism of the student newspaper had arisen among
faculty, administration officials, and students. Content was seen as favoring topics of narrow
interest, unrelated to the university, and somewhat radical or "left-leaning” in nature. The
newspaper was accused of pursuing the interests of the staff rather than those of the campus
community.
A comparison of the content of the paper with that of three other campus newspapers
(which were not reported by their advisers as being in conflict with campus constituencies),
using the author's method of content analysis (to be subsequently described) and an admit
tedly small sample of ten editions, yielded predictions regarding the relative distribution of
students into the Holland types at the four universities. All of the predictions regarding the
institution with the "problem” newspaper were validated by the objective method of examin-
28
•ing degrees awarded in fields associated with the Holland types. Thus, in this case, the ambi
ence of the campus may have been accurately reflected by the campus newspaper, despite
the prevailing view that the newspaper staff adhered to a divergent philosophy of campus
journalism. It can be argued that certain campus conditions, including values widely held
among the student body, faculty, and administration, may facilitate the emergence of the
"maverick" newspaper and its continued existence, as in the cases cited earlier of DePaul and
Columbia Universities. This implies that the presence of a radical student staff may not de
tract from the usefulness of the campus paper as a barometer of the campus environment, if
its contents are properly measured.
The evidence summarized above militates against the assertion that potential associations
between campus environments and newspaper contents are the product of the interests of
the student staff, who are, according to this view, sampled randomly from the general stu
dent population. It would appear that selection of student staff is not a random procedure.
Further, if student editors and reporters adopt the values of good journalism— and the quali
ty of the student press suggests that this is the case— and if they are in touch with the
concerns of their peers and the issues which face the institution as a whole, it is likely that
any relationship between the newspaper and ambience of the campus is both genuine and of
potential value to the student development profession.
The accuracy and perceptiveness of student reporters have, of course, been challenged.
Stone (1972), for example, lamented "creeping subjectivity" in the student press. In a study
by Mencher (1969), however, student editors who were surveyed overwhelmingly maintained
that one of the functions of the campus press is to present a "true" picture of the campus. A
"subjective" student view that strives for what the student perceives as a "true" picture of
the campus may raise questions from the standpoint of journalism, but could be exactly what
is required for the environmental assessment phase of milieu management. For the latter,
the writing of the student journalist need not be taken as a literal account of events. Rather,
it is used as an indicator of sources of concern or stress in the environment.
According to Himebaugh (1973), student journalists are generally highly responsible and
professional— an increasing trend since the 1960's. Burd (1973) indicated that the student
press is increasingly oriented toward the "real world" and decreasingly motivated by the
"ego trip of self-expression for students infatuated with the mechanics of the media." The
29
objectivity of the student press has been facilitated by the emergence of specific codes of
ethics adapted for use by student journalists (Evans, 1975). It must be recognized, however,
that some of the praise heaped by scholars interested in student journalism on the post-
1960's student press may be the result of fewer divisive controversial issues in the campus
community, rather than any awakening of ethical consciousness or professionalism.
Summary
There is no consensus on all of the objectives of the student press, nor is there
consensus on an ideal form of governance. The type of administrative structure preferred
is likely to depend on the purposes viewed as being served by the campus newspaper.
Although administrative forms range from legal independence to tight control as a journal
ism laboratory, with most newspapers in between, there has been a trend toward legal inde
pendence. This has, in part, resulted from legal decisions which guarantee freedom of the
college press at public institutions, limit the ability of the administration to intervene in the
editorial policy of the student newspaper, protect student editors, yet hold the institution
responsible for the contents of the campus newspaper if it is an on-campus activity. The
ability of newspapers to become legally independent is limited by financial considerations,
and it may be assumed that most student newspapers will not be able to make this step. Al
though some advantages have been claimed for independent student newspapers, including
a more enriching eductional experience for the student staff, few significant differences be
tween independent and non-independent newspapers have been documented.
Investigations in the field point toward the emergence of the campus newspaper from
being a campus gossip sheet or bulletin board to more comprehensive coverage of both on-
and off-campus news. Whether this trend is well received depends on the position regarding
the purposes of the student newspaper. Several different points of view have been proposed.
Among the major functions attributed to the campus press are the following: reporting cam
pus news; journalism laboratory; official publication of the administration or student govern
ment; record of student activities; source of publicity for the faculty; interpreting the institu
tion to the students; forum for student opinion; bulletin board.
The student staff of campus newspapers probably differ in distribution of personality traits
from the campus population at large. Their duties require personal sacrifice and unusual te
nacity and diligence. Inducements for participation include gaining valuable experience,
30
course credit, and payment. The relationship between the student staff member and the
newspaper is likely to depend on the relationship between the newspaper and the journalism
program and the role of the newspaper in the life of the institution.
Some Notes on Content Analysis
Before describing the content analysis techniques used in the present study, a few notes on
the theoretical basis of content analysis may be illuminating. According to Berelson (1952,
p. 18), content analysis is "...a research technique for the objective, systematic, and quantita
tive description of the manifest content of communications." Content analysis assumes the
following:
1. Inferences about the relationship between intent and content or between content and ef
fect can be made.
2. The "meaning" attributed to content by the analyst corresponds to the "meaning" in
tended by the communicator or understood by the reader.
3. The frequency of occurrence of various content attributes is an important factor in the
communication process.
Janis (1949) has added that the operations of content analysis consist of the classification of
the signs occurring in a communication into a set of appropriate categories, resulting in a de
scription of the frequency of occurrence of signs for each category in the scheme. Kaplan and
Goldsen (1943) described content analysis as a quantitative classification of a given body of
content, in terms of a set of categories created to provide data relevant to specific hypotheses
concerning the content.
MacDougall (1966) pointed out how content analysis has proved valuable in comparing
the treatment of specific news events or situations by various communications media. In
deed, content analysis has been employed in the analysis of such "communications" as polit
ical platforms, samples of prose and poetry to determine or verify authorship, children's liter
ature, and dreams. MacDougall notes, however, that critics have protested that content
analysts merely arrive at "common sense" conclusions. Skeptics question the validity of cate
gories and scales. The present study represents an attempt not only to analyze to what the
campus press pays attention and in what relative magnitudes, but to validate the analysis
against known, meaningful criteria.
31
Summary
The process of milieu management represents an attempt on the part of professionals re
sponsible for encouraging student growth to adopt a proactive position, seeking opportuni
ties to adjust the learning environment so that it is progressivley more congruent with the
goals of personal and academic development (Miller and Prince, 1977). One of the most im
portant steps in the process is the measurement of the campus environment. Environmental
assessment techniques can also guide potential students in college choice; prepare student ex
pectations of college life; illuminate aspects of student and faculty relationships; and identify
differences in the policies, goals, and priorities of institutions (Aulepp and Delworth, 1976;
Baird, 1973).
Three general approaches to environmental assessment have been developed: demographic
measures, perceptual measures, and behavioral measures. The demographic measures, as
represented by the ACE guide, American Universities and Colleges, document readily obtainable
facts about subject institutions: location, enrollment, programs, and so on. Their chief limita
tion is the absence of meaningful guidelines for interpreting the data.
The perceptual measures gather the opinions of significant campus populations. Examples
are Pace and Stern's College Characteristics Index, Pace's College and University Environ
ment Scales, and Peterson's College Student Questionnaire. Hyne (1976) has described these
measures as sensitive to environmental change, easy to understand, and readily available.
There are, however, potential problems from inaccurate perceptions of the institution. Baird
(1973) has added that perceptual measures are limited because of the need to focus on items
common to most colleges, the necessity of combining scores from diverse campus sub
groups, and the fact that a subject's general opinion is often most revealing, resulting in
a tendency to include vague and ambiguous items. Baird has also noted that these measures
have often focused on the gathering of data, rather than on the utility of the information.
The behavioral instruments utilize objective measurements of behavior on campus. Exam
ples are Astin and Holland's Environmental Assessment Technique, the Inventory of College
Activities, and the Experience of College Questionnaire. According to Hyne (1976), these
measures can provide an accurate and detailed account of the campus setting and can indi
cate specific areas where interventions may be profitable. Astin (1965a) has noted that behav
ioral measures are cost-effective, often do not require survey instruments, are parsimonious,
_______________________________________________ 32
and have been obtained for many colleges. As Feldman and Newcomb (1969) have noted,
however, it is important to discover the conditions created by factual variables. The behavior
al measures, like the perceptual measures, may not aid the administrator, counselor, or po
tential student in making important decisions.
In general, existing campus environmental measures have been criticized on several
grounds. Baird (1973) has pointed out that they are often too far removed from student de
velopment theory and practice. They also often lack the flexibility necessary to adapt to dif
ferent measurement goals or micro-environments. Aulepp and Delworth (1976) have de
scribed the importance of such flexibility. Freedman (1967) has commented on the static
nature of most instruments, in contrast to the dynamic nature of institutions of higher
learning.
One prominent feature of most campus environments is a student newspaper. While not
conceived of as an instrument for environmental assessment, the campus press may repre
sent the only continuous project of self-reflection involving students trained in observation
and reporting on many campuses. As McCleneghan (1975), Darrell (1975), and others have
noted, the student newspaper is a highly important source of information for students about
the campus.
The way in which campus newspapers are operated differs from campus to campus. While
some are operated as journalism laboratories under relatively tight supervision, others have
become legally independent from the institution. Most college newspapers lie between these
administrative extremes (VanBremmen, 1975). The nature of the relationship between the
newspaper and the institution is related to the way in which the students, faculty, and ad
ministration see the purposes of the newspaper. Among the purposes attributed to the stu
dent press are: an official publication of the students and forum for student opinion (Wilcox,
1956); an official publication of the administration, a medium for publicity for faculty, or a
house organ for student government (Hopkins, 1957); a source of campus news (Evans,
1975); a record of student activities (Ross and Selmeyer, 1974); an opportunity for the person
al growth of the newspaper staff, or a means for helping the students and institution under
stand each other (Estrin and Sanderson, 1066). Another factor affecting the relationship be
tween the newspaper and administration has been a series of court decisions which
effectively protect student newspapers and editors at public institutions from censorship, yet
33
frequently hold the institution responsible for what is published by a campus-based newspa
per. These decisions have increased the desirability of an independent newspaper at some
campuses.
While attempts have been made to link the administrative style of student newspapers
with content and instructional quality, few significant differences have been found (Wilson,
1977). Regardless of the form of governance, most student newspapers have evolved from
being campus gossip sheets, or bulletin boards, toward more comprehensive coverage of on-
and off-campus news (Conn, 1969; Poitella, 1967; Evans, 1975).
Because the campus environment has become an important focal point for student develop
ment interventions, and because the student newspaper is an important part of campus life,
a continuing survey of the changing contents of the campus press in terms of the goals of
student development is of value. Furthermore, the coverage of the campus being provided by
today's student newspapers— coverage which is often penetrating, conscientious, profession
al, and objective (Mencher, 1969; Himebaugh, 1973; Burd, 1973; Evans, 1975)— strongly sug
gests that the student newspaper may be a powerful tool for characterizing and assessing
campus environments.
The flexibility and cost-effectiveness of such an environmental assessment methodology
can be seen from the other uses to which content analysis of communications media has
been put. As MacDougall (1966) pointed out, content analysis has proven to be a valuable re
search tool in the investigation of political platforms, propaganda campaigns, dreams, and
questioned documents. As a technique, it is objective, can be modified to particular theoreti
cal models or assessment goals, requires no survey instrument, and is easy to administer.
Furthermore, in the case of newspapers, a continuous historical record is provided, and the
documentation of the environment continues into the future. These qualities are consistent
with the prerequisites for an effective instrument for measuring college campuses (Baird,
1973).
In investigating the use of the campus press in environmental assessment, two important
issues must be considered. First, the effect, if any, of governance on the relationship between
newspaper contents and the environment must be ascertained. If, as some scholars believe,
independence leads to more responsible reporting, the governance style of the newspaper
34
must be taken into account in interpreting findings resulting from a content analysis (Ebert,
1972).
Second, the makeup of the student staff must be considered. If correspondences between
newspaper contents and campus environments are the result of a random sample of students
(making up the staff) pursuing their individual interests, which coincidentally are representa
tive of the interests of students as a whole, then under certain conditions (such as the take
over of a newspaper by dissident students or the operation of a newspaper as a journalism
laboratory) where the student staff is not randomly selected, the effectiveness of using news
paper contents for environmental assessment would have to be questioned.
Limited data on newspaper editors and reporters suggest that these groups are more
homogeneous than campus populations as a whole, and are self-selected on the basis of the
demands of the job, which are common to most institutions (Mencher, 1971; American Com
mission on Education, 1978; Reuss, 1975). The author's pilot study supported the contention
that even assumption of control of a student newspaper by a group of dissidents does not
detract from the usefulness of the paper as an environmental assessment tool.
In sum, the literature pertaining to the description and assessment of college campuses
emphasizes the importance of continued development in this area. The literature on the stu
dent press in the United States suggests the potential value of adapting this medium as a
measuring instrument, taking into account the different ways that newspapers are managed
on American campuses.
35
Chapter III
Methodology
In order to describe the contents of the campus press and examine the relationship be
tween the campus press and the campus environment, it was necessary to delineate those in
stitutions and publications to be studied, devise a means to analyze the content of the cam
pus newspapers, utilize existing techniques to assess the nature of the campus environment,
and compare the results of the two forms of assessment.
Sample
The sample for this study was derived on the basis of several factors. First, it was neces
sary to utilize newspapers which were available to the author. This meant that the institu
tions from which newspapers were drawn had to be in close geographical proximity to the
University of Southern California, have a newspaper exchange relationship with the Universi
ty of Southern California, or be willing to forward a sample by mail. Second, it was consid
ered desirable to choose newspapers from institutions whose administrators were in a posi
tion to use or discuss with administrators from other institutions the results and implications
of the study. Third, the author viewed it as useful to compare newspapers from two- and
four-year institutions. Fourth, sufficient variability in governance type was needed to address
the second hypothesis of the study.
The organization which most contributed to the derivation of the sample was the Western
Association of University Publications Managers (WAUPM). The twenty-seven university
members of this organization share publications and other information. States represented
included Arizona, California, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Oregon, Texas, and Washington. While
the member institutions may not necessarily be representative of four-year universities in
the United States, officials of the member institutions expressed considerable interest in the
outcome of the study, and the inclusion of their newspapers in the sample would be a stimu
lus to discussion and utilization of the data.
The University of Southern California maintained reciprocal subscriptions with campus
newspapers from 30 institutions of higher learning, including some of the W AUPM mem
bers. Among these were institutions whose representatives maintained relationships of var
ious kinds (ranging from informal exchanges of information and visits to joint solicitation
of advertising for campus publications) with the Office of Student Publications at the Univ-
36
ersity of Southern California and who expressed an interest in the study.
The sample was drawn from the USC subscription list, cooperating W AUPM members,
institutions in close geographical proximity to Southern California which were visited by the
author, and other institutions willing to furnish newspapers in response to a request from
the author. The list of newspapers is given in Appendix 2.
A total of 45 newspapers was sampled. The data gathered on individual institutions are
given in Appendix II. their characteristics appear in Table 1. The mean enrollment of the
institutions was 18,964.
Table 1
Characteristics of the Sample
Public Institutions 33
Private Institutions 12
W AUPM Members 18
Non-Members 27
Two-Year Curriculum 5
Four-Year Curriculum 40
University of California 5
California State University and Colleges 8
California Community Colleges 5
Others 27
Institutions Located in California 23
Institutions located in Southern California 15
Institutions Located Outside California 27
Enrollment Under 5,000 4
6,000-12,000 12
13,000-25,000 14
Enrollment Over 26,000 15
Independently Incorporated Newspapers 12
Editorially Independent Newspapers 19
Potentially Dependent Newspapers 14
;37
The newspapers published during the spring semester, 1979, were sampled from most of
the institutions in the study, with the exception of the Daily Trojan and University of Washing
ton Daily, which had been previously analyzed for the spring semester, 1977. A single semes
ter was chosen as the period of analysis rather than an academic year in order to minimize
variation introduced by the changes in newspaper staffs which typically occur at the semester
break. Generalizability was, in this instance, sacrificed for sensitivity. Where possible, one
newspaper from each full week of publication was subjected to a content analysis. In the case
of daily papers, the day of the week was determined randomly for each week. This proce
dure insured the absence of bias resulting from any tendency of daily papers to consistently
run a particular format, feature, insert, or special section on a given day of the week.
As a result of erratic mailings, editions of some newspapers chosen for the sample from
the University of Southern California subscription list were not available. Discussions with
student staff responsible for the archives at the University of Southern California suggested
that this tended to be a random phenomenon. As a result, missing newspapers were re
placed in the sample with the edition published on the date closest to the missing publica
tion. In a few cases, a complete sample was unavailable. Under these circumstances, as many
issues as possible were used, in no case fewer than ten.
Data Collection
Predictor Variables
In a pilot study, the author devised 33 content categories into which articles in student
newspapers could be classified. The content categories, which were suggested by the Ameri
can Collegiate Press (1974) rating scale for breadth of content, are summarized in Appendix
I. The content categories are exemplified by such topics as varsity sports, campus news,
state, national, and international news, "bulletin board", and so on. Forty issues of the Indi
ana Daily Student, which is associated with Indiana University, were classified by the author
using this method, and the issues were randomly divided into two groups. A rank order cor
relation coefficient (Spearman's rho) was calculated which compared the order of content cat
egories in the two groups on the basis of percent of total content assigned to each. The value
of this statistic was 0.90. A similar procedure compared the order of content categories of
twenty editions of the campus paper of the University of Southern California, the Daily Tro
3fi
jan, drawn from 1975, with twenty drawn from 1977. The value of the correlation coefficient
was 0.74.
On the basis of the content analysis of four universities using these categories in the pilot
study, hypotheses were generated comparing the institutions in terms of the distribution of
students in Holland's six personality orientations. An independent determination of this dis
tribution was conducted using degrees awarded in various fields of study, as described by
Holland (1966) for the Environmental Assessment Technique (EAT). Five of the six hypothe
sized relationships were verified in this way. While the sample was too small to permit a
meaningful statistical analysis, these results indicated the reliability and validity of the con
tent categories. Since the content analysis technique was stable across different issues of a
newspaper and over a period of two years, and accurate predictions could be made of objec
tively measured environmental features, the use of this technique in the current study was
supported.
Data regarding the governance structure of each newspaper were gathered by means of a
questionnaire sent to the adviser or publisher of the paper. The questionnaire is reproduced
in Appendix III. Each newspaper was classified as independently incorporated from the
host institution (Type 1), not independently incorporated but editorially independent by
structure and practice (Type 2), or potentially editorially dependent on the faculty or adminis
tration (Type 3). While independent incorporation was readily ascertained, the question of
editorial independence of non-independently incorporated papers was more difficult to dis
cern. The flow chart used in conjunction with the questionnaire to make this determination is
j given in Appendix IV.
It should be noted that a judgment of potential editorial dependence did not imply that
the content of the newspaper was in fact influenced by members of the institution's faculty
or administration. Rather, such a judgment indicated that the potential for such influence
was built into the structure of the paper. Advisers to the paper may well have exercised
restraint in affecting editorial or news policy, but such restraint was voluntary rather than
functionally prohibited. In particular, newspapers serving as journalism laboratories were
'typically judged to be of Type 3, although a policy of editorial independence may have been
observed. If most of the student newspaper staff were working on the paper for journalism
credit, the assignment of grades or credit on the basis of pre- or post-publication reviews of
39
students' work, especially if coupled with assignment of stories or beats by advisers, suggest
ed potential editorial dependence. Further, selection of editors by a board with administra
tion representatives without at least a 50% student representation on the selection board was
indicative of potential dependence, as was a significant rate of adviser-initiated pre-publica-
ton consultation sessions with student reporters or editors.
Fourteen institutions did not return the questionnaire. Data were gathered by means of a
telephone conversation with the newspaper's adviser or editor.
Criterion Variables
The distribution of students among the Clark-Trow subcultures is information that was not
available from individual institutions. Furthermore, the generation of such a distribution
is usually based on self-assesment techniques, which are subject to bias resulting from the so
cial desirability of responses or lack of insight. The distribution of students into the Holland
types, however, may be objectively estimated by the numbers of degrees awarded in various
major fields, as compiled by the National Center for Educational Statistics, Higher Education
Branch of the United States Department of Education, and published by Mitchell (1979).
Fields which were identified with the six types according to the EAT were combined to yield
a score for each type at each institution. The score was expressed as the sum of the percents
represented by each field of total degrees granted during that year for a given institution.
The major fields included for each Holland personality orientation are summarized below.
1. Realistic Orientation: agriculture, agricultural education, physical education, industrial
arts, engineering, forestry, trade and industry, animal husbandry, mining.
2. Intellectual Orientation: architecture, biological sciences, geography, medical technology,
pharmacy, mathematics, philosophy, physical sciences, anthropology, philosophy
3. Social Orientation: health education, education of exceptional children, speech correc
tion, general education, nursing, occupational therapy, physical therapy, social science, so
ciology, social work, home economics, dietetics, physical education, recreation, theology,
psychology (non-experimental)
4. Conventional Orientation: accounting, secretarial, business and commercial, business ed
ucation, library science
5. Enterprising Orientation: hotel and restaurant management, hospital management, histo
40
ry, international relations, political science, foreign service, industrial relations, public admin
istration, business administration
6. Artistic Orientation: art education, music education, journalism, English, creative writ
ing, fine and applied arts, foreign language and literature, speech (except correction)
The scores for each institution are given in appendix 5.
Procedure
Content Analysis
A panel of four judges (composed of two journalism students who were former student
newspaper editors, a student in the graphic arts, and the author, who was then employed as
the manager of a university publication production facility) was used to analyze the contents
of the selected campus newspapers by assigning each item in a paper to a content category.
Measurements of the surface area devoted to the items, measured in standard 11 pica column
inches using a transparent overlay, were also recorded. Splitting of length estimates among
categories was permitted when an article clearly fell into more than one category.
Group and individual sessions with the judges, during which a sample of papers not in
cluded in the content analysis was reviewed and assignment of contents to categories was re
hearsed and discussed, were held until general agreement over category assignment was ob
tained. The newspapers were subsequently distributed as randomly as possible to the judges,
subject to constraints imposed by the simultaneous availability of a given set of newspapers
and an analyst to read them. Order of analysis of the papers by the judges was randomized
over time of publishing and institution. No effort was made to conceal the identity of the in
stitution associated with a particular paper. All judges independently analyzed 10 identical is
sues from one of the institutions for the purpose of calculating inter-rater reliability using
pair-wise computation of Spearman's rank order correlation coefficient for the order of con
tent categories determined by each analyst. The results are displayed in Table 2. A t-test
was used to determine the significance of the correlations. All were significant at the .01
level.
Upon completion of the content analysis, scores were computed for each content category
for each institution by summing the length estimates associated with each item classified in a
given category, expressing this as a percentage of total content, and computing the mean for
the period of analysis.
41
Table 2
Inter-Rater Reliabilities
Analyst 1 2 3 4
1 1.00 .846 .806 .803
2 .846 1.00 .976 .793
3 .806 .976 1.00 .811
4 .803 .793 .811 1.00
Selected content category scores were summed to form indices which were assumed to
be representative of the Clark-Trow dimensions of campus loyalty and involvement with
ideas. The indices represented items with an emphasis on off-campus activities (correspond
ing to low campus loyalty); on-campus activities (high campus loyalty); intellectual, academic,
or cultural material (high idea involvement); or social events (low idea involvement). By refer
ence to Figure 1, it can be seen that each index (and Clark-Trow subculture) can be hypothet
ically associated with a subset of the Holland types. Thus, the Off-Campus Index was expect
ed to be associated with the artistic, social, and (to a lesser extent) enterprising types. The
On-Campus Index was expected to be associated with the realistic and (to a lesser extent) in
vestigative and conventional types. The Intellectual / Academic/ Cultural Index was expected
to be associated with the investigative, artistic, and (to a lesser extent) realistic types. The So
cial Events Index was expected to be associated with the conventional, enterprising, and (to a
lesser extent) social types.
The assignment of specific content categories to indices was accomplished independently
by the judges in response to a description of the indices by the author following the content
analysis process. Content categories assigned by a majority of judges to an index were
summed to form a score. A content category could be assigned to more than one index.
The resulting combinations of content categories to form indices were as follows:
1. Intellectual / Academic / Cultural Index: academic policies; programs for professionals; ed
42
ucational opportunities; fellowships, grants, and scholarships; state, national, and interna
tional news; local news
2. Social Index: stage reviews; live music reviews; record / recording artist reviews; film
reviews; varsity sports; bulletin board; future student activities; past student activities; per
sonality stories
3. On-Campus Index: varsity sports; campus news; student government; campus local col
or; administration news; club and I / M sports; Greek
4. Off-Campus Index: state, national, and international news; local news; consumer; loca
businesses; general features; other entertainment
One set of indices was compiled for each institution for the period of analysis.
In order to address the research question concerning the contents of the campus press, the
institutions whose newspapers were sampled in this study were segregated into the follow
ing classes: four size ranges; public vs. private; daily or weekly newspaper publication sched-
I
ule; three levels of governance style; four-year vs. two-year institutions; and WAUPM mem
bers vs. non-members. Content categories and each of the four indices derived from the
categories were averaged for each newspaper, each of the above classes, and for the total
sample. The results were tabulated for discussion of similarities and differences, and were
compared with content data obtained by Evans (1975). The four indices were tabulated by
profile frequency for each class of newspaper.
Statistical Treatment
The first hypothesis, which was based on the superimposition of Clark-Trow and Holland
typologies depicted in Figure 1, was stated as follows:
Hypothesis 2. There is an association between the distribution of newspaper content
among combinations of content categories representing dimensions of idea involvement
and campus loyalty, and the distribution of students in Holland's personality orienta
tions, as determined by degrees awarded in major fields associated with those
orientations.
Hypothesis one may be stated in its null form as follows:
Hypothesis 1. There is no association between the distribution of newspaper content
among combinations of content categories representing dimensions of idea involvement
and campus loyalty, and the distribution of students in Holland's personality orienta
tions, as determined by degrees awarded in major fields associated with those
orientations.
This hypothesis was tested by a canonical correlation procedure using the six Holland per
sonality orientations as continuous criterion variables and the following predictor variables:
the Intellectual / Academic / Cultural Index, the Social Events Index, the Off-Campus Index,
and the On-Campus Index. This multivariate multiple regression procedure was chosen as
the means of conducting the analysis because of the lack of random assignment of subjects to
conditions and the probable dependence of the predictor and criterion variables used in the
study. Continuous variables were used to maximize sensitivity and prevent loss of
information.
An alpha level of .05 for a single canonical factor was selected as sufficient grounds for re
jection of the null hypothesis.
Cooley and Lohnes (1971) recommended the use of separate multiple regression analyses
as supplements to the interpretation of the results of the canonical correlation. Furthermore,
it was anticipated that the direct testing of the first hypothesis using the canonical correlation
procedure might not be adequately powerful given the small sample size. Accordingly, H y
pothesis 1 was broken into six statistical sub-hypotheses which, expressed in the null
form, were as follows:
Hypothesis la . There is no association between the percentage of degrees awarded in
fields associated with the Investigative Orientation and a linear combination of the four
indices.
Hypothesis lb. There is no association between the percentage of degrees awarded in
fields associated with the Conventional Orientation and a linear combination of the four
indices.
Hypothesis lc. There is no association between the percentage of degrees awarded in
fields associated with the Artistic Orientation and a linear combination of the four indices.
Hypothesis Id . There is no association between the percentage of degrees awarded in
fields associated with the Enterprising Orientation and a linear combination of the four
indices.
Hypothesis le. There is no association between the percentage of degrees awarded in
44
fields associated w ith the Realistic Orientation and a linear combination of the four ind
ices.
Hypothesis If. There is no association between the percentage of degrees awarded in
fields associated with the Social Orientation and a linear combination of the four indices.
To test these hypotheses, separate stepwise multiple regression analyses were conducted.
A significance level of .05 was set as the criterion for rejection of each null hypothesis.
Judgments about the overall hypothesis based on the results of the separate analyses on
common data are possible; however, it must be realized that the alpha level is inflated in pro
portion to the number of separate treatments of the data. While the probability of achieving
by chance a given number of statistically significant results varies with the intercorrelation of
the variables as well as with the number of analyses, the maximum probability may be deter
mined by considering each analysis as being independent of the others and using the binomi
al expansion. Based on this assumption, the probability of falsely rejecting the null hypothe
sis in at least two of the separate multiple regression analyses (with individual alpha levels of
.05) was .03. This figure may be taken as the level of probability of a type I error at which the
overall null hypothesis for Hypothesis One would be rejected. That is, the null form of Hy
pothesis One would be rejected if two or more of the null subhypotheses were rejected in the
independent analyses. Such a result would be significant at the .03 level.
The second hypothesis was stated as follows:
Hypothesis 2. The association between the distribution of campus newspaper content
and the distribution of students into Holland's personality orientations is greater for cam
pus newspapers which are incorporated independently from the host institution's admin
istration and academic departments, less for newspapers which are not independently
incorporated but are, by policy and practice, editorially independent, and least for news
papers whose content is potentially dependent on the editorial judgment of representa
tives of the administration or faculty.
Hypothesis two was expressed in the null form as follows:
Hypothesis 2: The association between the distribution of campus newspaper content
and the distribution of students into Holland's personality orientations is not greater for
newspapers which are incorporated independently from the host institution's administra
tion and academic departments, nor less for newspapers which are not independently in
45
corporated but are, by policy and practice, editorially independent, nor least for newspa
pers whose content is potentially dependent on the editorial judgment of
representatives of the administration or faculty.
Each newspaper was assigned to one of three categories— independently incorporated,
not independently incorporated but editorially independent by virtue of structure and prac
tice, or potentially editorially dependent on faculty or the administration— based on the rela
tionship between the newspaper and the college or university as determined by a question
naire sent to the adviser or publisher of each paper (or personal communication) and the
flowchart described in the Appendix.
Each multiple regression equation used for testing the first hypothesis included governance
as a predictor variable. The three levels of governance were coded as two dummy variables.
The second hypothesis was tested by determining the significance of the interaction be
tween governance and the other predictor variables in the separate multiple regression ana
lyses. Rejection of the null hypothesis for each separate analysis was based on a test of sig
nificance of the coefficient of multiple correlation and of the portion of the variance explained
by each pair of interaction terms. A significance level of .05 for the interaction was required.
Rejection of the overall null hypothesis required rejection of the null hypotheses in at least
two of the separate analyses. This represents a significance level of .03, as discussed above.
Limitations
Certain limitations of the procedure used in this preliminary and exploratory study must be
recognized. Perhaps the most serious of these was the fact that practical considerations pre
cluded obtaining a random sample of the student press in the United States. While this did
not affect interpretation of the data for the newspapers and institutions sampled in the study,
it did underscore the need for caution in attempting to generalize the results of the study be
yond the sample. It was felt by the author that the sample was sufficiently broad to permit a
discussion of the results in the context of the American student press. Certain groups of
institutions were sampled in a manner that approached a true random sample: University of
California campuses, California State University and College campuses, and the WAUPM or
ganization. Generalization to these groups may be made with greater assurance of validity
than generalization to the student press as a whole.
46
Limitations on available personnel for conducting the analysis prevented the application
of more refined techniques for determining reliability estimates, such as could have been
achieved had each analyst reviewed all newspapers. In addition, there was some confound
ing of newspapers with analysts, as samples from institutions were occasionally received at a
time when only one analyst was available to read them. The high level of reliability achieved
with the single sample used for this calculation supported the belief that this was not a major
limitation, particularly since the paper chosen for computing reliability was one of the more
complex (from the standpoint of variability of content) of all the papers sampled.
A further limitation was that Holland's EAT does not consider every major field at each in
stitution. Thus, while an institution might lack a particular major subsumed under the Realis
tic type, for example, it might have a large number of students enrolled in a major not con
sidered by the EAT but which would also be relevant to an index of the Realistic orientation.
It was necessary to rely on the demonstrated validity of the EAT in addressing this concern.
47
Chapter IV
Results
This study sought to test two hypotheses regarding the nature of the association between
the campus press and the campus environment. In addition, data were gathered to explore a
research question which addressed the issue of the nature of the contents of the campus
press at the end of the 1970's.
In this chapter, the results of the tests of the hypotheses will be reviewed and discussed.
The contents of the campus press will subsequently be examined. Contents will be reviewed
on the basis of selected characteristics of the newspapers and the institutions with which
they were associated, and interpretatons will be discussed in terms of different approaches to
the purposes of the campus press and the goals of colleges and universities.
Hypothesis 1
The first hypothesis was stated as follows:
Hypothesis 1. There is an association between the distribution of newspaper content
among combinations of categories, representing dimensions of idea involvement and
campus loyalty, and the distribution of students in Holland's personality orientations,
as determined by degrees awarded in major fields associated with those orientations.
Hypothesis One may be stated in its null form as follows:
Hypopthesis 1. There is no association between the distribution of newspaper content
among combinations of categories, representing dimensions of idea involvement and
campus loyalty, and the distribution of students in Holland's personality orientations,
as determined by degrees awarded in major fields associated with those orientations.
Results
The first hypothesis was tested by a canonical correlation procedure using the six Holland
personality orientation scores based on degrees awarded in major fields for each institution
48
(see Appendix) as continuous criterion variables and the following predictor variables (com
posed of combinations of content categories): the Intellectual/Academic/Cultural ("Aca
demic") index, the Social Events index, the Off-Campus index, and the On-Campus index. A
significance level of .05 was chosen for rejection of the null hypothesis. A single canonical
variate was found to be significant. The results of the canonical correlation procedure are
displayed in Table 3.
Table 3.
Relationship Between Holland Personality Orientation Scores and Content Indices
Eigenvalue Canonical
Correlation
Chi-
Square
Degrees of
Freedom
Signifi
cance
.46137 .67924 47.27427 24 .003
Coefficients for Canonical Variables of the First Set
Realistic I Enterprising Social Artistic Conventional
22.56 35.60 27.94 28.06 14.51 31.26
Coefficients for Canonical Variables of the Second Set
Academic Social On-Campus Off-Campus
-3.65 -0.82 -0.65 2.47
On the basis of the data in Table 3, the null hypothesis was rejected. That is, there was
found to be an association between the content of student newspapers and the environment
of the host institutions, as measured by the methods indicated. The predictor variables most
heavily loaded on the canonical variate were the Intellectual/Academic/Cultural Index and
49
the Off-Campus Index. The portion of the total variance explained by the predictor and crite
rion vectors was 46.24%.
In order to further clarify the relationship between the contents of the student press and
the campus environment, six sub-hypotheses were derived from Hypothesis One. Each was
tested using a step-wise multiple regression procedure with the four indices as predictor vari
ables, and one Holland personality orientation score as the criterion variable. For the purpose
of testing Hypothesis Two, a three-level categorical governance variable coded as two dum
my variables was included, with the appropriate interaction terms, in each analysis. Interac
tion terms were initially entered as pairs in the step-wise procedure for determination of the
significance of the interactions. The results of testing the interaction will be discussed subse
quently. A significance level of .05 was chosen for rejection of each null sub-hypothesis. The
rejection of two or more of the six sub-hypotheses by chance carried a maximum probability
of .03. The sub-hypotheses were stated as follows:
Hypothesis la . There is no association between the percentage of degrees awarded in
fields associated with the Investigative Orientation and a linear combination of the four
indices.
Hypothesis lb. There is no association between the percentage of degrees awarded in
fields associated with the Conventional Orientation and a linear combination of the
four indices.
Hypothesis lc. There is no association between the percentage of degrees awarded in
fields associated with the Artistic Orientation and a linear combination of the four indices.
Hypothesis Id . There is no association between the percentage of degrees awarded in
fields associated with the Enterprising Orientation and a linear combination of the four
indices.
Hypothesis le. There is no association between the percentage of degrees awarded in
fields associated with the Realistic Orientation and a linear combination of the four ind
ices.
Hypothesis If. There is no association between the percentage of degrees awarded in
fields associated with the Social Orientation and a linear combination of the four indices.
The results of the individual multiple regression analyses are displayed in Table 4.
50
Table 4
Correlations Between Individual Holland Personality Orientation Scores and
Content Indices
Holland
Orientation
Multiple
R
R
Square
Mean
Square
Reg.
Mean
Square
Resid.
F
Investigative .840 .706 389.8 75.74 5.151
Conventional .651 .424 189.50 120.15 1.58
Artistic .565 .319 30.50 30.31 1.01
Enterprising .491 .242 87.17 127.44 0.68
Realistic .689 .475 114.3 58.8 1.94
Social .713 .508 185.64 83.77 2.22s
Note. Degrees of freedom for all analyses were 13 and 31
* significant at the .05 level
Two of the null sub-hypotheses, la and If, were rejected at the .05 level. Thus, the nul
hypothesis for Hypothesis One was rejected as well. More detailed consideration of the re
suits of the multiple regression analysis for the two significant sub-hypotheses was warrant
ed.
The analysis of the data for Hypothesis la is summarized in Table 5. The analysis
of variance for the multiple regression analysis is displayed in Table 6.
The interaction between the governance variable and the Social Events Index was signifi
cant at the .05 level. The nature of the interaction will be explored under Hypothesis Two.
Consideration of main effects was limited to the remaining three Indices. Analysis of variance
for these variables is depicted in Table 7.
51
Table 5
Relationships Between Investigative Personality Orientation Score and Content Indices
Variable Multiple
R
R
Square
R Square
Change
B Beta
D1 .242 .058 .058 7.54 .254
D2 .389 .157 .098 95.2 3.59
On-Campus .468 .219 .062 6.82 .043
Academic .587 .345 .125 -57.5 -.597
Off-Campus .650 .423 .078 64.1 .730
Social .672 .452 .028 .347 .003
D1 X Social .737 .543 .091 167.6 1.88
D2 X Social .748 .559 .016 -66.4 -.940
D1 X On-Campus .800 .641 .081 -142.4 -1.73
D2 X On-Campus .811 .658 .018 -100.8 -1.41
D2 X Academic .839 .704 .046 -114.8 -1.57
D2 X Off-Campus .840 .706 .001 32.2 .441
D1 X Off-Campus .840 .706 0 -1.44 -.021
D1 X Academic .840 .706 0 .897 .012
Constant 8.08
Note. D l, D2: Dummy Variables for Governance
Table 6
Analysis of Variance of the Investigative Personality Orientation
Variable R Square DF F
Main Effects
Indices .372 4
Governance . 157 2
Interactions
With Academic .010 2 .50
With Social Events .108 2 5.40'
With On-Campus .500 2 2.50
With Off-Campus .050 2 .250
Residual .294
30
* significant at the .05 level
Table 7
Analysis of Variance for the Investigative Personality Orientation Score— Main Effects
Variable R Square DF F
Academic .126 1 12.6*
On-Campus .063 1 6.3*
Off-Campus .078 1 7.8*
Residual .294 30
* significant at the .05 level
The effects of all three variables were significant at the .05 level. That is, there was a signif
icant association between the Investigative personality orientation score and the Intellec
tual/Academ ic/Cultural, On-Campus, and Off-Campus Indices.
The regression equation data for Hypothesis If is summarized in Table 8. The analysis
of variance is displayed in Table 9.
There were no significant interactions. Significant main effects were found for governance
and for the Intellectual/Academic/Cultural and Off-Campus Indices. That is, there was an
association between the Social personality orientation score and the Intellec
tual/Academ ic/Cultural and Off-Campus Indices.
In accordance with the proposed similarities between the Holland personality orientations
and the Clark-Trow subcultures, a set of expectations was developed regarding the associa
tion between the four content indices (which were devised in such a way as to reflect the
Clark-Trow dimensions of involvement with ideas and campus loyalty) and the six personali
ty orientations. The predicted direction of the associations, and the actual associations de
rived from the correlation matrix (which appears in full in Appendix VI) are given in Table
10. O f the 24 associations, 14 were in the expected direction.
Table 8
Relationships Between the Social Personality Orientation Score and Content Indices
Variable Multiple R R Square B Beta
R Square Change
D l .312 .097 .097 -27.8 -1.15
D2 .359 .129 .031 -66.0 -3.06
Academic .520 .270 .142 97.2 1.24
Off-Campus .586 .344 .073 -84.7 -1.19
Social Events .595 .354 .010 6.80 .068
On-Campus .597 .357 .003 -60.8 -.469
D l X On-Campus .627 .393 .035 110.6 1.65
D2 X On-Campus .662 .438 .045 105.2 1.81
D l X Social Events .679 .461 .023 -65.5 -.905
D2 X Off-Campus .710 .504 .043 41.8 .704
D2 X Social Events .712 .507 .003 16.6 .290
D l X Off-Campus .713 .508 .001 -25.5 -.451
D l X Academic .713 .508 0 22.9 .394
D2 X Academic .713 .508 0 10.1 .170
Constant 46.5
Note. D l, D2: Dummy Variables for Governance
55
Table 9
Analysis of Variance of the Social Personaity Orientation Score
Variable R Square DF F
Main Effects
Governance .129 2 3.96*
Indices .230 4
Academic .142 1 8.87*
Off-Campus .074 1 4.60*
Social Events .010 1 0.62
On-Campus .003 1 0.19
Interactions
With Academic .023 2 0.72
With Social Events .007 2 0.22
With On-Campus .810 2 2.53
With Off-Campus .014 2 0.44
Residual .490 30
* significant at the .05 level
56
Table 10
Relationships Between Individual Content Indices and Holland
Personality Orientations
R I E S A C
Academic .188 .004 -.198 .252 .082 -.233
pos pos neg neg pos neg
Social .055 -.149 .176 -.095 -.230 .160
neg neg pos pos neg pos
iOn-Campus -.015 -.332 .206 -.093 .059 .254
pos pos neg neg neg pos
Off-Campus .198 .104 -.193 .156 .107 -.280
neg neg pos pos pos neg
Note, neg: expected negative association; pos: expected positive association
Discussion
The results of the canonical correlation procedure and the six individual multiple regression
analyses supported Hypothesis 1. That is, there was found to be an association between cam
pus newspaper contents, as measured by the content analysis method described and repre
sented by the four content indices, and the environments of the campuses, as measured by
the estimate of the distribution of students into the six Holland personality orientations ob
tained by tabulating the degrees awarded in major fields associated with those orientations.
The research conducted by Holland (1963, 1968) indicated that the distribution of students
among the six personality orientations would result in a particular distribution of interests,
ambitions, goals, self-perceptions, vocational preferences, competencies, and avocations with
in the student body. In interpreting the relationship put forth in Hypothesis 1, it is necessary
to attempt to account for how this distribution of attributes became mirrored in the contents
of the student newspaper.
The most apparent interpretation is that student editors and reporters, who attended class
57
es, worked, and in many cases lived on campus, were subjected to a variety of stimuli which
reflected the interests and concerns of the student body. Among these would likely have
been the number, frequencies, and types of student activities on campus; the number and
enthusiasm of participants in particular activities; the attention attracted by spontaneous cam
pus events or by the consequences of spontaneous campus events; letters to the editor; social
conversations with other students, staff, and faculty; classroom discussions; and the mass
media. To this must be added the personal insights and intuition of the reporter or editor.
Out of his or her immersion in the life of the campus, the student reporter or editor decid
ed how matters of concern to the campus community were to be prioritized for publication.
In the context of the student press, the need to prioritize is exaggerated in comparison to the
commercial press because of the extreme limitations on space that are typical. The student
newspapers thus became distillations of the concerns of the campus community, as perceived
by the student newspaper staff. By becoming a record of the activities and issues that follow
from those concerns, the campus newspapers reflected the distribution of the Holland per
sonality orientations.
It should be noted that the prioritization process need not be relied on to produce a distri
bution of content which was correlated with the distribution of student attributes. The fre
quency of various events, behaviors, or demands for services was likely to have been related
to the distribution of traits in the student population. Even a random sampling of behaviors
within the campus community would have resulted in content that reflected trait distribution.
An alternative explanation is that the members of the student newspaper staff pursued
their own interests in print, without regard for the interests of the readership. In order to ac
count for the findings of the present study using this explanation, it would be necessary
to postulate that the student staffs tended to be randomly selected from the student bodies
(and therefore the interests of the staff represented the interests of the student population)
and were generally unconcerned with the practice of professional journalism. In light of what
evidence exists on the selection and training of student journalists, these assumptions do
not seem plausible.
In considering the results of testing Hypothesis 1, it is necessary to briefly examine the re
lationships between the individual content indices and the Holland personality orientations.
On the basis of the hypothesized relationship between the content indices and the dimen-
58
sions used by Clark and Trow to define their subcultures, and of the presumed relationship
between the Clark Trow subcultures and the Holland personality orientations, the directions
of the twenty-four associations between the content indices and Holland personalty orienta
tion scores were predicted.
Fourteen of the associations were in the predicted directions. The erroneous expectations
suggested the possibility of an imperfect correspondence between the Clark-Trow subcultures
and the Holland personality orientations. The Investigative and Realistic types were associat
ed positively with the Off-Campus Index, and negatively with the On-Campus Index, sug
gesting less campus loyalty than characterizes the academic subculture. The Social type was
positively associated with the Intellectual/Academic/Cultural Index and negatively associat
ed with the Social Events Index, suggesting greater idea involvement than characterizes the
vocational subculture. The Enterprising type was positively associated with the On-Campus
Index and negatively associated with the Off-Campus Index, indicating greater campus loyal
ty than characterizes the vocational subculture. These differences did not affect the extent to
which the content indices were able to predict the personality orientation scores, as the step
wise multiple regression procedure found the linear combination of indices which explained
the greatest amount of the variance.
Another explanation is that the content indices did not represent the Clark-Trow di
mensions. In particular, the On-Campus Index may not have been positively related to cam
pus loyalty, and the Off-Campus Index may not have been negatively associated with cam
pus loyalty. These two indices had the fewest associations in the predicted directions.
Interest in campus activities was not necessarily associated with loyalty to the campus; in
volvements in student government or varsity athletics could be pursued by individuals who
would not score high on that dimension. Similarly, interest in state, national, and interna
tional news may not have imlied the lack of campus loyalty. The content categories compris
ing the Intellectual/Academic/Cultural Index seemed most clearly identified with the corre
sponding Clark-Trow dimension, involvement with ideas, and this index had the greatest
number of correct predicted associations.
Summary
The results of the canonical correlation procedure supported the rejection of the null form
of Hypothesis 1. This finding was confirmed by the rejection of two of the null sub-hypothes-
59
es derived from Hypothesis 1. That is, support was found for an association between the
newspaper content indices and the distribution of students in the Holland personality
orientations.
The most plausible explanation for the finding is that student editors and reporters,
through their involvement in the life of the campus, became aware of the interests and con
cerns of the campus community through observation of campus events (both organized and
spontaneous), social interaction, the demand for and response to services, and other stimuli.
This awareness influenced the process of selecting material for publication. By reflecting the
interests of the readership, the distribution of students in the Holland personality orienta
tions was also mirrored. In addition, the number and frequency of different kinds of campus
behaviors was likely affected by the distribution of traits in the student population. This de
termined the number and frequency of events available for reporting.
An alternative view, that student newspaper staff members pursued their own interests,
thereby inadvertently reflecting the interests of the readership, seemed less plausible. This
view assumes random sampling of the newspaper staff and lack of journalistic competence.
Hypothesis 2
The second hypothesis was stated as follows:
Hypothesis 2. The association between the distribution of campus newspaper content
and the distribution of students into Holland's personality orientations is greater for cam
pus newspapers which are incorporated independently from the host institution's admin
istration and academic departments, less for newspapers which are not independently
incorporated but are, by policy and practice, editorially independent, and least for news
papers whose content is potentially dependent on the editorial judgment of representa
tives of the administration or faculty.
Hypothesis 2 was expressed in the null form as follows:
Hypothesis 2: The association between the distribution of campus newspaper content
and the distribution of students into Holland's personality orientations is not greater for
newspapers which are incorporated independently from the host institution's administra
tion and academic departments, nor less for newspapers which are not independently in
corporated but are, by policy and practice, editorially independent, nor least for newspa
60
pers whose content is potentially dependent on the editorial judgment of
representatives of the administration or faculty.
Results
In order to test the second hypothesis, the significance of the interaction between gover
nance and the four indices was tested for each of the separate multiple regression analyses
described above. Of the two multiple regression equations that resulted in a significant coeffi
cient of multiple correlation, only the equation in which the Investigative personality orienta
tion score was used as the criterion variable had a significant interaction. As it was necessary
to reject the null hypothesis of no interaction in at least two of the separate multiple regres
sion analyses in order to reject the null form of Hypothesis Two, the latter was not rejected.
It is of some interest, however, to examine the nature of the single significant interaction
which was found. Separate regression lines were computed using the Investigative personali
ty orientation score as the criterion variable and the Social Events Index as the predictor vari
able for each of the three levels of governance. The results are summarized in Table 11.
Table 11
Regression Equations for the Investigative Personality Orientation Score and the
Social Events Index at Three Levels of Governance
Type Constant B
Legally Independent -13.1 118.4
Editorially Independent 39.7 -52.1
Potentially Dependent 14.5 -6.8
The points of intersection were within the region of interest, which spanned all values
of the predictor variable from 0.00 to 1.00. The interaction was therefore disordinal. The graph
of the equations appears in Figure 2.
61
Predicted
Investigative
Orientation
(Percent)
100
80 90 100 70 50 40 60 10 30 20
Social Events Index
(Percent)
Fig 2. Regression Equations for Each Level of Governance Using the Investigative Personality
Orientation Score as Criterion Variable and the Social Events Index as Predictor Variable.
62
1 As can be seen from Figure 2, the slope of the regression line for the legally independent
I
newspapers was opposite to that of the newspapers representing the other two forms of gov
ernance. The slopes of the regression lines, which are a measure of the sensitivity of the crite
rion variable to changes in the Social Events Index, was greatest for the legally independent
newspapers, less for the editorially independent newspapers, and least for the potentially
dependent newspapers. This was the direction of interaction predicted in Hypothesis 2.
Discussion
The results of the six separate multiple regression analyses failed to support rejection of the
null form of Hypothesis 2. No evidence was found for differences in the association between
the contents of campus newspapers and campus environments on the basis of the ways in
which the newspapers were governed.
One interpretation of this finding is that editors and reporters working on editorially inde
pendent newspapers (whether or not they were independently incorporated) were not given
significantly more freedom to cover the campus as they saw fit than were editors and report
ers working on newspapers which were potentially under greater control of the journalism
faculty or administration, including "laboratory” papers. Indeed, respondents whose ques
tionnaires were used to assess governance resulted in a judgment of potential depend
ence indicated, with only two exceptions, that a policy of editorial independence was pur
sued. The data were consistent with Wilson's (1971) findings that independent and laboratory
newspapers did not differ significantly in quality, and did not support the view that newspa
pers operated as journalism laboratories are somehow isolated from their readerships and
less capable of addressing their concerns than independent papers.
An alternative possiblity is that editorial independence was in fact limited at the potentially
dependent papers, but that the faculty or administration advisers provided guidance to edi
tors and reporters which resulted in the same quality of campus coverage as that achieved by
independent student staff working without such guidance. Sensitivity to the campus may
have been the product of the perceptions of the adviser, rather than the students. This view
is inconsistent with the evaluations of editorial independence furnished by the advisers of the
potentially dependent papers. On the other hand, it may have been the case that the types of
stories which were most consistent with sensitivity to the campus were unlikely to produce
the kind of controversy that could result in the exercise of faculty or administration control
63
at a potentially dependent newspaper. Types of articles which were more likely to appear in
an independent paper than in a dependent paper might not have contributed significantly to
the representation of the campus environment.
Perhaps the failure to find a difference between independent and dependent papers reflect
ed the value of plurality. It could be that, on some campuses, a dependent paper is better
able to capture the ambience, while on other campuses, a more independent paper is
more sensitive. That is, governance of the newspaper may be congruent with other aspects of
the institution, this relationship facilitating the interpretation of the campus to the reader
ship.
Summary
The results of testing the interactions in the six individual multiple regression analyses did
not support rejection of the null form of Hypothesis 2. That is, there was no support for dif
ferences in the relationship between newspaper content and the campus environment on the
basis of governance.
The failure to find differences among newspapers with different governance structures may
have resulted from nearly universal practice of the principle of freedom of the press in con
nection with student newspapers, at least in terms of the types of articles which are correlat
ed with campus ambience. Sensitivity to the campus may have been promoted, rather than
restrained, by the guidance of faculty adivsers. Furthermore, differences in governance may
themselves have been related to differences in campus ambience, thereby enhancing the rela
tionship between newspaper content and the campus environment.
Limitations on Interpretation of Hypotheses 1 and 2
In making inferences based on the outcomes of testing Hypothesis 1 and Hypothesis 2
from the sample to the broader population of campus newspapers, it is important to consider
the assumptions on which the inferential statistics depended. The first of these was random
sampling from the population to form the sample. As was noted earlier, the use of a random
sample was not practical in the current study. It was felt by the author that the sample was,
however, highly representative. Furthermore, the sample approached a random sample of
University of California and California State College and University campuses and did take in
all of the members of the Western Association of University Publication Managers.
Other assumptions pertaining to multiple regression analysis include the following:
64
1. The regression of predictor and criterion variables is linear.
2. All the criterion variable arrays have the same variance.
3. Each array of the criteron variable for a given combination of predictor variables follows
the normal distribution.
The assumptions regarding linearity and homogeneity of variance were examined by refer
ence to the scatterplots of the residuals of the predictor variables plotted against the predict
ed values. The plot for the Inevestigative personality orientation showed a diagonal pattern
which indicated a moderate linear relationship between the residuals and the predicted val
ues. The plot for the Social personality orientaton generally supported the assumptions of li
nearity and homogeneity of variance.
As Kerlinger and Pethauser (1978) note, the F statistic used in testing the hypotheses is re
latively "robust" with respect to moderate violations of the basic assumptions. In the present
case, however, it is necessary to make generalizations from the data with caution.
Research Question
The content analysis used for testing the hypotheses resulted in the generation of data
which comprise a description of the selected student newspapers at the end of the 1970's.
These data will be described and discussed for each major group of institutions in the sample
in the following sequence:
(1) The sample as a whole
(2) Public and private institutions
(3) Four- and two-year institutions
(4) Size ranges of institution
(5) Newspaper governance types
(6) Weekly or daily publications
(7) Members of the Western Association of University Publication Managers
The contents of the student newspapers will, as feasible, be compared with the earlier find
ings of Evans (1975), and will be used to explore differences in approach and philosophy be
65
tween institutions and newspapers and to examine some of the goals suggested for the cam
pus press.
Data for the Sample
Results. The mean values, standard errors, standard deviations, and skewness for each con
tent category for the entire sample of 45 institutions are depicted in Table 12. Each mean rep
resents the fraction of total content devoted to the category. Categories are rank ordered.
A full description of each category is given in Appendix I.
The values of the indices formed by summing the content categories selected by the
raters who performed the content analysis are displayed in Table 13. The frequencies of
the various profiles of indices may be determined by reference to Table 14. The indices are
listed in rank order, from largest to smallest, in each profile.
Discussion. As can be seen from Table 13, the campus newspapers surveyed in this study
had a predominately on-campus and social activities orientation. What was significant was
that the indices were so well balanced. The range of the indices was .047, a figure which was
surprisingly small. The campus press at the close of the 1970's, to the extent that the present
sample represented it, appeared to have developed a considerable concern for events of im
portance to members of the campus community that take place away from the campus, with
out sacrificing the primary purpose of covering the campus.
It will be recalled that the theoretical foundation for the hypotheses of this study assumed
that the Social and Academic indices constituted opposite ends of a continuum, as did the
On-Campus and Off-Campus indices. The most frequent profile reflected a dichotomy that
placed the Social Events and On-Campus Indices above the Academic and Off-Campus ind
ices; however, the second most frequent profile reversed this pattern— the Off-Campus and
Academic Indices exceeded the On-Campus and Social. The former dichotomous pattern was
found for a total of 24 newspapers, while the latter was found for only 16. A dichotomy
of either type was not found for 5 newspapers. Thus, while the means of the indices for the
entire sample pointed to greatest emphasis on social and on-campus reporting, a significant
number of institutions emphasized academic and off-campus reporting.
66
Table 12
Content Analysis of Selected Campus Newspapers
Category Mean Std. Std. Skew
Dev. Error
1. Varsity Sports .168 .068 .010 0.556
13. General Features .124 .067 .010 1.986
15. State / National / International .122 .112 .017 0.616
2. Campus News .082 .039 .006 0.489
3. Bulletin Board .056 .034 .005 0.485
4. Administration News .048 .027 .004 1.029
16. Local News .044 .039 .006 1.040
5. Student Government .041 .027 .004 1.341
6. Personalities .029 .023 .003 1.424
7. Future Student Activities .029 .025 .004 1.115
8. General Editorials .023 .019 .003 1.081
27. Film Reviews .022 .024 .004 2.322
33. Other Entertainment .022 .021 .003 0.770
17. Educational Opportunities .019 .016 .002 1.546
11. Minorities .016 .022 .003 2.559
21. Stage Reviews .016 .017 .003 2.937
9. Student Services .015 .020 .003 2.649
24. Record Reviews .019 .018 .003 1.030
20. Student Media .013 .017 .002 3.421
10. Campus Color .012 .013 .002 2.476
14. Club & I / M Sports .012 .012 .002 1.460
23. Live Music Reviews .011 .010 .002 1.762
18. Past Stu Activities .009 .012 .002 2.525
j(Table 12 continued on next page.)
Table 12
j Content Analysis of Selected Campus Newspapers
(Continued)
Category Mean Std. Std. Skew
Dev. Error
19. Academic Policy .009 .007 .001 0.857
22. Grants and Scholarships .007 .008 .001 2.068
29. Local Business .007 .007 .001 1.990
28. University Service .006 .014 .002 3.356
25. Greek .005 .007 .001 2.729
30. Activism .004 .005 .001 1.687
12. Political Cartoons3
26. Consumer .003 .006 .001 3.623
32. Broadcast .003 .005 .001 3.200
31. Programs for Professionals .001 .002 .000 2.739
^Indicates category not retained for analysis
Table 13
Newspaper Content Indices
Index Mean Value
On-Campus .368
Social Events .359
Academic .325
Off-Campus .321
Table 14
Frequencies of Rank Order Profiles of Indices
Profile
Frequency
Academic / Off-Campus / On-Campus / Social
5
Social / Academic / On-Campus / Off-Campus
1
Off-Campus / Academic / Social / On-Campus
3
On-campus / Academic / Off-Campus / Social
2
Off-Campus / Academic / On-Campus / Social
8
Social / On-Campus / Academic / Off-Campus
5
On-Campus / Social / Academic / Off-Campus
9
Off-Campus / Social / Academic / On-Campus
1
Social / On-Campus / Off-Campus / Academic
7
On-Campus / Social / Off-Campus / Academic
3
On-Campus / Off-Campus / Social / Academic
1
69
The most heavily covered content areas may be determined by reference to Table 12. Var
sity sports was clearly the dominant topic; however, it shared the top 25% of content with
general features of political, cultural, economic, or scientific interest. The upper 50% of con
tent also included state, national, and international news followed by campus news. The re
maining categories in the upper 75% were administration news, local news, student govern
ment, personality stories, future student activities, and general editorials. This distribution
reflected in detail the well-developed sense of balance between on- and off-campus concerns
shown by the indices.
The categories receiving the least attention and occupying the bottom 10% of content were
activism, consumer, broadcast, and programs for professionals. Greek was also quite low.
The combination of all entertainment categories (stage reviews, live music reviews, re
cord/recording artist reviews, film reviews, and other entertainment) accounted for 8.9%
of content. When combined with past and future student activities, the amount : of content
devoted to activities concerned with entertainment and diversion rose to 12.7%.
Many of the categories were heavily skewed. The categories departing least from a normal
distribution were varsity sports; campus news; bulletin board; state, national, and interna
tional news; and academic policies. The other categories showed a pattern of clustering of
values below the mean, with a few newspapers exhibiting scores well above the mean. That
is, some newspapers gave greater attention to particular categories than was typical, a fact
which was consistent with the expectation that campuses would have special concerns and
that their newspapers would therefore emphasize different topics.
According to Evans (1975), the student press in 1974, five years prior to the dates of publi
cation used in the current study, had an emphasis on the following content categories (in
rank order): varsity sports; student events; personalities; student government; state, national,
and international news; academic developments; campus news; and local news. As can be
seen, the results of the present study point to a greater concern for off-campus news and fea
tures than was found in the 1974 sample. By contrast, student activities and student govern
ment received much less attention in the 1979 sample. To some extent, the campus press
seems to have become more "serious" in its approach to news coverage, and is certainly
not restrained by the boundaries of the campus.
These findings were consistent with the predictions of trends in student newspapers made
70
iby VanTurbergen (1970), Montgomery (1971), Conn (1969), and Politella (1967). They were
lalso consistent with studies by Windhauser and Lattimore (1973), Stempel (1964), Lyle and
iWilcox (1963), and Bomholdt (1966) which found support for increased coverage of off-cam
pus events and serious reporting in the campus press.
While the distribution of content in the sample demonstrated a great concern for national,
international, and, to a lesser extent, local affairs, there was little indication of campus un
rest. In addition, topics of interest to students as consumers, represented by the consumer
and local business categories, received relatively little attention. Given an upswing of atten
tion in the commercial press to consumer issues and to certain types of activism (chiefly the
anti-nuclear power movement, which was emerging in the late 1970's), the general lack of
coverage in these areas was notable.
J
Certain campus sub-groups, such as fraternities and sororities, minority groups, club and
intramural sports organizations, and activist and protest groups, received minimal coverage.
This fact should be considered in light of the increasing trend toward special interest publica
tions on campus. On the other hand, varsity sports had not lost its primacy in the news.
The distribution of contents may be used to evaluate some of the purposes which have
been put forth for the campus press. Hopkins (1957), writing over two decades ago, stated
several objectives of student newspapers. One of these was the view by student government
that the newspaper should be its house organ. Given the comparatively low emphasis on stu
dent government in the current sample, this view would no longer appear to be tenable,
if, indeed, it ever was. Similarly, the content distribution did not support the notion that the
campus paper is the official organ of the administration or that it is primarily a source of pub
licity for faculty.
Ross and Selmeyer (1974) stated that one of the functions of the campus newspaper was to
generate a record of student activities. Except for varsity sports, coverage of past student
activities was comparatively low. Campus events in the “hard news" category, which exclu
ded planned events, were quite prominent, however. Certain important campus sub-groups,
such as fraternities and sororities, club and intramural sports organizations, and minorities
were almost ignored.
Evans (1975) found that college presidents, student editors, and faculty advisers considered
the reporting of campus news the most important function of the paper. The present data
71
'supported this contention, as indicated by the primacy of the On-Campus Index. The provi
sion of experience for future journalists has also been cited as a major objective of the cam
pus press, a view which was supported by the relatively large amount of space devoted to
istate, national, and international news and in-depth feature stories, which provided a variety
of experience.
• Estrin (1956) suggested that informing the community about the institution was an impor
tant function of student newspapers. Although campus news events and varsity sports—
topics of some importance in many college towns— were well covered, other content areas
that would contribute to this function were not emphasized. Among these were university
service to the community, programs for off-campus populations, articles about local business
es providing goods and services to students, and local news.
The low local news coverage is somewhat surprising. A good deal of attention was given
to state, national, and international events. These areas are, however, generally well covered
by other media. Local news is an area where the campus paper can make a more unique con
tribution, particularly in towns where the college or university is extremely prominent and is
highly involved in the politics and economics of the community. Perhaps it is more difficult
to interest student journalists in the affairs of the community (which is often not the stu
dent's home town), in comparison to the often more universal and dramatic events of nation
al or world scope. While the data indicated that the campus press is no longer confined to
the campus, many student newspapers have not developed a significant focus on the
community.
: It has been suggested that a function of the campus press is to represent the institution to
students. Student services; educational opportunities; and fellowships, grants, and scholar
ships were not heavily covered, however. Opportunities for involvement in certain areas,
represented by such categories as Greek, minorities, club and intramural sports, and even ac
tivism received little coverage. Certain categories which could have served an informative
function for students, such as consumer news and local businesses, were also de-empha-
sized. Bulletin board items, however, were quite prominent. The paper apparently does serve
•an important function in the provision of notices, announcements, and calendars.
Limitations on Interpretation. Before concluding the description of the sample as a whole,
it is important to examine the impact of the inter-relationships between the demographic
72
measures of the institutions and their newspapers on the generalizability of the findings.
The crosstabulations are depicted in Table 15.
Table 15
Numbers of Newspapers Associated with Each Pair of Variables
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
1 0 4 0 4 1 0 3 0 4
2 2 10 3 9 3 7 2 8 4
3 2 13 11 4 3 8 4 12 3
4 1 13 13 1 5 4 5 13 1
5 0 .2 2 1 0 5 0 1 4 4 0
6 4 10 13 13 27 13 12 18 10 28 12
7 0 3 11 13 0 27 10 13 4 21 6
8 4 9 4 1 5 13 2 6 10 12 6
9 1 3 3 5 0 12 10 2 7 5
10 0 7 8 4 1 18 13 6 17 2
11 3 2 4 5 4 10 4 10 9 5
12 0 8 12 13 5 28 21 12 7 17 9
13 4 4 3 1 0 12 6 6 5 2 5
Note. Variable List: 1: Size under 5,000; 2: Size 5,001-12,000; 3: Size 12,001-25,000; 4: Size
over 25,000; 5: Two-Year Institutions; 6: Four-Year Institutions; 7: Daily Publication; 8:Weekly
Publication; 9: Legally Independent; 10: Editorially Independent; 11: Potentially Dependent;
12: Public Institutions; 13: Private Institutions
The values of the Chi Square statistic for each pair of variables whose levels are included in
Table 15 are given in Table 16.
73
TABLE 16
Associations Among Pairs of Institutional Variables
Years Frequency Status Size Type
Years 10.2* 0.8 1.2 6.5*
4 1 3 2
Frequency 2.25 29.1* 15.1
4 12 8
Status 14.3* 4.5
3 2
Size 7.6
6
Note. Variables were: Years—two- or four-year institutions; Freq.— issues per week; Sta
tus— puiblic or private institution; Size— four ranges of enrollment; Type— governance type.
* Indicates significance at the .10 level.
In general, the public institutions in the sample tended to be larger, while private institu
tions tended to be smaller. The papers from the two-year institutions were all published
weekly. There were no legally independent papers among the two-year institutions, and
there was a high concentration of potentially dependent newspapers among this group. All
of the two-year institutions were public. All of the newspapers published daily were from
four-year institutions, and the independent papers greatly outnumbered the potentially de
pendent papers. Among weekly papers, the potentially dependent papers outnumbered the
independents.
The data appearing in these two tables demonstrated the need for caution in generalizing
the findings regarding differences in newspaper content. It can be seen that the demographic
variables were confounded, a result which followed from the fact that newspapers were
drawn from the natural environment rather than being manipulated experimentally. As the
74
sample was not drawn randomly from student newspapers in the United States, the associa
tions found to be significant could not be inferred to hold for the student press as a whole.
Comparisons of content, therefore, could have been biased in a way not characteristic of the
American student press in general. In the opinion of the author, the sample was sufficiently
broad to justify the use of the findings in a preliminary inquiry into student press contents.
The implications mentioned as each institutional or newspaper comparison is discussed
should be regarded as indications of the need for future research rather than final judgments.
Public and Private Institutions
Results. The sample was divided into public and private institutions. The means for the
content categories for these two groups are presented in Table 17. The indices are presented
in Table 18. The frequency distribution of profiles of the content indices is shown in Table 19.
Discussion. As is evident from a study of the indices in Table 18, the public newspapers
showed a greater academic focus than the private newspapers. Furthermore, the public
newspapers were more balanced with respect to content. The range of the indices was .152
for the private newspapers, but only .022 for the public newspapers.
The most common profiles for newspapers from public institutions were the two dichoto
mies with the Social / On-Campus indices over the Academic /Off-Campus indices and the
Academic/Off-Campus indices over the Social/On-Campus. Overall, there were 15 cases
in which the Social/On-Campus pair dominated, as opposed to 13 in which the Academ
ic / Off-Campus pair predominated. A total of 5 cases did not correspond to either
dichotomy.
For private institutions, the Social / On-Campus over Academic/Off-Campus dichotomy
was the most common pattern, with 9 cases, in contrast to only 3 of the reverse. All cases
were dichotomies of one of the two types. This analytical approach again illustrates the great
er on-campus and social activity emphasis, and lower diversity, of the private newspapers.
The content categories receiving the greatest and least attention were similar for both
groups. Private newspapers were characterized by less emphasis on administrative news,
general features, and local, state, national, and international news than were the public
newspapers. Evans (1975) noted a similar difference in off-campus news coverage between
75
Table 17
Content Analysis of Newspapers from Public and Private Institutions
Public Institutions Private Institutions
Category Mean Rank Mean Rank
i
1. Varsity Sports .168 1 .168 1
2. Campus News .077 4 .094 3
3. Bulletin Board .053 6 .064 5
!4. Administration News .054 5 .031 9
5. Student Government. .038 8 .050 6
6. Personality Stories .030 9 .025 11
7. Future Student Activities .026 10 .036 8
8. General Editorials .021 11 .030 10
9. Student Services .016 14 .015 15
,10. Campus Color .010 20 .017 15
11. Minorities .015 15 .017 15
•12. Political Cartoons
;13. General Features .131 3 .104 2
14. Club and I / M Sports .013 17 .011 19
;15. State/National/International News .132 2 .093 4
16. Local News .052 7 .023 12
17. Educational Opportunities .020 12 .016 16
18. Past Student Activities .008 21 .011 19
19. Academic Policy .010 20 .007 20
20. Student Media .012 18 .014 17
21. Stage Reviews .014 16 .022 13
'22. Grants and Scholarships .007 22 .005 22
(Table 17 continued on next page.)
76
Table 17
Content Analysis of Newspapers from Public and Private Institutions
(Continued)
Public Institutions Private Institutions
Category Mean Rank Mean Rank
23. Live Music Reviews .011 19 .012 18
24. Record Reviews .017 13 .023 12
25. Greek .004 24 .006 21
26. Consumer .002 26 .004 23
27. Film Reviews .016 14 .040 7
28. University Service .005 23 .007 20
29. Local Business .005 23 .011 10
30. Activism .001 24 .003 24
31. Programs for Professionals .001 27 .001 25
32. Broadcast .002 26 .004 23
33. Other Entertainment .021 11 .025 14
L
77
Table 18
Content Indices for Public and Private Newspapers
Index Mean Value
Public
On-Campus .365
Academic .353
Off-Campus .343
Social .343
Private
Social .401
On-Campus .377
Off-Campus .260
Academic .249
Table 19
Frequencies of Profiles of Content Indices of Public and Private Newspapers
Profile Frequency
Academic / Off-Campus / On-Campus / Social
Public
5
Private
0
Social / Academic / On-Campus / Off-Campus 1 0
Off-Campus / Academic / Social / On-Campus 1 2
On-Campus / Academic / Off-Campus / Social 2 0
Off-Campus / Academic / On-Campus / Social 7 1
Social / On-Campus / Academic / Off-Campus 3 2
On-Campus / Social / Academic / Off-Campus 7 2
Off-Campus / Social / Academic / On-Campus 1 0
Social / On-Campus / Off-Campus / Academic 4 3
On-Campus / Social / Off-Campus / Academic 1 2
On-Campus / Off-Campus / Social / Academic 1 0
public and private papers in his 1974 sample, although the public newspapers in the present
sample had somewhat less emphasis on student government and campus color than in the
1974 sample.
There was a little difference in emphasis on entertainment in the two groups of newspa
pers. The combined score for entertainment categories was .09 for private papers and .08
for public papers. With student activities added, however, these figures showed a greater
disparity. They were .137 and .115, respectively.
It is possible to speculate on the meaning of some of the differences in content between
newspapers from public and private institutions in terms of the differing priorities of these
two groups of colleges. In the newspapers from the private institutions, the greater emphasis
on campus life may have reflected the fact that the maintenance of a highly distinctive image
79
can be quite important to a private school for attracting and holding students. Clark (1960)
has noted the greater salience of the images of private institutions in comparison to public
colleges and universities. Since the costs of attending private colleges are often higher than
the costs of attending tax-supported institutions, the private school must be seen to be offer
ing something beyond what the public schools provide; one of these offerings may be a well-
defined and highly regarded "spirit of place," with an emphasis on traditions and student ac
tivities. Such an emphasis might also be related to the fact that students attending non-sec
tarian private institutions tend to come from higher socio-economic status families than stu
dents attending public institutions (Astin, 1965). On the other hand, the greater emphasis on
the administration in newspapers from public institutions may have reflected a greater con
cern with student, public, and political input into the running of the college.
Four-Year and Two-Year Institutions
Results. The sample was divided into newspapers from four-year institutions and newspa
pers from two-year California Community Colleges. The distribution of their contents is
shown in Table 20. The mean values of the content indices for newspapers from two-year
and four-year institutions are depicted in Table 21.
Discussion. The average index profiles for the two types of newspaper were similar in that
both represented the Social/On-Campus over Academic/Off-Campus dichotomy. The Social
index was dominant over On-Campus and the Academic was dominant over the Off-Campus
for two-year newspapers, while the On-Campus index was dominant over the Social and
the Off-Campus was dominant over the Academic for four-year newspapers. What was per
haps most significant was the greater balance of the four-year papers. The range of the in
dices was .058 for these papers, compared to .270 for the two-year papers. The latter would
seem to have had a great prediminance of social and campus-oriented writing.
Because of the small number of two-year newspapers in the sample, a detailed tabulation
of index profiles for the two groups will not be presented. Briefly, three of the five communi
ty colleges adhered to the On-Campus/Social/Academic/Off-Campus index order. The
other two cases were of the Social/Academic/On-Campus/Off-Campus and Social/On-
Campus / Academic / Off-Campus types.
As would be expected from this analysis, the four-year papers had a greater emphasis on
local, state, national, and international news. More space was given to minority issues and
80
Table 20
Content Analysis of Newspapers from Four- and Two-Year Institutions
Two-Year Four-Year
Institutions Institutions
Category Mean Rank Mean Rank
1. Varsity Sports .193 1 .165 1
2. Campus News .096 4 .080 4
3. Bulletin Board .050 7 .057 5
4. Administration News .066 5 .045 7
5. Student Government .045 9 .041 8
6. Personality Stories .051 6 .026 9
7. Future Student Activities .068 4 .024 10
8. General Editorials .047 8 .020 13
9. Student Services .027 13 .014 15
10. Campus Color .006 21 .013 16
11. Minorities .017 17 .016 14
12. Political Cartoons
;i3. General Features .095 3 .127 3
14. Club & I / M Sports .008 20 .013 16
15. State /N ational /International News .028 12 .134 2
16. Local News .029 11 .046 6
17. Educational Opportunities .038 10 .016 14
18. Past Student Activities .016 18 .008 20
19. Academic Policy .011 19 .009 19
20. Student Media .016 18 .012 17
(Table 20 continued on next page.)
81
Table 20
Content Analysis of Newspapers from Four- and Two-Year Institutions
(Continued)
Two-Year Four-Year
Institutions Institutions
Category Mean Rank Mean Rank
21. Stage Reviews .019 15 .016 14
22. Grants and Scholarships .018 16 .005 23
23. Live Music Reviews .008 20 .011 18
24. Record Reviews .003 23 .021 12
25. Greek .002 24 .005 23
26. Consumer .001 25 .003 25
27. Film Reviews .020 14 .022 11
28. University Service .006 21 .006 22
29. Local Business .002 24 .007 21
30. Activism
.002 24 .004 24
31. Programs for Professionals .004 22 .001 26
32. Broadcast .003 23 .003 25
33. Other Entertainment .003 23 .024 10
82
Table 21
Content Indices of Two- and Four-Year Newspapers
Index t M ean Value
Two-Year
Social .429
On-Campus .416
Academic .224
Off-Campus .159
Four-Year
On-Campus .3 77
Social .369
Off-Campus .341
Academic .319
general features. The two-year papers had a greater emphasis on administration news, per
sonality stories, student activities, and student services. The two-year papers also had more
content devoted to educational opportunities and fellowships, grants, and scholarships, de
spite the lower academic index.
The four-year papers had somewhat more entertainment coverage— .09 for all entertain
ment categories in comparison to .05 for two-year papers. When student activities were com
bined with entertainment scores, however, the situation reversed. The four-year score was
.126 while the two-year score was .140. Perhaps the lower entertainment score resulted from
the fact that the two-year schools were commuter institutions.
The lower coverage of local news among the papers from the two-year colleges was inter-
83
jesting, given that the institutions in this sample were community colleges, administered by a
jlocal district. Historically, community colleges have had special relationships with their com-
i
munities, making education available to local students who could not afford, or could not
imeet the entrance requirements of, four-year institutions remote from the community (Bru-
jbacher and Rudy, 1976).
! The higher coverage of student services, educational opportunities, and campus affairs in
; general among the community college papers may have indicated a greater emphasis
on integrating the student into campus life. Perhaps the expectations of students and admin
istrators differed at four- and two-year schools in terms of the role of the institution in en
riching the students' experience outside the classroom. Brubacher and Rudy (1976) have de
scribed the historical origins of the community college in attempts to democratize and
broaden the scope of American higher education. The community college helped open higher
education to the masses. Students who would have been prevented from attending college
on the basis of economic, racial, religious, or geographic barriers were given the opportunity
for two years of advanced study beyond high school, with an emphasis on terminal pro
grams. This population may have required greater nurturing to adjust to and fully benefit
from college life, in comparison to the more highly selected population attending four-year
colleges and universities. This attitude may have been reflected in the contents of the student
newspaper.
College and University Enrollment
Results. The sample was divided into four size categories on the basis of enrollment: 5,000
or less; more than 5,000 but less than 12,000; more than 12,000 but less than 25,000; more
than 25,000. The distribution of content among the categories is given in Table 22. The
values of the content indices are given in Table 23.
Discussion. As can be seen by reference to Table 23, as the size of the institution increased,
the content distribution shifted from an unbalanced dominance of Social/On-Campus over
Academic/Off-Campus (with a range of .304), to a greater balance with the same pattern
(with a range of .140), to a diminished emphasis on the Social index (with a range of .031), to
dominance of the Academic/Off-Campus over Social / On-Campus (with a range of .060).
Some detail can be gained from an examination of Table 22. Group one (the smallest
84
Table 22
Content Analysis of Newspapers from Institutions in Four Size Ranges
0-5,000 5,000-12,000 12,000-25,000 25,000-
Category Mean Rank Mean Rank Mean Rank Mean Rank
1. Var Spt .209 1 .163 1
2. Camp News .062 4 .084 3
3. Bui Brd .073 3 .063 5
4. Admin .031 10 .052 6
5. Stu Gov .061 5 .047 7
6. Person .028 11 .026 12
7. Fut Stu Act .052 6 .041 8
8. Gen Ed .037 8 .029 10
9. Stu Serv .020 13 .019 16
10. Camp Color .014 12 .012 19
11. Minor .014 17 .021 15
12. Polit Cart
13. Gen Feat .105 2 .134 2
14. Club & I / M .007 20 .016 17
15. S t/N a t/In t .035 9 .074 4
16. Local .015 16 .022 14
17. Ed Op .018 15 .025 13
18. Past Stu Act .020 13 .009 21
19. Acad .009 18 .005 23
20. Stu Media .014 17 .019 16
21. Stage .009 18 .022 14
.148 1 .182 1
.094 4 .073 4
.058 5 .043 6
.052 6 .043 7
.038 9 .035 8
.039 7 .021 10
.023 11 .019 11
.023 11 .014 15
.014 14 .012 17
.011 16 .010 19
.012 15 .016 14
.129 3 .114 3
.012 15 .012 17
.137 2 .173 2
.051 7 .064 5
.014 14 .018 12
.009 18 .006 20
.010 17 .011 18
.008 19 .011 18
.019 12 .011 18
(Table 22 continued on next page.)
,85
Table 22
Content Analysis of Newspapers from Institutions in Four Size Ranges
(Continued)
0-5,000 5,000-12,000 12,000-25,000 25,000-
Category Mean Rank Mean Rank Mean Rank Mean Rank
22. Grants .008 19 .009 21 .006 20 .006 20
23. Live Music .020 13 .010 20 .009 18 .011 18
24. Record .024 12 .027 11 .012 15 .017 13
25. Greek .003 21 .004 24 .006 20 .004 22
26. Consumer .008 19 .001 26 .002 24 .003 23
27. Film .041 7 .032 9 .015 13 .017 13
28. Univ Serv .014 17 .004 24 .005 21 .006 20
29. Local Bus .018 15 .007 22 .005 21 .005 21
30. Activism .000 24 .003 22 .004 22 .006 20
31. Prog Prof .001 23 .001 26 .001 25 .001 25
32. Broadcast .002 22 * .001 26 .003 23 .004 22
33. Other Ent .017 14 .014 18 .024 10 .028 9
86
Table 23
Content Indices of Newspapers in Four Size Ranges
Index ’ Mean Value
Group 1: 0-5,000
Social .495
On-Campus .396
Off-Campus .197
Academic .191
Group 2: 5,000-12,000
Social .392
On-Campus .377
Academic .271
Off-Campus .252
Group 3: 12,000-25,000
On-Campus .362
Academic .347
Off-Campus .347
Social .331
(Table 23 continued on next page.)
87
Table 23
Content Indices of Newspapers in Four Size Ranges
(Continued)
Index Mean Value
Group 4: 25,000-
Off-Campus .386
Academic .385
On-Campus .359
Social .326
schools) had the lowest local, state, national, and international news. It had the highest var
sity sports, student government, and student activities content. Somewhat suprisingly, it also
had the lowest administration news content. The group showed a high feature content.
Group four (the largest schools) showed the lowest bulletin board, student government, and
student services content. It had the largest other entertainment content, largely due to the
contribution of professional sports to this category.
As size of the school increased, entertainment coverage tended to drop. In order of increas
ing enrollment, the combined entertainment scores were .111, .105, .079, .084. Adding stu
dent activities resulted in scores of .183, .155, .111, .109.
It has been reported that smaller institutions are likely have a greater impact on the values
and attitudes of students than larger institutions (Jacob, 1957). The newspapers from the
smallest institutions in the sample tended to have the greatest coverage of areas that could be
interpreted as "invitations to become involved" in the life of the campus. Perhaps the diver
sity of the larger institutions inhibited fuller coverage of involvement opportunities. Yet, it
would seem that large colleges and universities have the greatest need for inducements for
student participation in the wide range of activities available. Although feelings of alienation
88
and isolation, which have often been cited at large schools, can be countered by involvement,
the newspapers at the larger institutions seemed to do a poorer job of covering areas con
nected with involvement than did the papers from the smaller schools. Even “bulletin board"
coverage, which might be expected to increase with the number of available activities, was
negatively associated with size.
Governance Style
Results. The sample was divided into three groups on the basis of the governance of the
newspaper. The first group was made up of newspapers which were legally independent
of the host institution. The second group contained newspapers which were not legally inde
pendent but which were editorially independent. The third group represented newspapers
which were potentially dependent on the host institution for the direction of editorial and
news content. The values for the content categories for these governance types are displayed
in Table 24. The content indices are depicted in Table 25. The patterns formed by the indices
are given in Table 26.
Discussion. As can be seen from inspection of Table 25, the legally independent papers
had the greatest off-campus and academic emphasis. The range of the indices was .068, how
ever, which indicated a high order of balance between the indices. The editorially independ
ent newspapers reversed the pattern of indices, emphasizing on-campus and social concerns.
The balance was still quite high, however, with a range of .043. The potentially dependent
newspapers had a heavy social and on-campus emphasis, with a range of .145. These papers
showed considerably less balanced coverage than did the two types of editorially independ
ent newspaper.
From inspection of Table 26 it can be seen that the most frequent pattern for the legally in
dependent papers was the Off-Campus/Academic over On-Campus/ Social dichotomy.
There was somewhat more variation among the editorially independent papers. There was
considerable representation of the Academic / Off-Campus over On-Campus / Social dichoto
my, but the majority of patterns emphasized on-campus and social concerns. Only three of
the fourteen dependent papers had patterns dominated by the Off-Campus and Academic
Indices. <
The legally independent papers had the strongest local, state, national, and international
news coverage. They were weakest in bulletin board, administration, student government,
89
Table 24
Content Analysis of Newspapers with Three Governance Types
Independently Editorially Potentially
Incorporated Independent Dependent
Category Mean Rank Mean Rank Mean Rank
1. Varsity Sports .161 2 .155 1 .192 1
2. Campus News .086 4 .074 4 .090 3
3. Bulletin Board .048 5 .058 5 .061 5
4. Administration News .041 6 .053 6 .046 6
5. Student Government .036 7 .042 7 .046 7
6. Personality Stories .018 12 .024 11 .045 8
7. Future Student Activities .022 10 .028 9 .036 9
8. General Editorials .018 12 .022 13 .030 10
9. Student Services .019 11 .011 19 .018 14
10. Campus Color .008 17 .013 18 .013 16
11. Minorities .006 19 .023 12 .015 15
12. Political Cartoons
13. General Features .112 3 .127 2 .128 2
14. Club & I / M Sports .011 15 .017 16 .007 21
15. State/National/International News .189 1 .123 3 .064 4
16. Local News .048 5 .040 8 .046 6
17. Educational Opportunities .018 12 .016 17 .023 11
18. Past Student Activities .003 21 .010 20 .012 19
19. Academic Policy .010 16 .009 21 .009 20
20. Student Media .005 20 .017 16 .012 19
(Table 24 continued on next page.)
90
Table 24
; Content Analysis of Newspapers with Three Governance Types
(Continued)
I Independently Editorially Potentially
Incorporated Independent Dependent
Category Mean Rank Mean Rank Mean Rank
21. Stage Reviews .011 15 .017 16 .020 12
22. Grants and Scholarships .007 18 .006 23 .007 21
23. Live Music Reviews .012 14 .013 18 .007 21
24. Record Reviews .013 13 .026 10 .014 17
25. Greek .008 17 .005 24 .002 24
26. Consumer .002 22 .003 26 .003 23
27. Film Reviews .031 9 .020 14 .019 13
28. University Service .001 23 .008 22 .007 21
29. Local Business .010 16 .005 24 .007 21
30. Activism .006 19 .004 25 .001 25
31. Programs for Professionals .001 23 .001 27 .001 25
32. Broadcast .001 23 .003 26 .004 22
33. Other Entertainment .035 8 .019 15 .014 17
Table 25
Newspaper Content Indices for the Three
Types of Governance
Index Mean Value
Independently Incorporated
Off-Campus .386
Academic .385
On-Campus .351
Social .318
Editorially Independent
On-Campus .359
Social .350
Academic .323
Off-Campus *316
Potentially Dependent
Social .406
On-Campus .395
Academic .277
Off-Campus .261
92
Table 26
Frequencies of Profiles of Content Indices for Three Types of Governance
Profile Frequency
Independently Editorially Potentially
Incorporated Independent Dependent
Academic / Off-Campus / On-Campus / Social 1 4 0
Social / Academic / On-Campus / Off-Campus 0 1 0
Off-Campus / Academic / Social / On-Campus 1 1 1
On-Campus / Academic / Off-Campus / Social 1 1 0
Off-Campus / Academic / On-Campus / Social 4 2 2
Social / On-Campus / Academic / Off-Campus 0 2 3
On-Campus / Social / Academic / Off-Campus 1 3 5
Off-Campus / Social / Academic / On-Campus 0 1 0
Social / On-Campus / Off-Campus / Academic 1 3 3
On-Campus / Social / Off-Campus / Academic 2 1 0
On-Campus / Off-Campus / Social / Academic 1 0 0
93
personality stories, student activities, and campus color. Surprisingly, they were the highest
in coverage of the Greek category, but lowest in feature coverage. The editorially independ
ent papers had the highest administration and minority coverage, but the lowest varsity
sports and local news coverage. The potentially dependent papers were the leaders in cover
age of varsity sports, campus news, bulletin board, student government, personality stories,
student activities, and educational opportunities.
Evans (1975) described independent papers, a form of governance then in its relative infan
cy, as seeking a balance between off- and on-campus reporting. While there were indications
in the present sample of an off-campus emphasis, a balance does seem to have been
achieved. Evans described the dependent papers as "top heavy" with administrative news
and "bulletin board" type material. This description is consistent with the present analysis.
Evans described the editorially independent papers as a coalescence of the two other forms, a
description which was also confirmed by the present data. The editorially independent pa
pers had a balance between on- and off-campus reporting, as did the legally independents,
but there was more emphasis on on-campus reporting.
The differences between the three types of newspapers were consistent with some expecta
tions regarding the effect of styles of governance. The independently incorporated papers
may have had a greater need for advertising revenue and a broad readership to sustain inde
pendent publication. Thus, there was a greater emphasis on off-campus news and a de-em
phasis of campus life and student activities. The editorially independent papers, which did
not need to cultivate an off-campus readership, were more economically and (in comparison
to the dependent papers) administratively free to explore such potentially controversial areas
as the administration and minority concerns. The potentially dependent papers had the low
est coverage of the administration, minorities, and activism. The emphasis was on campus
life, a field which may have had less potential for divisive or embarrassing controversy and
which could be directly experienced by student reporters, a factor with importance for jour
nalism instruction, since the direct reporting of experienced events is a fundamental skill.
Publication Frequency
Results. The sample was divided into two groups on the basis of frequency of publication.
Papers publishing three or more times a week were classified as daily, while papers publish
94
ing less frequently than three times a week were classified as weekly. The values of the con
tent categories for these two groups are displayed in Table 27. The content indices are
depicted in Table 28.
Discussion. As can be seen from Table 28, the daily papers emphasized the Academic and
Off-Campus Indices over the On-Campus and Social Indices, while the situation was re
versed for the weekly papers. The range for the dailies (.061) reflected more balanced cover
age than did that for the weeklies (.180).
The weekly papers had somewhat greater feature coverage, a fact also noted by Evans
(1975). The weeklies tended to be quite low in state, national, and international news, while
this was the highest category for the dailies. The weekly papers tended to have more cover
age devoted to campus news, bulletin board, administration news, student government, per
sonality stories, educational opportunities, student media, and fellowships and scholarships.
The weekly papers had double the coverage devoted to student activities and services that
the dailies had. Weeklies had somewhat less entertainment coverage (.085 as compared to
.091 for dailies), but the combined entertainment and student activities scores were higher for
the weeklies (.141) than for the dailies (.117).
In comparing the daily and weekly papers, the fact that the weekly papers had only one
opportunity each week to present all of the official notices, announcements, calendars of
events, reports of coming student activities, and similar material (publication of which is a
major function of any campus paper) must be considered. Furthermore, weekly publication
prevented up-to-date presentation of major news items. These two factors help account for
the higher campus and feature coverage among the weekly papers. It should be noted
that about half of the weekly papers were also classified as potentially editorially dependent,
a far greater proportion than for the dailies.
W A U P M Members
Results. The final division of the sample that will be reviewed was into members and non
members of the Western Association of University Publication Managers (WAUPM). The pur
pose of the division was to permit members of this organization to compare profiles of their
individual institutions (provided by the author) with those of the W AUPM group as well
as with the profiles of the other divisions of institutions in the sample. The values of the con
tent categories for these two groups are given in Table 29.
95
:_____________
Table 27
Content Analysis of Newspapers with Daily and Weekly Publication Schedules
Daily Weekly
Category Mean Rank Mean Rank
1. Varsity Sports .170 2 .161 2
2. Campus News .076 4 .093 3
3. Bulletin Board .050 6 .063 4
4. Administration News .043 7 .055 5
5. Student Government .036 8 .047 6
6. Personality Stories .020 10 .043 8
7. Future Student Activities .020 10 .044 7
8. General Editorials .014 12 .038 9
9. Student Services .011 15 .024 13
10. Campus Color .010 16 .015 16
11. Minorities .013 13 .021 14
12. Political Cartoons
13. General Features .118 3 .135 1
14. Club & I / M Sports .012 14 .013 17
15. State / National / International News .180 1 .033 10
16. Local News .053 5 .032 11
17. Educational Opportunities .014 12 .024 13
18. Past Student Activities .006 18 .012 18
19. Academic Policy .010 16 .008 21
20. Student Media .014 17 .020 15
21. Stage Reviews .014 12 .021 14
22. Grants and Scholarships .005 20 .009 20
(Table 27 continued on next page.)
96
Table 27
Content Analysis of Newspapers with Daily and Weekly Publication Schedules
(Continued)
Daily Weekly
Category Mean Rank Mean Rank
23. Live Music Reviews .011 15 .010 19
24. Record Reviews .018 11 .015 16
25. Greek .007 18 .001 25
26. Consumer .002 22 .002 24
27. Film Reviews .018 11 .030 12
28. University Service .006 19 .007 22
29. Local Business .005 20 .008 21
30. Activism .005 20 .003 23
31. Programs for Professionals .001 23 .002 24
32. Broadcast .004 21 .001 25
33. Other Entertainment .030 9 .009. 20
Table 28
Content Indices for Newspapers Pub
lished Daily and Weekly
Index VIean Value
Daily
Off-Campus .389
Academic .382
On-Campus .353
Social .328
Weekly
Social .399
On-Campus .386
Academic .242
Off-Campus .219
98
Table 29
Content Analysis of Newspapers from WAUPM Members and Non-Members
W AUPM Other
Category Mean Rank Mean Rank
1. Varsity Sports .168 2 .162 1
2. Campus News .068 4 .090 4
3. Bulletin Board .054 5 .060 5
4. Administration News .044 6 .046 6
5. Student Government .040 7 .042 7
6. Personality Stories .020 9 .031 9
7. Future Student Activities .019 10 .028 11
8. General Editorials .013 15 .027 12
9. Student Services .011 17 .016 17
10. Campus Color .011 17 .014 19
11. Minorities .017 12 .015 18
12. Political Cartoons
13. General Features .119 3 .134 2
14. Club & I / M Sports .013 15 .013 20
15. State / National / International News .172 1 .103 3
16. Local News .054 5 .039 8
17. Educational Opportunities .014 14 .018 16
18. Past Student Activities .008 19 .008 23
19. Academic Policy .011 17 .007 24
20. Student Media .010 18 .014 19
21. Stage Reviews .012 16 .019 15
22. Grants and Scholarships .006 20 .005 25
(Table 29 continued on next page.)
a
Table 29 —
Content Analysis of Newspapers from WAUPM Members and Non-Members
(Continued)
W AUPM Other
Category Mean Rank Mean Rank
23. Live Music Reviews .011 17 .011 21
24. Record Reviews .018 11 .023 13
25. Greek .008 14 .003 27
26. Consumer .003 22 .003 27
27. Film Reviews .015 13 .029 10
28. University Service .008 19 .004 26
29. Local Business .005 21 .009 22
30. Activism .005 21 .003 27
31. Programs for Professionals .001 23 .001 29
32. Broadcast .003 22 .002 28
33. Other Entertainment .028 8 .021 14
The content indices for W AUPM members and non-members are given in Table 30. Th?
profile patterns are shown in Table 31.
Discussion. W AUPM members tended to have the Off-Campus / Academic over On-Cam
pus /Social pattern, while non-members tended to have the reverse. The range of indices for
W AUPM members was .055, while for non-members it was .065. Both groups of newspapers
showed good balance in coverage, but a different emphasis.
Of the 17 W AUPM members in the sample, 10 had the pattern emphasizing the Academic:
and Off-Campus Indices, while only 6 emphasized the Social and On-Campus Indices. One
member paper had a pattern which did not reflect either dichotomy.
The W AUPM newspapers had more coverage devoted to local, state, national, and interna
tional news, academic policies, fraternities and sororities, and university service. They hac
less coverage of campus news, personality stories, student activities, and local businesses
The W AUPM papers also had less space devoted to general feature stories.
Summary
The student newspapers in the current sample were largely campus oriented, but with
a balance in coverage between on- and off-campus affairs. The greatest coverage was given to
varsity sports; general features; state, national, and international news; and campus news.
Other leading topics were administration news, student government, personality stories, fu
ture student activities, and general editorials.
Areas receiving the least coverage were activism, consumer news, broadcast, programs for
professionals, and Greek. Many of the categories were heavily skewed, indicating a cluster
ing of scores below the mean with a few scores well above the mean.
When compared with newspapers published in 1974, the papers in the sample had more
space devoted to state, national, and international concerns. The campus newspapers ap
peared to have developed a greater emphasis on "serious” news coverage, consistent with
the expectations of some of the scholars in the field.
The distribution of content was relevant for viewing some of the purposes attributed to the
student press. Certain views received little support. These were the notions that the student
press should be a house organ for student government, that it represents the insitution to the
community, or that it should be the official publication of the administration. Reporting cam-
101
Table 30
Newspaper Content Indices for
WAUPM and Non-WAUPM Institutions
Index Mean Value
WAUPM
Off-Campus .380
Academic .377
On-Campus .353
Social .325
Non-WAUPM
Social .370
On-Campus .369
Off-Campus .309
Academic .305
102
Table 31
Frequency of Content Index Profiles for WAUPM Members
Profile Frequency
Academic / Off-Campus / On-Campus / Social 4
Off-Campus / Academic / On-Campus / Social 6
Social / On-Campus / Academic / Off-Campus 1
On-Campus / Social / Academic / Off-Campus 1
Off-Campus / Social / Academic / On-Campus 1
Social / On-Campus / Off-Campus / Academic 2
On-Campus / Social / Off-Campus / Academic 2
pus news was the function best supported by the data. It should be noted, however, that
certain groups— minorities, club and intramural sports organizations, fraternities and sorori
ties, and activists— received very little coverage. Certain important areas, such as student
services, educational opportunities, scholarships and grants were also not well covered.
In comparing newspapers from public and private institutions, the former showed a great
er academic focus, and a greater balance between on- and off- campus coverage. The greater
campus focus of the private institutions may have reflected the importance of campus tradi
tions and the salience of the image at these colleges and universities.
When newspapers from two-year and four-year institutions were compared, those of the
former demonstrated a greater preponderance of campus coverage, the newspapers from
four-year colleges and universities showing a more balanced approach. The concept of the
community college as an instrument for broadening the srnne of hieher education, bringing it
to "the masses," may have been related to the greater emphasis on student services, educa
tional opportunities, and campus affairs in the two-year papers.
Comparison of newspapers from institutions in four size ranges indicated a shift from a
strong campus emphasis in the smaller papers toward greater balance in the mid-range pa
pers, and finally to a preponderance of off-campus material in the largest papers, although
103
coverage was still balanced. This relationship was consistent with reports of greater student
involvement at smaller institutions. Although larger schools could be presumed to have more
activities, their coverage in this area was poorer, a fact which has implications for student de
velopment at these institutions.
In comparing newspapers with different governance structures, it was found that the inde
pendently incorporated papers had the greatest off-campus focus, although coverage was
relatively balanced. Editorially independent papers had an on-campus emphasis, but retained
balance. The potentially dependent papers were strongly campus-oriented. This was consist
ent with the findings of Evans (1975). Differences in content may have been related to finan
cial needs, different readership patterns, and the extent of administrative control.
Comparison of newspapers on the basis of publication frequency indicated that papers pub
lished weekly had less off-campus news, but greater feature coverage. Given the need to
publicize important campus events and official notices, it seemed reasonable that weekly pa
pers would have to devote a greater percentage of their scarce space to these areas. Feature
articles typically are prepated over a long period of time, consistent with a weekly schedule.
Furthermore, off-campus news stories that break daily are more difficult to handle in a week
ly format.
An examination of W AUPM members indicated that, in comparison to non-members, there
was a greater focus on off-campus and intellectual material, although coverage was balanced.
While the W AUPM members had less space devoted to feature stories, they had greater cov
erage of local, state, national, and international news; academic policies; fraternities and so
rorities; and university service.
Because of the fact that demographic variables were confounded in the non-random sample
in a way which may have differed from the student press in the United States as a whole,
generalizations from these findings should be limited.
104
Chapter V
Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations
Although there are over 2,500 student newspapers published at colleges and universities
around the United States (Inglehard, 1973), a number of factors have discouraged widespread
familiarity with the campus press among student development professionals. These factors
include court decisions regarding freedom of the student press, the trend toward independ
ence in campus newspaper governance, and lack of experience with journalism among most
college student personnel workers (Weisinger, 1976). Often, the campus press captures the
attention of the administration and faculty only when its contents are highly controversial or
threaten the status quo of the institution. While treated with '"benign neglect" by practition
ers involved with student development, the campus press has been shown to be the princi
pal source of campus information for students (McCleneghan, 1975; Wanty, 1969)f who are, in
general, highly receptive to its messages (Darrell, 1975).
Neglect of aspects of the student press is significant in light of the movement in the stu
dent development profession toward an aggressive approach to campus problems. It has
been shown that the non-academic sectors of institutions of higher learning have a significant
impact on student development (Lehman, 1965; Walz and Miller, 1969; Drum and Fiegler,
1973). In fact, Jacob (1957) asserted that extra-curricular aspects of the environment had more
of an effect in changing student attitudes and values than did the academic portion of the
college experience.
In recent years, strategies of milieu management have evolved which are based on the
use of accurate assessments of campus conditions, upon which are built planned interven
tions that alter selected aspects of the campus environment to enhance opportunities for stu
dent growth (Miller and Prince, 1977; Aulepp and Delworth, 1976). The initial phase of these
strategies— the technology of environmental measurement— is still in a state of develop
ment. Despite the efforts of the past fifteen years, many of the problems in this area have not
been resolved (Baird, 1973).
One purpose of the present study was to demonstrate the potential utility of the campus
press in the environmental assessment process by establishing that a relationship exists be
tween the contents of campus newspapers and the campus environment, and by examining
the influence of newspaper governance on this relationship. To accomplish this, the results of
105
a content analysis of selected student newspapers with different governance styles were com
pared with the results of an environmental assessment of the host campuses. In addition,
this study sought to document the contents of selected student newspapers at the close of
the 1970's, compare the contents of newspapers with different styles of governance and from
different kinds of institutions, and examine some of the assumptions about the campus press
that have appeared in the literature in light of these data.
Two existing approaches to environmental assessment were utilized in developing the
methodology of the present study. The first of these was Astin and Holland's (1961) Environ
mental Assessment Technique (EAT). This instrument uses as one of its major components
the estimation of the distribution of students into the six personality orientations devised
by Holland (1966) for his theory of vocational development. The orientations are Realistic, In
vestigative, Enterprising, Social, Artistic, and Conventional. The measure is based on the as
sumption that the qualities of an environment depend greatly on the types of individuals that
make it up— chiefly students, in the case of colleges.
While the strength of affiliations with the categories is determined for an individual on
the basis of preference for work environments associated with the orientations (as measured
by the Strong Vocational Interest Blank), the number of students in each category at an insti
tution can be estimated by the objective procedure of determining the percentage of degrees
awarded in sets of major fields that are associated with each orientation. The EAT has been
validated in a number of studies, and has been used to study the "fit" between student
career choices and college satisfaction (Astin, 1963, 1972; Holland, 1968). Baird (1973) report
ed that Astin and Holland developed considerable evidence that student traits have a sub
stantial effect on college characteristics.
The second approach underlying the current study was Clark and Trow's (1962) method of
characterizing an institution in terms of sub-cultures based on student traits. Using the di
mensions of campus loyalty and involvement with ideas, Clark and Trow defined four
"subcultures"— the academic (high idea involvement, high loyalty), collegiate (low idea in
volvement, high loyalty), non-conformist (high idea involvement, low loyalty), and vocational
(low idea involvement, low loyalty).
106
The validity of this typology has been established by a variety of researchers. Gottlieb and
Hodgkins (1963) found differences is religion, socio-economic status, urban/rural origin, aca
demic performance, attendance, and attitude change among the subcultures, membership in
which was established by self-description. Sloan and Brown (1978) found that subculture
; membership was a successful predictor of personality differences among students with a
homogeneous career goal. They found that academics tended to be more culturally sophisti
cated and intellectually and socially concerned. Collegiates tended to be the highest in social
extroversion and peer dependence, and were the least concerned with academic matters.
Nonconformists were typically independent and were the least motivated to achieve in tradi
tional ways. The typology has also been supported by Apostal (1968, 1969), Kees and McDou-
gall (1971), Lange (1972), Peterson (1968), and Williams (1972).
There have been some objections to the theoretical basis of the typology. As Frantz (1967)
pointed out, the notion of a subculture requires, among other properties, endorsement of
membership and interaction among members. Research has not established that these prop
erties are possessed by the Clark-Trow types, which thus might be better termed "role
orientations."
While there has been no published comparison of the Holland personality orientations and
the Clark-Trow subcultures, the descriptions of these classifications suggest that such a com
parison is feasible. Cole, Whitney and Holland (1974) represented the six Holland orienta
tions spatially on a pair of axes, along with occupations associated with the orientations.
Distances between orientations and occupations represented the strength of the associations.
By superimposing the dimensions of campus loyalty and involvement with ideas on this
scheme, a hypothetical relationship was obtained.
According to this relationship, the artistic orientation was within the nonconformist subcul
ture. By comparison, the conventional orientation was identified with the collegiate subcul
ture. The enterprising orientation was placed in the vocational subculture, and the investiga
tive orientation was in the academic. The realistic orientation was also in the academic
subculture, a relationship supported by the types of occupation requiring a college degree
connected with this orientation (mathematics, statistics, engineering). The evidence did not
as strongly support the placement of the social orientation within the vocational subculture,
107
although hobbies associated with the social orientation emphasize volunteer work and com
munity service.
The hypothesized relationship between these two systems of describing personality traits
permitted the generation of hypotheses regarding the distribution of students at college cam
puses in the six Holland orientations on the basis of an estimate of the comparative strengths
of Clark and Trow's dimensions derived from an anaysis of the content of student
newspapers.
A content analysis technique devised by the author was used to characterize the contents
of selected student newspapers using four indices. These indices were based on the Clark-
Trow dimensions of idea involvement and campus loyalty. They represented articles with
an emphasis on social activities (the Social Events Index), an emphasis on ideas (the Intellec
tu a l/ Academic / Cultural Index), an emphasis on off-campus affairs (the Off-Campus Index),
or an emphasis on on-campus events (the On-Campus Index). The first pair represented
poles of the dimension of idea involvement (low and high, respectively), and the second
pair represented poles of the dimension of campus loyalty (low and high, respectively).
Information on the degrees awarded in various major fields was collected to provide an en
vironmental assessment in the form of estimates of the distribution of students in Holland's
personality orientations for the campuses in the sample. Two hypotheses were proposed uti
lizing the content analysis and evironmental assessment. The hypotheses were stated as fol
lows:
Hypothesis 1. There is an association between the distribution of student newspaper con
tent among various categories, representing dimensions of idea involvement and campus
loyalty, and the distribution of students in Holland's personality orientations as deter
mined by degrees awarded in major fields associated with those orientations.
Hypothesis 2. The association between the distribution of campus newspaper content and
the distribution of students into Holland's personality orientations is greater for campus
newspapers which are incorporated independently from the host institution's administra
tion and academic departments, less for newspapers which are not independently incor
porated but are, by policy and practice, editorially independent, and least for newspa
pers whose content is potentially dependent on the editorial judgment of
representatives of the administration or faculty.
108
i To more fully explore the contents of the campus press, newspapers were compared on the
Jbasis of institutional size, public versus private administration, two-year versus four-year cur-
I
jriculum, publication frequency, and type of governance (legally independent, not legally in
dependent but editorially independent, and potentially editorially dependent). In addition,
newspapers from institutions which were members of the Western Association of University
Publications Managers (WAUPM) were reviewed. These data were used to address the fol
lowing research question:
Research Question. How may the contents of the student press in 1979 be described, and
how do the contents of newspapers with different characteristics and from different
| kinds of institutions compare?
Methodology
Sample
The sample for this study was drawn from newspapers on the subscription list of the Uni
versity of Southern California, WAUPM members, and cooperating student newspapers
contacted by the author. A total of 45 newspapers was used, which were classified as fol
lows: 12 were associated with private institutions; 33 were associated with public institutions;
40 were from four-year institutions; 5 were from two-year California Community Colleges; 23
of the colleges and universities were in California, with 15 in Southern California; 8 universi
ties were members of the California State University and College system, 5 were Universities
of California. The mean enrollment was 18,964. The distribution of enrollment among the
institutions in the sample was as follows: under 5,000— 4; 5,000 to 12,000— 12; 12,000 to
25,000— 14; over 25,000— 15.
Issues published during the spring of 1979 were sampled from each institution, with the
exception of two institutions analyzed previously whose papers were published during the
spring of 1977. Typically, twenty papers were randomly selected for each institution. When a
complete sample was unavailable for a given institution, fewer issues were used, in no case
fewer than 10.
109
Data Collection
Predictor Variables. In a pilot study, the author devised 33 content categories into which
the items appearing in student newspapers could be classified. The rank order of content cat
egories from two sets of ten newspapers from a single institution were correlated to provide
a reliability estimate. The value of this statistic, Spearman's Rho, was 0.90. This figure was
sufficiently high to justify the use of these categories in the current study.
Data regarding the governance of each newspaper in the sample were gathered by means
of a questionnaire sent to.the adviser of each paper. Based on such factors as the percent of
students working on the paper for academic credit, policies regarding faculty review of sto
ries before or after publication, the method of selecting senior editors and other staff mem
bers, and the style of advisement, the newspapers were classified into three groups. These
were newspapers independently incorporated from the associated institution (Type 1), news
papers not independently incorporated but manifesting editorial independence by virtue of
the administrative structure (Type 2), and newspapers characterized by potential dependence
on faculty or the administration of the associated institution (Type 3).
Fourteen institutions did not return the questionnaire. In these cases, the data were gath
ered by means of a telephone interview with the newspaper's adviser or editor. Of the news
papers sampled, 12 were incorporated independently from the college or university, 19 were
not independently incorporated but met the criteria for editorial independence, and 14 main-
fested the potential for editorial dependence on the administration or faculty of the associated
institution.
Criterion Variables. The distribution of students into six personality orientations was estimat
ed for each institution using the technique described by Holland (1966) for the Environmental
Assessment Techinque (EAT). The orientations, devised by Holland as part of a theory of vo
cational development, were as follows: realistic, investigative, enterprising, social, artistic,
and conventional. The estimation process consisted of determining the percentage of degrees
awarded in various major fields associated with each orientation, as compiled by the National
Center for Educational Statistics, Higher Education Branch, of the United States Department
of Education and published by Mitchell (1979).
110
Procedure
The newspapers selected for the study were randomly presented to a panel of four raters
who had previously been trained in the content analysis technique. A set of ten papers from
a single institution which were not included in the study was presented to each rater for the
purpose of measuring reliability. The rank orders of the content categories were correlated for
each pair of judges using Spearman's Rho. The value of this statistic ranged from .793 to
.976, with all correlation coefficients significant at the .01 level.
Each rater measured the surface area of each item in a given newspaper (excluding adver
tising) and determined into what category the item would be placed. A score was calculated
for each category by summing the surface area measured for each item in the content catego
ry and expressing this as a percent of the total of the item sizes for all content categories. If
an item logically fit in more than one content category, its size could be split among different
categories in proportion to the strength of the association perceived by the rater. Upon com
pletion of the content analysis, an average for each category was calculated across all issues
of each paper.
Each rater was asked to assign content categories to four indices which were assumed to be
representative of the Clark-Trow dimensions of idea involvement and campus loyalty. The
first of the indices reflected a concern with academic matters and the life of the mind.
Termed the Intellectual/Academic/Cultural Index, this subset of the content categories was
taken to be associated with high idea involvement. The second index, termed the Social Ev
ents Index, reflected a concern with social activities and entertainment and was taken to rep
resent low idea involvement. The third, or Off-Campus Index, reflected a concern with ev
ents and issues taking place off-campus, and was assumed to be associated with low campus
loyalty. The final index, denoted the On-Campus Index, reflected a concern with on-campus
affairs and was taken to represent high campus loyalty. It was permissible for a content cate
gory to be affiliated with more than one index. The criterion for the retention of a content
category in an index for the final analysis was assignment by a majority of the raters.
These data were tabulated by institutional characteristics (public or private status, size,
two- or four-year curriculum, W AUPM membership) and newspaper characteristics (publica
tion schedule, governance type) to address the research question: How may the contents
111
of the student press in 1979 be described, and how do the contents of newspapers with dif
ferent characteristics and from different kinds of institutions compare?
Statistical Treatment
The first hypothesis, its null form, was as follows:
Hypothesis 1. There is no association between the distribution of newspaper content
among combinations of content categories, representing dimensions of idea involvement
and campus loyalty, and the distribution of students in Holland's personality orienta
tions, as determined by degrees awarded in major fields associated with those orienta
tions.
Hypothesis 1 was tested by a canonical correlation procedure which used the six Holland
personality orientation scores as criterion variables and the four content indices as predictor
variables. An alpha level of .05 for a single canonical factor was selected as sufficient grounds
for rejection of the null hypothesis.
The relationship between newspaper contents and the environmental measure was further
explored by means of six independent multiple regression analyses, each using one of th€
Holland personality orientaton scores as the criterion variable. Cooley and Lohnes (1971) rec
ommended this practice as a complement to the canonical correlation procedure. The six sub
hypotheses, in the null form, were as follows:
Hypothesis la . There is no association between the percentage of degrees awarded in
fields associated with the investigative orientation and a linear combination of the four
indices.
Hypothesis lb. There is no association between the percentage of degrees awarded in
fields associated with the conventional orientation and a linear combination of the four
indices.
Hypothesis lc. There is no association between the percentage of degrees awarded in
fields associated with the artistic orientation and a linear combination of the four indices.
Hypothesis Id . There is no association between the percentage of degrees awarded in
fields associated with the enterprising orientation and a linear combination of the four
indices.
Hypothesis le. There is no association between the percentage of degrees awarded in
112
j fields associated with the realistic orientation and a linear combination of the four in-
1 5
dices.
Hypothesis If. There is no association between the percentage of degrees awarded in
fields associated with the social orientation and a linear combination of the four indices.
The multiple regression procedure was conducted in a stepwise manner to produce the
[linear combination of predictor variables which accounted for the greatest amount of criteri-
ion variable variance in each case. There was no theoretical basis for an a priori ordering of the
predictor variables. An alpha level of .05 was set as the criterion for rejecting each of the null
;hypotheses.
It was possible to make judgments about the overall hypothesis by reference to the results
i
jof testing the individual sub-hypotheses. It must be recognized that the alpha level for the
overall hypothesis was inflated in proportion to the number of tests on the common data. In
order to account for this effect, it was determined that the overall null hypothesis would
be rejected if two or more of the sub-hypotheses were rejected. Using the binomial expan
sion, the probability of rejecting two or more of the six sub-hypotheses at the .05 level by
chance was found to be .03, based on the worst-case assumption that each test was inde
pendent of the others.
The second hypothesis, in null form, was as follows:
Hypothesis 2. The association between the distribution of campus newspaper contents and
the distribution of students into Holland's personality orientations is not greater for cam
pus newspapers which are incorporated independently from the host institution's admin-
i istration and academic departments, nor less for newspapers which are not independent
ly incorporated but are, by policy and practice, editorially independent, nor least for
newspapers whose content is potentially dependent on the editorial judgment of repre
sentatives of the administration or faculty.
To test Hypothesis 2, the three levels of newspaper governance determined by responses
to the author's questionnaire were included as a categorical predictor variable in each of the
independent multiple regression analyses described above. Rejection of Hypothesis 2 was
based on the finding of a significant interaction between the governance variable and content
indices in two or more of the analyses. As noted above, this corresponded to an alpha level
of .03 for the overall hypothesis.
113
Results
Hypothesis 1
Hypothesis 1 was stated as follows: There is an association between the distribution of
student newspaper contents among various categories, representing dimensions of idea in
volvement and campus loyalty, and the distribution of students in Holland's personality or
ientations, as determined by degrees awarded in major fields associated with those orienta
tions.
The canonical correlation procedure used to test the first hypothesis resulted in a single
canonical factor which was significant at the .003 level. The canonical correlation was .68,
with a Chi-Square value of 47.27 with 24 degrees of freedom. On the basis of this finding,
the null form of Hypothesis 1 was rejected.
Of the six individual multiple regression analyses, two resulted in associations significant
at less than the .05 level between the content indices and the Holland personality orientation
used as the criterion variable. The regression equation used for testing Hypothesis la yielded
a coefficient of multiple correlation of .84. The value of the F statistic used to test the signifi
cance of this association was 5.15, with degrees of freedom of 13 and 31. The regression
equation used for testing Hypothesis If produced a coefficient of multiple correlation of .713,
with an F value of 2.22 with degrees of freedom 13 and 31. These data also provided suffi
cient grounds for the rejection of Hypothesis 1.
In reviewing the outcome of testing Hypothesis 1, it is of value to consider the specific pre
dicted relationships between the predictor and criterion variables and the correlations which
were actually obtained. In accordance with the proposed similarities between the Clark-Trow
subcultures and the Holland personality orientations, and between the four content indices
and the two dimensions of campus loyalty and involvement with ideas used by Clark and
Trow, 24 expectations were generated concerning the associations between the four indices
and the six personality orientations. Of these, 14 were in the predicted direction. The Intel-
ectual/Academic/Cultural Index and Social Events Index had more correct associations (5
and 4, respectively) than did the Off-Campus and On-Campus Indices (3 and 2). The former
were also the variables most heavily loaded on the canonical factor.
114
Hypothesis 2
Hypothesis 2 was stated as follows: The association between the distribution of campus
newspaper content and the distribution of students into Holland's personality orientations is
greater for campus newspapers which are incorporated independently from the host institu
tion's administration and academic departments, less for newspapers which are not inde
pendently incorporated but are, by policy and practice, editorially independent, and least
for newspapers whose content is potentially dependent on the editorial judgment of repre
sentatives of the administration or faculty.
The six subhypotheses derived from Hypothesis 1, each involving one of the Holland
personality orientations as a criterion variable, were examined for interactions as a test of
Hypothesis 2. Of the two individual multiple regression equations that yielded associations
significant at the .05 level, only the analysis used for testing the subhypothesis with the so
cial orientation as the criterion variable had a significant interaction.
An interaction was found between governance and the Social Events Index. Separate re
gression equations were computed using the Social Events Index at each of the three levels of
governance. The interaction was found to be disordinal within the region of interest of the
Social Events Index, and the slopes of the regression lines were in the direction predicted in
Hypothesis 2. That is, the line for the independently incorporated newspapers was steeper
(reflecting greater changes in the predicted value of the criterion variable with small changes
in the index) than that of the editorially independent papers, which was in turn steeper than
that of the potentially dependent newspapers.
These data provided insufficient grounds for the rejection of the null form of Hypothesis 2.
Research Question
The research question was stated as follows: How may the contents of the student press in
1980 be described, and how do the contents of newspapers with different characteristics and
from different types of institution compare?
The data from the content analysis were used to address the research question. The com
parison of content analyses among institutions of different types and among newspapers
115
with different governance structures and publication schedules provided some interesting
contrasts. The major points are summarized below.
4
Content Description for the Sample. The campus newspapers surveyed in the study tended to
emphasize social activities and campus concerns, as measured by the Social Events and On-
Campus Indices. The range of all four indices was relatively low (.047), however, indicating a
balance between on- and off-campus focus and attention to social and intellectual concerns.
Varsity sports was the leading topic, followed by feature stories concerning political, cultur
al, scientific, or artistic matters; state, national, and international news; campus news; admin
istration news; local news; student government; personality stories; and future student activi
ties. Subjects receiving the least attention were activism, consumer affairs, commercial
broadcast, and programs for off-campus populations. Fraternities and sororities, minority
groups/and club and intramural sports organizations received relatively little coverage. Many
of the categories were highly skewed, with most scores clustered below the mean and a few
scores well above the mean.
Comparison of Content for Public and Private Institutions. Newspapers from public colleges and
universities had a greater emphasis on the Intellectual/Academic/Cultural Index than did
newspapers from private institutions, which had a greater emphasis on Social Events. Fur
thermore, the range of indices was less for public institutions (.022 vs. .152), indicating more
balanced coverage.
The content categories receiving the greatest and least coverage were similar for the two
groups. Newspapers from private schools had less emphasis on administrative news, fea
tures, and local, state, national, and international news. Newspapers from public institutions
had less emphasis on student government and campus color.
Comparison of Content for Four-Year and Two-Year Institutions. Newspapers from both classes
of institutions emphasized Social Events and On-Campus Indices over the Off-Campus and
Intellectual/Academic/Cutlural. The range of the indices was much lower for the four-year
newspapers (.058) than for the two-year newspapers (.270), whose coverage was less
balanced.
Newspapers from four-year institutions had more coverage of local, state, national, and
international news. More space was given to minority concerns and general features. The
papers from two-year colleges had more coverage of administration news; personality stories;
1 1 6
student activities; student services; fellowships, grants, and scholarships; and educational
opportunities.
Comparison of Content on the Basis of Size. The colleges and universities in the sample were
divided into four size ranges. As the size of the institutions increased, the newspapers shift
ed from a highly unbalanced dominance of Social Events and On-Campus Indices over Off-
Campus and Intellectual/Academic/Cultural coverage (with a range of the indices of .304),
toward greater balance (range of .140), then a diminished emphasis on the Social Events In
dex (range of .031), and finally the dominance of Intellectual/Academic/Cultural and Off-
Campus Indices (range of .060).
The newspapers from the smallest schools had the lowest local, state, national, and inter
national news coverage. These papers also had the lowest coverage of the administration.
They had the highest varsity sports, student government, and student activities coverage.
Feature content was fairly high. The newspapers from the largest schools had the lowest
content devoted to "bulletin board" items, student government, and student services. As
the size of the institution increased, the attention given to entertainment topics tended to
decrease.
Comparison of Content by Governance Type. The newspapers in the sample were classified
on the basis of governance style as being independently incorporated, editorially independ
ent, or potentially dependent editorially. The independently incorporated papers had the
greatest Off-Campus and Intellectual/Academic/Cultural emphasis. The range of the ind
ices (.068) indicated balanced coverage. The editorially independent papers emphasized the
On-Campus and Social Events Indices; however, the coverage was still quite balanced, as rep
resented by a range of indices of .043. The potentially dependent papers had a strong domi
nance of On-Campus and Social Events coverage (range of .145), and showed the least bal
anced coverage.
The independently incorporated papers had the strongest local, state, national, and inter
national news coverage. They had the weakest coverage of "bulletin board" items, adminis
tration news, student government, personality stories, student activities, and campus color.
They did have the highest coverage of fraternities and sororities. The editorially independent
117
papers had the highest coverage of administration news and minorities, but the lowest var
sity sports coverage. The potentially dependent papers had the highest coverage of varsity
sports, campus news, “bulletin board” items, student government, personality stories, stu
dent activities, and educational opportunities.
Comparison of Contents by Publication Frequency. The sample was divided into newspapers
published less frequently than three issues per week (“weeklies”) and those published three
or more times per week (“dailies"). The daily papers emphasized Off-Campus and Intellec
tual/Academ ic/Cultural coverage over Social Events and On-Campus news. The situation
was reversed for the weekly papers. The range of the dailies (.061) indicated more balanced
coverage in these papers than in the weeklies (range of .180).
The weekly papers were quite high in feature stories, but were lower in coverage of state,
national, and international news. This was the highest category for the dailies. The weekly
papers had more space given to campus news, “bulletin board" items, administration news,
student government, personality stories, educational opportunities, student media, and fel
lowships, grants, and scholarships.
Comparison of Content of W A U P M Members and Non-Members. Newspapers which were mem
bers of W AUPM tended to emphasize the Off-Campus and Intellectual/Academic/Cutlural
Indices over the Social Events and On Campus Indices. The reverse was the case for non
members. The balance of coverage was quite high for both groups however. The range of
indices for W AUPM members was .055, while it was .065 for non-members.
The W AUPM papers had more coverage of local, state, national, and international news;
academic policies; fraternities and sororities; and university service. They had less coverage of
campus news, personality stories, student activities, local businesses, and general feature sto
ries.
Discussion
Hypothesis 1
The analysis of the data by means of the canonical correlation procedure and the six indi
vidual multiple regression equations supported the rejection of the null form of Hypothesis 1.
That is, support was found for an association between the contents of a campus newspaper
and the environment of the host campus, as measured by the distribution of students in
the Holland personality orientations.
In order to account for this finding, it must be noted that Holland's (1963, 1968) research
indicated that the way in which students are distributed among the six personality orienta
tions is related to the distribution of vocational plans, interests, ambitions, avocations, self-
image, and other traits in the student population. The distribution has been found to have a
strong impact on the nature of the campus environment.
It can be assumed that the distribution of student traits very likely determined the types,
numbers and frequencies of student activities, responses to campus events, demands for stu
dent services, and expressions of student interest in on- and off-campus issues taking place
in social and academic contexts. A random sample of campus behavior would, if published,
reflect the differential frequency of campus behaviors and, in the long run, the distribution of
traits within the student population.
It is highly probable, however, that selection of material for the campus newspapers stud
ied was not a random phenomenon. The student reporters and editors worked, studied, and
in many cases lived on campus. They were immersed in student life and were subjected
to stimuli from the environment which aided in the determination of the interests of the
campus newspaper's readership. Since very little space is available in most student newspa
pers, in comparison to the commercial press, editors and reporters were forced to prioritize
subject matter, publishing only the most important material or the material of greatest inter
est to the readers. This probably resulted in a distillation of relevant material which enhanced
the ability of the newspaper to mirror the distribution of student interests, behaviors, and
needs, and thus the distribution of students in the Holland personality orientations.
119
An alternative explanation is that the members of the student newspaper staffs pursued
; their individual interests in writing and editing. According to this view, the association be
tween the contents of the campus newspaper and the campus environment resulted from the
coincidence of the interests of the staff with those of the student body. This explanation as-
jjsumes that newspaper staffs were sampled randomly from the student population at each
institution, and that they did not follow the basic practices of professional journalism. Given
the existing data on the selection of student journalists, and the nature of journalism educa
tion, this view does not seem plausible.
In the testing of Hypothesis 1, assumptions were made regarding the relationship between
the content indices and the dimensions used by Clark and Trow to define student subcul
tures. A relationship between these subcultures and the Holland personality orientations was
also assumed. Data on the validity of these assumptions was gathered in the form of the as
sociations between the content indices and the Holland personality orientations. O f the twen
ty-four associations, fourteen were in the predicted direction. One reason for the erroneous
predictions may have been an imperfect correspondence between the Clark-Trow subcultures
and the Holland orientations. The Investigative and Realistic orientations were positively as
sociated with the Off-Campus Index, suggesting the possibility that these orientations were
characterized by less campus loyalty than the academic subculture. The Social orientation
was negatively associated with the Social Events Index, indicating the possibility that this
orientation was identified with more idea involvement than the vocational subculture. The
Enterprising orientation was positively associated with the On-Campus Index and negatively
associated with the Off-Campus Index, which may have meant a greater tendency toward
campus loyalty than characterized the vocational subculture.
Another interpretation is that the content indices did not adequately represent the dimen
sions attributed to them. For example, state, national, and international news were compo
nents of the Off-Campus Index. Interest in these areas may not have represented a low order
of campus loyalty. Similarly, interest in varsity sports or student government, which were
components of the On-Campus Index, may not have indicated a high degree of campus loy-
ialty. Although the topics associated with the Intellectual/Academic/Cultural Index seemed
reasonably representative of involvement with ideas (and this content index had the greatest
! number of correctly predicted associations with the Holland orientations), such topics as en
120
tertainment reviews, varsity sports, and student activities, which were components of the
Social Events Index, may not have represented low involvement with ideas.
Hypothesis 2
The data from the six individual multiple regression analyses failed to support rejection of
the null form of the second hypothesis. That is, no evidence was found for differences in the
association between campus newspaper contents and the campus environment on the basis
of the way the newspapers were governed.
One reason for this finding may have been the universal practice of student press freedom
at all of the institutions in the sample. That is, the potential for faculty or administration
influence on the student journalists may have existed, but not have been exercised, at least
with respect to the kinds of articles which resulted in the association with the campus
environment.
This interpretation is consistent with the results of the questionnaire used to assess gover
nance type. All but two of the advisers of newspapers classified as potentially dependent in
dicated that editorial independence was practiced at the newspaper. The assignment of
grades or credit may have been based strictly on the quality of writing and editing, rather
than on choice of subject matter, and staff selection may have been based on merit. Any
open or covert censorship which did exist may have involved stories which would not have
enhanced the content-environment association.
An alternative view is that the guidance and direction provided by advisers to potentially
dependent papers may have enhanced the ability of the paper to reflect its environment.
In the absence of press freedom, the intuitions, insights, and professional judgments of the
adviser may have resulted in a paper which was sensitive to the interests and needs of the
readership.
Another possibility is that differences in newspaper governance were congruent with dif
ferences between student bodies. Thus, the amount of freedom actually permitted student
journalists may have biased content in a way consistent with other features of the campus
environment. These two alternative views were not consistent with the self-evaluation of
press freedom provided by the newspaper advisers in the questionnaire.
121
Research Question
The content analysis used for testing the hypotheses was used to address the research
question concerning how the contents of the campus press may be described and how the
contents differ among different types of newspapers and institutions. The resulting data may
be used to clarify the current trends in student newspaper coverage and shed light on the
goals being served by the student press.
The newspapers reviewed in this study were primarily campus oriented, with varsity
sports the most prominent topic. It is significant that the range of indices was relatively
small, however. This indicated a high order of balance in coverage. Indeed, off-campus cov
erage, while not the main thrust of the papers, was quite prominent. The space devoted
to state, national, and international news and feature articles of cultural, political, scientific,
or economic interest exceeded that given to such topics as campus and administration news.
When the contents of the papers analyzed in this study were compared with the findings of
Evans (1975), it was clear that the campus press has developed a much greater coverage of
off-campus news over the past five years. This was consistent with predicitions by VanTur-
bergen (1970), Montgomery (1971), Conn (1969), and Politella (1967). It was also consistent
with a number of studies showing greater interest among students and student newspaper
editors with increased coverage of off-campus and "serious" news (Windhauser and Latti-
more, 1973; Stempel, 1964; Lyle and Wilcox, 1963; Bornholdt, 1966).
Some opinions as to the purpose of the campus press appear, in light of the current data,
to be no longer applicable. In an early statement, Hopkins (1957) stated that among the goals
attributed to the campus press was that it should be the "house organ" of student govern
ment. Similarly, it has been suggested that the paper should be the official publication of the
administration or a source of publicity for the faculty. In the sample chosen for this study,
none of, the content areas that would reflect these objectives was sufficiently emphasized to
justify such a conclusion.
Ross and Selmeyer (1974) stated that a principal function of the campus newspaper was to
serve as a record of student activities. With the exception of varsity sports, coverage of past
student activities was rather low, although campus events of a "hard news" nature (which
excluded organized events) were prominent. This was consistent with Evan's (1975) finding
that most college presidents, student editors, and faculty advisers considered reporting cam
122
pus news the most important function of the paper. Certain important sub-groups on cam
pus, such as fraternities and sororities, minorities, and club and intramural sports organiza
tions, however, were almost ignored in the sample as a whole.
Estrin (1956) commented that informing the community about the institution was a major
function of the campus press. Although campus news and varsity sports, which were well
covered, are often important in college towns, certain content areas that would seem relevant
to this function were not well covered. These included local news, local businesses, programs
for off-campus populations, and university service to the community. The low amount of
space devoted to local news is surprising, since state, national, and international news are
typically well covered by other media, while the student paper is in a better position to make
a unique contribution in the local arena.
The representation of the institution to the students has been cited as a justification for the
student press; however, such topics as educational opportunities, fellowships, grants, and
scholarships, and student services were not well covered. Opportunities for involvement, as
represented by such topics as Greek, minorities, club and intramural sports, and even activ
ism, received relatively little attention. Bulletin board items were very abundant, however,
and the student papers did serve the important function of providing space for announce
ments, calendars, and official notices.
The nature of student press contents can be further elucidated by briefly examining some
of the differences in content between institutions of different types.
Public and Private Institutions. Public institutions differed from private institutions in that
their newspapers had less emphasis on student government, campus color, and general cam
pus reporting and greater emphasis on administration news, general features, and state, na
tional, and international news. Similar differences were found by Evans (1975). While the
meaning of these differences was not clear, they were consistent with the notion that the pri
vate institution, to be competetive, has to be highly concerned with the image it presents to
the students and the public, while the public institution may be more concerned with student
and public input into its administrative structure and the consequences of political decisions
at the state level. Further, the degree of student involvement in college life and traditions
may be a prominent part of the appeal of the private institution, as reflected in more intense
campus coverage.
123
■ __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Two-Year and Four-Year Institutions. In comparing two- and four-year institutions,, the news
papers of the former were more campus oriented, with greater coverage of administration
news, personality stories, student activities, student services, educational opportunities, and
fellowships, grants, and scholarships. The greater emphasis on campus life in the newspa
pers from two-year community colleges may accurately reflect a greater concern with generat
ing student involvement and a smoother transition to college life at these schools, which
were originally developed to broaden the scope of higher education and bring post-secondary
schooling to the masses.
Institutional Enrollment. The comparison of newspapers on the basis of the size of the host
institution provided an interesting contrast. The newspapers from the smallest group had
the most coverage of topics that could be identified with "invitations to become involved" in
student activities and campus events. Jacobs (1957) and others have noted that smaller insti
tutions tend to maximize opportunities for involvement which enhance student development.
It would therefore seem important for larger institutions to utilize all feasible means to dis
seminate as much information about such opportunities as possible and to depict them in
such a way as to encourage involvement. The tendency of students to feel anonymous and
isolated on crowded campuses can be reduced by efforts to facilitate immersion in the multi
ple opportunities for involvement that exist at large schools. Nevertheless, as institutional
size increased, campus newspaper coverage of campus life fell off, including the "bulletin
board" category, which would be expected to require increased space with increased institu
tional size.
Governance Style. When the contents of newspapers with different styles of governance
were compared, it was found that the legally independent papers had the strongest off-cam
pus coverage and some of the weakest on-campus coverage. On the other hand, the poten
tially dependent papers (including journalism laboratories) led in campus coverage. The inde
pendent papers, which were sometimes located off-campus, had a greater need to generate
advertising revenue than the papers receiving support from the institution. Thus, it was pos
sible that their content had to stimulate broader interest among potential readers and there-
I
fore stressed off-campus concerns more than on-campus activities. On the other hand, the
dependent papers largely confined their contents to material within the immediate range of
experience of the newspaper staff, which was potentially important for teaching. The training
124
aspect of the dependent papers may also have been reflected in the high feature content. The
editorially independent papers, which were able to have a campus focus but perhaps lacked
some of the restraints of the dependent papers, had the greatest emphasis on administrative
news, a topic they may have been more free (for economic as well as political reasons) to re
port than either of the other two types.
Publication Schedule. In reviewing the content of newspapers with different publications
.schedules, it appeared that weekly papers were forced to concentrate their available space on
material which was important to the conduct of student life, while the dailies were free to
give space to off-campus events. The weeklies had to condense several days of bulletins,
notices, announcements, and campus events into a single issue. The dailies could spread
this coverage out over a week. The daily schedule seemed to permit greater flexibility and
more varied experience for student writers and editors,* however, most of the papers which
could be classified as journalism laboratories published weekly.
External Validity: Hypotheses
Limitations existed on the ability to generalize the findings of this study to institutions
and newspapers not included in the sample. As a result of practical considerations, a random
sample of the American student press was not used. The colleges and universities sampled
may have had salient properties not characteristic of the 2,500 institutions in the United
States with campus newspapers, and therefore the relationships found in the study may have
been unique to the sample (or a subset of the sample). It must be noted, however, that the
sample was quite broad. It took in all of the members of WAUPM and approximated a true
random sample of University of California and California State University and College cam
puses. The sample also contained two-year community colleges in addition to four-year
schools, and institutions from outside of California. There was a mix of private and public in
stitutions. It seemed unlikely that a source of bias existed which would cause the findings of
this study to be limited to the highly varied institutions in the sample. Nevertheless, general
izations must be made with caution.
External Validity: Research Question
Because the sample was small and not randomly drawn from the population, demographic
variables may have been correlated within the sample in a way which was different from the
way these variables are correlated in the population. Furthermore, the size of the sample
125
prohibited the use of covariates to control for the confounding of variables. Generalizations
involving differences in newspaper content in terms of institutional differences should be
made with restraint. The descriptive data from the study were found, where comparisons
'were feasible, to be generally consistent with the findings of earlier studies.
Recommendations
Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations are offered:
1. The fact that Hypothesis 1 was supported pointed out the need for further research
on the use of the student press for the purpose of environmental assessment. This could
result in the development of an instrument with several advantages, among which are the
following:
Objectivity: The student newspaper is a record of behaviors on campus as well as a forum
for the opinion of various campus constituencies. The objectivity of student journalists may
be compared with that of observers retained to record behaviors using existing objective in
struments. Furthermore, once content categories have been established, it is difficult for the
analysts to bias interpretation of the results, as can occur in the interpretation of responses to
open-ended survey items.
Flexibility: The method of content anaysis can be adjusted to meet the demands of different
theoretical models and assessment goals.
Low Cost: The content analysis procedure is relatively inexpensive. It avoids many of the
methodological and practical problems associated with survey research.
Dynamic Properties: The student press provides a historical record, and on-going process
that reaches into the future. It captures the dynamic nature of the college or university, not
ing the changes that take place as the institution evolves.
Special Interest Groups: The increase in special interest publications on many campuses pro
vides an opportunity to assess the properties of significant campus sub-groups.
Availability: Since most campuses support student newspapers, the method of content
analysis can be nearly universally applied. The results obtained from different institutions
may be compared. The fact Hypothesis 2 was not supported indicates that the results ob
tained from analyzing newspapers with different administrative configurations may be
compared.
126
Several indications exist for the direction of research devoted to the development of a prac
tical instrument. The method of content analysis must be grounded in student development
theory. An attempt was made in the present study to use the frameworks established by
Clark and Trow, and by Holland,, for this purpose. More sophisticated theoretical formula
tions that feature specific implications for student growth should be used. Among those that
could be investigated are the developmental vector approach of Chickering (1969), Erkison's
(1963) stage approach derived from psychoanalytic theory, and the stage approach devised by
Blocher (1966).
In order to develop a practical assessment tool, the content analysis must be validated
against objective measurements of the environment. In the present study, the distribution of
students into the Holland personality types was used. This type of validation was useful
in demonstrating the potential of the student press as an assessment instrument, but is not
particularly useful in the actual process of milieu management. The support found for Hy
pothesis 1 justifies the commitment of resources necessary for the use of more complex in
struments in the validation process. Since one application of content analysis could be to
locate potential sources of tension or stress in the environment, approaches to validation
might include the use of counseling center intake or case documentation, as well as existing
commercial instruments. Another technique is the analysis of student newspapers at a small
number of institutions over a long period of time, looking for changes in content which regu
larly preceded significant shifts in activities at the institution, perhaps also measured by the
student (or commercial) press. For example, an a posteriori attempt could be made to predict
levels of activism on campuses using old student newspapers. Newspapers from institutions
known to have experienced high or low levels of activism could be compared historically
for fluctuations in content indices and the number of reported incidents of protest or vio
lence. Similarly, fluctuations could be compared against subsequent demographic shifts, as
measured by historical documents. It is important to determine whether or not the content
analysis can be used predictively, as well as for contemporary assessment.
An important part of further research is the use of a large, random sample of institutions.
The support found for Hypothesis 1 justifies the expenditure of resources necessary for such
an undertaking. The use of the computer is an essential part of managing the data involved
in a large study. It can also be used to gather data, the most costly part of a content analysis
127
study. As more student newspapers begin using electronic composition and archiving tech
nologies, the task of content analysis will be greatly facilitated. Word counts can be util
ized in place of categorization of articles, allowing for greater subtlety as well as cost benefits.
Advancing scanner technology can be used to "read" student papers into a computer memo
ry, which would also eliminate the need for human content raters and reduce the likelihood
of error related to fatigue, boredom, or eye movement.
2. The descriptive data obtained in this study pointed out the importance of an on-going
effort to clarify the purposes of the student press and the ways that this activity can contrib
ute to student growth. Some views of the purpose of campus newspapers, such as "house-
organ" for student government or the administration, publicity source for faculty, "gossip
sheet," or "bulletin board" are clearly no longer applicable, if indeed they ever were.. The
- trend to cover more off-campus material, however, should not be uncritically accepted as
a sign of maturity of the student press, but should be reviewed in terms of the goals of
higher education and the needs and interests of the campus community itself.
The low level of attention to the local community in many of the student newspapers indi
cates that this is an area of potential growth. The campus press can improve its ability to rep
resent the institution to the community and the community to the students. Other areas that
were weak in the present study's sample included coverage of student services, educational
opportunities, and opportunities to become involved in extra-curricular offerings. Increased
attention to these areas should be investigated as a potential aid for student development.
It would be of value to continue to investigate differences in press contents among differ
ent types of institutions as a means of identifying how institutions with different characteris
tics vary in educational priorities and attitudes toward student expression. Similarly, contin
ued examination of differences in contents among newspapers with different administrative
structures would be of value in assessing goals and objectives and the impact of governance
styles. A large random sample would assure generality and would permit the use of covar-
iates to control for confounded demographic variables.
The student press in the United States is a remarkable resource. Older than the country it
self, it has evolved in ways quite unimagined even a few decades ago. If the campus news
paper is to fully serve all of its constituencies, it is the responsibility of student development
professionals to continue to investiagte its objectives and the effects it has on the students
1 2 8
'who work on it and on those who read it. It must not be regarded as a trivial extra-curricular
activity for a few students, or as a simple forum for official notices, for to do so would be to
gnore, among many vital roles and services, the potential of the student press for revealing
:he institution to itself.
129
I
| References
I
American Council on Education. American Universities and Colleges. Washington, D.C.: Au-
j thor, 1928.
American Council on Education. The student personnel point of view. Washington, D.C.: A u -:
thor, 1949.
I
(American Council on Education. Institutional research project. Washington, D.C.: Author,
i 1966-1971 I
j !
/ jAmerican Council on Education. Report of the special commission on student newspapers. Wash-
! I
ington, D.C.: Author, November, 1971. j
American Newspaper Publishers Association, Journalism education. Eaton, Pa.: Author, 1979!
i
Anderson, C. Personal communication, 1978. !
i
! j
Anotclli v. Hammond, 308 F. Supp. 1329, D. Mass (1970). j
i I
'Apostal, R.A. Student subcultures and personal values. Journal of College Student Personnel,\
|
; 1968, 9, 34-39. I
lAsch, S.E. Studies of independence and conformity. Psychological Monographs, 1956, 70, No. 9.|
(Associated Collegiate Press, Newspaper guidebook. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, j
j 1974.
| !
Astin, A.W. An empirical characterization of higher education institutions. Journal of Educa-\
i
; tional Psychology, 1962, 53, p.224.
(Astin, A.W. Further validation of the environmental assessment technique. Journal of Educa
tional Psychology, 1963, 54, 217-226. |
Astin, A.W. Effects of different college environments on the vocational choices of high apti-1
! |
I tude students. Journal of Counselng Psychology, 1965, 12, 28-34. (a) I
! . ‘ |
Astin, A.W. Who goes where to college? Chicago: Science Research Associates, 1965. (b) j
, j
Astin, A.W. The college environment. Washigton: American Council on Education, 1968.
Astin, A.W. Manual for the Inventory of College Activities. Minneapolis: National Computer Sys-1
terns, 1972. j
(Astin, A.W., Astin, H.S., Bayer, A.E., & Bisconti, A.S. The power of protest. San Francisco: Jo-;
sey-Bass, 1975
130(
___ j
Astin, A.W ., & Holland, J.H. The environmental assessment technique: A way to measure
college environments. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1961, 52, 306-316
Atkins, C. The role of the campus newspaper in the youth vote. College Press Review, 1974,
13, 6-9
Aulepp, L. and Delworth, U. Training manual for an ecosystem model. Boulder: Western Inter
state Commission on Higher Education, 1976.
Baird, C.I. Measuring campus environments. College Board Review, Winter 1973, 3-38.
Barcus, F.E. Education in content analysis: A summary. In In G. Gerbner, O.R. Holsti, K.
Krippendorf, W.J. Paisley, & P.J. Stone (Eds.), The analysis of communications content. New
York: Wiley, 1969.
Barnum, C.E. The modified segregated approach. In H.A. Estrin & A.M. Sanderson (Eds.)
Freedom and censorship of the college press. Dubuque, Iowa: Brown, 1966.
Bayer, A.F., & Astin, A.W. Campus disruption: 1968-1969. Washington: American Council on
Education, 1969.
Bazaar v. Fortune, 476 F. 2d 570, 5th Cir. (1973).
Berelson, B. Content analysis in communication research. Glencoe, 1 1 1 .: Free Press, 1952.
Bert, R.E. Trend is toward supervision of student newspapers. Journalism Quarterly, Winter
1952.
Bing, R. The role of the college press. Journal of Higher Education, October 1955, p. 382.
Bornholdt, J.N. Should the student press be more serious? Journalism Quarterly, Autumn
1966, p. 562.
Brubacher, J. and Rudy, W. Higher education in transition. New York: Harper-Row, 1976.
Burd, G. Urban affairs coverage in the college press: The problems. College Press Review, Win
ter 1973.
whickering, A.W . Institutional differences and student characteristics. Journal of the American
College Health Association, 1966, 14, 168-181.
Chickering, A.W . Education and identity. San Francisco: Josey-Bass, 1969.
Clark, B.R. College image and student selection. In T.R. McConnell (Ed.) Selection and edu
cational differentiation. Berkeley: University of California, 1960.
Clark, B.R., & Trow, M. Determinants of college student subculture. Berkeley: Center for Re
search and Development in Higher Education, 1962.
131
Cockburn, A. and Blackburn, R. (Eds.) Student power: Problems, diagnosis, action. Victoria,
Australia: Penguin Books, 1969.
Cole, N.S., Whitney, D.R., & Holland, J.H. A spatial configuration of occupations. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 1971, 1, 1-9
Conn, E.L. The student newspaper-magazine: Next evolution of the college press. College
Press Reivew, Fall 1969, p. 5.
Cooley, W .W ., & Lohnes, P.R. Multivariate data analysis. New York: Wiley and Sons, 1971.
Czerniejewski, H.J. Your newsroom can be searched. College Press Review, Fall 1978, 10-15.
' Darrell, L. College papers read by 87% of students. Editor and Publisher, August 7, 1975.
Deaver, F. Independence for college newspapers? College Press Review, 1977, 16, 18-21.
Drum, D.J. , & Fiegler, H.E. Outreach in counseling. New York: Intext Educational Publishers,
1973.
„ Duncan, R.D. The campus press: Friend or foe? College and University Journal, 1971, 10, 21-22.
Duscha, J., & Fischer, T.C. The campus press: Freedom and responsibility. Washington, D.C.:
American Association of State Colleges and Universities, 1973.
Ebert, T. Student newspaper on its own. College Management, 1972, 7, 31-32.
Estrin, H .A. What is a college newspaper? In H.A. Estrin & A.M. Sanderson (Eds.) Freedom
and censorship of the college press. Dubuque, Iowa: Brown, 1966.
Estrin, H .A . The collegiate press: Irresistible, irreverent, but relevant. In H.A. Estrin & D.V.
Melus (Eds.) The American language in the 1970's. San Francisco: Boyd and Fraser, 1974.
Estrin, H .A ., & Sanderson, A.M . (Eds.) Freedom and censorship of the college press. Dubuque,
Iowa: Brown, 1966.
Evans, G.P. The college newspaper press: An analysis of its development since 1968 in 4 dimensional
areas. Doctoral Dissertation, Syracuse University, 1975 (University Microfilms No.
76-7697).
Feldman, K.A., & Newcomb, T.M. The impact of college on students. San Francisco: Josey-Bass,
1969
Good, S. Editorials studied in selected Indiana college newspapers. College Press Review,
1976-1977, 16, 18-19.
Gottlieb, D., & Hodgkins, B. College student subcultures: Their structural characteristics in
relation to student attitude change. School Review, Fall 1963, 266-289.
__________________________________________________________________________ ; ___________ 132
Gottlieb, D., Hodgkins, B., & Colby, S. College student subcultures, in K. Yamomoto (Ed.),
The college student and his culture. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1968.
Greenfield, J. College newspapers in search of their own voice. Harper's, May 1966.
Grubb, D.R. A modified integrated approach. In H.A. Estrin & A.M. Sanderson (Eds.), Free
dom and censorship of the college press. Dubuque, Iowa: Brown, 1966.
Heider, F. The psychology of interpersonal communications. New York: Wiley, 1958.
^ Hewison, D.L. Attitudes revealed by student newspaper editorials at five liberal arts colleges,
1963-1973. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Indiana University, 1977.
Himebaugh, G.A. New looks of college journalism. College Press Review, Spring 1973, p. 10.
Holland, J.H. Some explorations of a theory of vocational choice. Psychological Monographs,
1962, 26, p. 76.
Holland, J.H. Explorations of a theory of vocational choice and achievement. Psychological
Reports, 1963, 12, 547-594.
Holland, J.H. The psychology of vocational choice. Waltham, Mass.: Blaisdell Publishing, 1966.
Holland, J.H. Exploration of a theory of vocational choice. Journal of Applied Psychological M on
ographs, 1968, 52, No. 1.
Hopkins, E.J. Educational approach to supervision. College Press Review, January 1957.
--'Hotchkiss, C.W ., & Madson, D.L. The campus press and the law. Student development staff pa
per, 7(1), Colorado State University, 1976-1977.
Hyne, S. Environmental assessment techniques. In L. Aulepp & U. Delworth (Eds.), Training
manual for an ecosystem model, Boulder: Western Interstate Commission on Higher Educa
tion, 1976.
Inglehard, L.E. The college and university press: An examination of its status and some of the myths
surrounding it. Report prepared for the National Council of College Publication Advisers,
1973.
Jacob, P.E. Changing values in college. New York: Harper, 1957.
Janis, I. The problems of validating content analysis. In H. Lasswell & N. Leites (Eds.), The
language of politics. London: Stewart, 1949.
Kaplan, A. , & Goldsen, J. The reliability of content analysis categories. In H. Lasswell & N.
Leites (Eds.), The language of politics. London: Stewart, 1949.
133
Kees, D.J., & McDougall, W.P. A validation study of the Clark-Trow college subculture typol
ogy. Journal of College Student Personnel, 1971, 12, 193-199.
Kerr, C. The frantic race to remain contemporary. In K. Yamomoto (Ed.), The college student
and his culture. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1968.
Kitzes, E. Before the revolution come the words. College Press Review, Spring 1968, 3-5.
Kochersberger, R.C. Who organizes the campus press in New York State? Unpublished B.A. The
sis, St. Bonaventure University, 1972.
Koon, J. Types, traits, and transitions: The lives of four-year college students. Berkeley: Center for
Research and Development in Higher Education, 1974.
Krech, D., Crutchfield, R.S., & Ballachey, E.L. Individual in society. New York: McGraw-Hill,
1962
Lange, A.J. An analysis of the Clark-Trow subtypes. Journal of College Student Personnel, 1972,
213, 347-351.
Langford v. Vanderbilt University, 318 S.W. 2d 568, Tenn., 1958.
Lehman, I.J. Curricular differences in selected cognitive and affective characteristics. Journal of
Educational Measurement, 1965, 2, 103-110.
Lipsett. S.M. Opinion formation in a crisis situation. In S.M. Lipsett & S.S. Wolin (Eds.), The
Berkeley student revolt. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1965.
Lyle, J., & Wilcox, W. Students view the news. College Press Review, Spring 1963, 14-23.
MacDougall, C.D. Understanding public opinion. Dubuque: Brown, 1966.
McCleneghan, M. The student press is number one. College Press Review, Summer 1975, 4-6.
Mencher, M. The administrator and the college press. College Press Reivew, Fall 1969, 14-15.
Mencher, M . The curse of Gutenberg? The Quill, May 1971, 11-12.
Mencher, M. The killing of the campus press. College Press Review, Fall 1973, p. 17.
Miller, T.K., & Prince, J.S. The future of student affairs. San Francisco: Josey-Bass, 1977.
Mitchell, J.S. What's where: The official guide to college majors. New York: Avon, 1979.
Montgomery, R. Journalist Montgomery feels that campus publications are "better than
ever." Czrolinalyse, December 1971, p. 1.
Moore, C.B. Whose perceptions? College Press Review, Summer 1975, 8-11.
National Council of College Publications Advisers. Students, administrators agree on atti
tudes toward the college press. College Press Review, Winter 1969, 13.
134
Newcomb, T.M. Personality and social change. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1943.
Newcomb, T.M. An approach to the study of communicative acts. Psychological Review, 1953,
60, 393-404.
Newcomb, T.M. Student peer group influence and intellectual outcomes of college experi
ence. In R. Sutherland, W. Holtzman, E. Koile, & E. Smith (Eds.) Personality factors on the
college campus. Austin: Hogg Foundation, 1962.
Noah, W.W . , & Anderson, C.N. Automated Publishing Facility: A model of integrated re
sources at the University of Southern California. On-Line Systems, June 1979.
dicker, M .A. The college newspaper—A descriptive definition. College Press Review, 1972, 11,
9-12.
Osipow, S.H. Theories of career development. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1968.
Pace, R. Analysis of a national sample of college environments. Washington: United States Depart
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1967.
Pace, R. College and university environment scales: Technical manual. Princeton: ETS, 1969.
Pace. R., & Stern, G.G. An approach to the psychological measurement of characeristics of
the college environment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1958, 49, 269-277. (a)
Pace, R., & Stern, G.G. A criterion study of college environments. Syracuse: College Entrance Ex
amination Board, 1958. (b)
Papish v. University of Mississippi Board of Curators, 93 S. Ct. 1197 (1973).
Pervin, L.A. Performance and satisfaction as a function of individual-environment fit. Psycho
logical Bulletin, 1968, 69, 56-58.
Pervin, L.A. Reality and non-reality in student expectations of college. In K.A. Feldman
(Ed.), College and the student. New York: Pergamon Press, 1972.
Peterson, R.E. The scope of student protest in 1967-1968. Princeton: Educational Testing Service
1968. (a)
Peterson, R.E. Technical manual: College student questionnaires. Princeton: Educational Testing
Service, 1968. (b)
Politella, D. Patterns of press freedom in a selected group of colleges and universities in Indiana in
1964. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Syracdse University, 1965.
Politella, D. The campus press: A revolution coming. The Quill, September 1967, p. 14.
135
Politella, D. Students, administrators agree on attitudes toward college press. College Press
Review, 1969, p. 13.
Politella, D. Directory of the college student press in America. New York: Oxbridge Communica
tions, 1978.
Pullias, E.V. The task before us. Los Angeles: University of Southern California Press, 1966.
Reuss, C. College credit for student editors? College Press Review, 1975, 15, 8-10.
Rivers, W .L., & Sellers, L. Student newspapers in transition. College Press Review, Fall 1972.
Ross, B.I., & Sellmeyer, R.L. School publications: A guidebook. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1974.
Rubin, D. The campus press: Slouching toward responsibility. Change, 1976, 8, 34-36.
Sanderson, A.M . An integrated approach- The Iowa plan. In H.A. Estrin & A.M. Sanderson
(Eds.) Freedom and censorship of the college press. Dubuque, Iowa: Brown, 1966.
Sanford, T. The college student in the world today. In K. Yamomoto (Ed.), The college student
and his culture. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1968.
Sloan, T.B., & Brown, D.R. The Clark-Trow typology and applicants to a six year A.B.-M.D.
program. Journal of College Student Personnel, 1978, 19, 6-11.
Smith, V.D. Studies in control of student publications. College Press Review, 1964, 4, 19-33.
Stempel, G.H. Students' and campus editors' news concepts. College Press Review, Spring
1964, 10-12.
Stone, G.C. Can the campus press survive today in its present state? The Collegiate Journalist,
Spring 1972, p. 5.
Tinker v. Detroit Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. (1969).
Trager, R. Very recent court cases involving the student press. Unpublished report, National
Council of College Publication Advisors, 1973.
Trow, M. The campus viewed as a culture. In H.T. Sprague (Ed.), Research on college students.
Boulder: Western Interstate Commission on Higher Education, 1960.
UCLA Committee on the Campus Press Report. Berkeley, 1970.
Van Bremen, L. Independence: Myth or reality? College Press Reivew, 1975, 15, 19-20.
Van Turbergen, N. The student press and campus unrest. Journalism Quarterly, Summer 1970,
368-372.
Walz, G., & Miller, J. School climates and student behavior: Implications for the counselor
role. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1967, 47, 859-867.
136
Wanty, V. What's the source of news for community college students? College and University
Personnel, 1969, 46, 24.
Weisinger, R. The changing role of student personnel work in relation to the campus press.
M S U Orient, 1975-1976, 11, 1-7.
- Whiting, A .N. The campus press: A dysfunctional entity. Educational Record, 1973 54, 260-264.
Whitney, D.R. A method for representing differences among college environments. Journal of
Educational Research, January 1973, 199-202.
Wilcox, W. The college newspaper—What is its function? In H.A. Estrin & A.M. Sanderson
(Eds.) Freedom and censorship of the college press. Dubuque: Brown, 1966.
Williams, C.N. Occupational choice of male graduate students as related to values and per
sonality. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 1972, 2, 39-46.
Wilson, C.C. A comparative analysis of independent and academic laboratory student newspapers in
selected California universities. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Southern
California, 1977.
Windhauser, J.W., & Lattimore, D.L. News interest and satisfaction: Differences between edi
tors and readers. College Press Review, 1973, 12, p. 31.
Yablonsky, B. The segregated approach in laboratory newspapers. In H.A. Estrin & A.M .
Sanderson (Eds.) Freedom and censorship of the college press. Dubuque, Iowa: Brown, 1966.
Zimmer, T.A. The views of college newspaper editors on their readers, newspapers, and
news policies. Journal of Higher Education, 1975, 46, 451-459.
137
Appendices
138
Appendix I
Content Categories for Student Newspapers
Note: The order of the content categories was established by the author's pilot work, and
represents the average order of frequency for the initial four newspapers analyzed. This man
ner of ordering was seen as a convenience for analysts, as the most commonly used catego
ries appeared near the top of the content analysis form.
1. Varsity Sports: Stories concerning athletic events officially sanctioned by the college
or university and conducted on an intercollegiate basis. Includes profiles of athletes and
coaches. Includes schedules and summaries of scores. Does not include club or intramural
sports. Includes administrative areas directly related to varsity athletics.
2. Administrative News: Stories concerning the administration of the institution, includ
ing governance, budget, hiring and other personnel policies, relationship to state or local
government, and activities of the regents, trustees, or directors related to the operation of
the institution.
. 3. Campus News: "Hard” news pertaining to the campus or institution. Coverage of ac
tual events, as opposed to trend analysis or general descriptions. Includes campus-communi
ty interactions where these are manifested in specific events. Excludes athletic events and ac
tivities confined to campus administration. Excludes planned student activities, unless some
spontaneous action occurred that is by itself newsworthy.
4. Bulletin Board: Short items (generally less than three column inches) which serve pri-
marly to announce an event or service without elaborating on the nature of the event or
service.
5. Student Government: Articles pertaining to the operation of bodies composed of elect
ed student representatives, whether an actual student government, administrative advisory
body, or "associated student" organization. Includes the ways in which student administra
tive bodies dispense funds, hold elections, make and interpret regulations, negotiate with
the administration, and how their members campaign.
6. Personality Stories: Stories primarily biographical in nature or which intend to de
scribe or depict an individual. The focus is on the person, rather than on events surrounding
139
the person that impact the campus or community. Excludes participants in varsity athletics or
students running for office.
7. Future Student Activities: Descriptions, beyond simple announcements, of scheduled
and institutionally sanctioned student activities to be held in the future. These events are
generally confined to campus, but may be off-campus, such as "Disneyland Night." Excludes
fraternity or sorority functions unless these are presented for the campus at large.
8. General Editorials: Editorials are classified by subject matter, as are other articles. This
category is for editorials which cannot be more specifically classified.
9. Student Services: Articles describing or discussing services on campus which are availa
ble to students. Includes such services as health and counseling centers, career planning and
placement, and recreation. Can also include less traditional "student services," such as librar
ies or study centers.
10. Campus Local Color: Articles highlighting some aspect of the campus environment
which characterizes the institution. Does not generally apply to specific events, but rather
features which contribute to the ambience. Examples might be "Tommy Trojan," the "oldest
building on campus," "Founders' Rock," or other entities that give the campus a distinctive
flavor.
11. Minorities: Stories whose primary focus is the special problems of minority groups,
or special events planned primarily for minority groups. The definition of a minority group is
deliberately general, is not limited to ethnic minorities, and can depend to some extent on
the tone of the article. Thus, a psychological study of homosexuality would probably not
fit into this category; an examination of the gay lifestyle probably would. Groups which may
be considered minority groups (if so treated by the article) include: blacks, Hispanics, wom
en, gays, orientals, the handicapped, native Americans, religious groups, and international
students. Specific news events, such as a demonstration, and services, such as international
student counseling, are excluded.
12. Political Cartoons: Cartoons with a predominately political thrust. Designed to inform
or satirize, rather than simply entertain. Ignored by some analysts and not included in final
calculations.
13. General Features: Features that are intended to educate the reader. Topics include
science, politics, economics, culture, and art. Feature articles generally do not focus on specif
140
ic events, although events may be used to illustrate a broader thesis. Thus, a speech by a
politician on campus is a news event. An analysis of a candidate's platform is a feature arti
cle. This category generally excludes varsity sports, campus local color, and minority affairs
(unless the problems discussed are in a broader context than the special problems facing eth
nic or other minorities).
14. Club and Intramural Sports: Articles covering sports events involving students but not
conducted on the varsity level. May be intercollegiate club sports (where this status is clearly
identified in the article) or intramural competitions. Includes "non-traditional" collegiate
sports such as frisbee or billiards.
15. State, National, International News: News events on the state, national, or internation
al level. Focus must be on specific events. Broader expositions of current political, economic,
or social questions constitute feature articles.
16. Local News: As above, except at the local level. "Local" is defined differently in differ
ent contexts. Generally, the term means the immediate community within which the univers
ity resides. If the university or college is located in a suburb, the broader city is regarded as
local. A rural setting can include the surrounding countryside.
17. Educational Opportunities: Articles pertaining to courses, programs, or facilities devot
ed to the intellectual growth of students.
18. Past Student Activities: Articles describing or discussing student activities that occurred
in the past. To qualify, events must have been scheduled and sanctioned by the institution.
Spontaneous events are considered campus news.
19. Academic Policies: Discussions or reports of policy affecting the academic life of the in
stitution. Includes information about prerequisites, degree requirements, breadth require
ments, grading standards, etc.
20. Student Media: Articles about student-operated mass media on campus, including the
newspaper, yearbook, or broadcast stations. Does not include official sources of information
compiled by the administration or faculty, such as bulletins or catalogs.
21. Stage Reviews: Reviews or discussions about live performances, excluding musical con
certs. Can include theater, ballet, musical-comedies, comic acts, readings, etc. This category,
and all subsequent categories denoted "reviews," can include discussions of personalities if
the emphasis is on contributions made to specific art forms. Reviews can also include general
141
discussions of genres if specific instances are cited and descriptions of them are emphasized.
Does not include highly general discussions, such as the effect of modern theater on our
society, which would be a feature article (of the cultural type).
22. Fellowships, Grants, Scholarships: Articles about financial opportunities related to aca
demic work. Can include internships and practica if money is earned in the context of an ed
ucational experience.
23. Live Music Reviews: Reviews or discussions of live musical performances.
24. Record and Recording Artist Reviews: Reivews or discussions about records and re
cording artists.
25. Greek Activities: Articles about fraternities or sororities. Can include discussions of
Greek letter society life, the relationship between fraternities and sororities and the institu
tion, events for fraternity and sorority members, and broader campus events involving or
hosted by Greek letter societies if the focus is on their contribution.
26. Consumer Articles: Articles aimed at educating the reader as a consumer. Can include
products and services, money management, or investment opportunities.
27. Film Reviews: Reviews or discussions of films or of film as an art form if specific mov
ies are emphasized.
28. University Service: Articles about ways in which the university serves the community
or human race. Could include coverage of such topics as a tutorial program for local school
children, reports of an urban renewal project sponsored by the institution, or the application
of a new scientific discovery in agriculture.
29. Local Businesses: Articles about businesses in the immediate community around the
campus providing goods or services to students. Supercedes consumer articles.
30. Activism: Articles about demonstrations, student strikes, boycotts, riots, or other forms
of organized or spontaneous mass protest on any college or university campus. Includes off-
campus events if they were characterized by an overwhelming or highly conspicuous student
participation.
31. Programs for Professionals: Educational programs for off-campus populations, includ
ing business people, professionals, housewives, prisoners, the handicapped, etc. Includes
continuing professional education. Can be on- or off-campus, but must be official offerings of
the institution.
142
32. Commercial Broadcast: Articles discussing commercial broadcast stations, their pro
grams, or programming practices. Includes schedules and personality stories if the focus is
on the individual's contribution to broadcasting.
33. Other Entertainment: Articles about entertaining events or activities that do not fit
into a more specific category. Includes professional sports and book reviews.
143
Appendix II
Institutions in the Sample
The number preceding each institution is a control number. An asterisk denotes WAUPM
membership; parenthetical references refer to public vs. private status, four year vs. two year
curricula, enrollment, publications schedule (issues per week or month), and governance sta
tus (Type 1— independently incorporated; Type 2— not independently incorporated but edi
torially independent by virtue of administrative structure and practice; Type 3— potentially
editorially dependent, often the product of a journalism program). Data were taken from
Politella (1978), a questionnaire circulated by the author (to be subsequently described), and
personal communication.
1. The Alligator/ University of Florida (public; 4 yr.; 28,000; 5 /week; Type 1)
2. The California Tech, California Institute of Technology (private; 4 yr.; 1,544; 1/week; Type
1)
5. The Columbia Spectator, Columbia University (private; 4 yr.; 16,000; 5 /week; Type 1)
7. The Daily Aztec, San Diego State University (public; 4 yr.; 33,000; 4 /w k ; Type 1)
8. The Daily Barometer*, Oregon State University (public; 4 yr.; 15,915; 5 /week; Type 2)
9. The D aily B ruin*, University of California, Los Angeles (public; 4 yr.; 33,000;
5/week;Type 2)
10. The Daily Californian*, University of California (public; 4 yr.; 30,000, 5 /w eek, Type 1)
11. The Daily Campus*, Southern Methodist University (private; 4 yr.; 6,000; 4 /w k ; Type 1)
12. The Daily Emerald*, University of Oregon (public; 4 yr.; 17,000; 5 /week; Type 1)
13. The Daily Evergreen*, Washington State University (public; 4 yr.; 16,174; 4 /week; Type
2)
14. The Daily Fortyniner*, California State University, Long Beach (public; 4 yr.; 32,000;
5 /w eek; Type 3)
15. The Daily Ilini*, University of Illinois (public; 4 yr.; 36,145; 5 /week; Type 1)
16. The Daily Nexus*, University of California, Santa Barbara (public; 4 yr.; 14,840; 5 /week;
Type 2)
144
17. The Daily Sundial*, California State University, Northridge (public; 4 yr.; 25,377; 4 / wk;
Type 3)
19. The Daily Trojan*, University of Southern California (private; 4 yr.; 23,500; 5 /week;
Type 2)
20. The Daily Universe, Brigham Young University (private; 4 yr.; 26,000; 5 /week; Type
3)
21. The Daily Utah Chronicle, University of Utah (public; 4 yr.; 21,471; 5/w eek; Type 2)
22. The Diamondback, University of Maryland (public; 4 yr.; 35,000; 5 /week; Type 1)
50. The Dominguez News, California State College, Dominguez Hills (public; 4 yr.; 6,803;
1 /w k ; Type 1)
23. The Graphic, Pepperdine University, Malibu (private; 4 yr.; 1,500; 1/week; Type 3)
25. The Highlander, University of California, Riverside (public; 4 yr.; 5,100; 1/w k ; Type 2)
26. The Hoya, Georgetown University (private; 4 yr.; 10,301; 1/w k ; Type 2)
27. The Indiana Daily Student*, Indiana University (public; 4 yr.; 32,000; 5 /w k ; Type 2)
52. Insight, California State University, Fresno (public; 4 yr.; 15,356; 1/w k ; Type 3)
28. The Lantern*, Ohio State University (public; 4 yr.; 54,650; 5 /w k ; Type 3)
54. New University, University of California, Irvine (public; 4 yr.; 9,926; 1 /w k ; type 2)
31. The Observer, Notre Dame University (private; 4 yr.; 6,700; 5 /w k ; Type 1)
32. The Oklahoma Daily*, University of Oklahoma (public; 4 yr.; 20,000; 5 /w k ; Type 2)
51. The Oracle, Oral Roberts University (private, 4 yr.; 3,000; 1/w k ; Type 3)
33. Orion, California State University, Chico (public; 4 yr.; 12,666; 1/w k ; Type 3)
36. The Poly Post, California Polytechnic University (public; 4 yr.; 11,100; 2 /w k ; Type 2)
38. Quaker Campus, Whittier College (private; 4 yr.; 1,679; 1/w k ; Type 3)
39. Raider Reporter, Moorpark College (public; 2 yr.; 11,200; 1/w k; Type 2)
40. Renegade Rip, Bakersfield College (public; 2 yr.; 10,942; 1 /w k ; Type 3)
41. Roosevelt Torch, Roosevelt University (private; 4 yr.; 6,532; 1/w k ; Type 3)
145
Appendix III
Questionnaire
1. What percent of your newspaper budget is supplied through the administration of the
college or university with which your newspaper is associated?
2. Is your newspaper incorporated independently of the college or university?
3. Is your newspaper produced all or in part by a journalism class or as part of coursework
for journalism classes?
a. What percentage of your newspaper staff work on the paper as part of their course-
work?
b. Are newspaper stories or contributions reviewed after publication by faculty or admin
istration advisors for the purpose of assigning grades or credit?
4. Which staff members, if any, are paid for their contributions?
5. Do faculty or administration advisers review material prior to publication?
a. Is adviser approval required prior to publication of a story?
b. What percentage of the stories are reviewed prior to publication?
6. Do faculty or administration advisers assign staff members to particular stories or beats?
a. What percentage of stories are assigned in this manner?
7. What is the percentage of staff members appointed by the faculty or administration?
a. What positions on the staff are filled in this manner?
b. Are students involved in the appointment process? If appointments are made by a
committee, what is the percent of student representation on the committee?
146
8. Do students consult with faculty or administration advisers regarding topics, writing
style, investigative techniques, or other journalistic matters prior to the writing of a story?
a. What is the percentage of stories published following such advisement?
b. Are these contacts always student initiated?
c. If not, what percentage are adviser initiated?
9. Do you consider your newspaper to be editorially independent of the faculty or adminis
tration?
147
Appendix IV
Flowchart for Governance Determination
1. Question 9.
a. If "yes,” continue.
b. If "no," newspaper is Type 3.
2. Question 3.
a. If "yes," newspaper is Type 1.
b. If "no," continue.
3. Question 2.
a. If "no," continue.
b. If "yes," then
(1) If answer to "a" is less than 10%, go to (4).
(2) If answer to "b" is "yes/yes," newspaper is Type 3.
If answer to "b" is "n o /n o ," then go to (3).
If answer to "b" is "yes/no," then go to (3).
(3) Qestion 6.
(a) If answer is less than 10%, continue.
(b) If answer is greater than 10%, newspaper is Type 3.
(4) Question 7.
(a) If more than the editor and advertising manager, newspaper is Type 3.
(b) If "a" is less than 50% student representation, newspaper is Type 3.
(5) Question 8.
(a) If answer is "no," then newspaper is Type 2.
(b) If "a" is greater than 10%, go to (c)
(c) If "a" is less than 10%, newspaper is Type 2.
(d) If "b" is "faculty," newspaper is Type 3.
148
Appendix V
Distribution of Degrees Awarded in Holland Personality Orientations
Institutions were assessed on the basis of degrees awarded in major fields associated with the
six Holland personality orientations. The percentages of degrees in each of these orientations
for each institution in the sample are given below. The six orientations are: Realistic (R),
Investigative (I), Enterprising(E), Social (S), Artistic (A), and Conventional (C).
Institution R I E S A C
Arizona State University 9.6 13.5 15.0 45.0 9.5 7.2
Bakersfield College 14.5 7.5 6.9 44.6 0.6 25.8
Brigham Young University 11.7 13.4 12.7 37.8 14.6 9.8
California State Polytechnic University 33.1 18.5 8.9 16.4 2.5 220.5
California Institute of Technology 32.9 65.3 0.0 0.0 1.7
California State University, Chico
California State University,
18.4 10.0 8.0 38.0 10.3 15.3
Dominguez Hills 3.0 11.2 16.5 30.4 13.9 24.8
California State University, Fresno
California State University,
19.6 12.8 3.1 35.9 12.6 16.0
Long Beach
California State University,
11.9 14.4 7.3 29.3 16.7 20.3
Northridge 6.4 10.4 10.2 23.1 19.8 29.9
Georgetown University 0.0 10.7 29.0 13.1 17.5 30.0
Indiana University 6.1 20.0 11.4 29.0 22.8 10.7
Long Beach City College 16.2 11.4 0.0 21.8 5.4 45.2
Los Angeles Pierce College 19.0 5.0 2.3 19.2 20.6 33.9
Los Angeles Valley College 6.8 14.7 2.1 20.3 18.7 37.4
Moorpark College 13.8 10.3 12.1 31.0 10.3 22.4
Notre Dame University 14.3 20.1 9.2 3.6 12.0 40.8
Ohio State University 21.7 18.7 10.5 25.6 14.0 9.4
149
Institution R I E S A C
Oral Roberts University 5.1 9.4 3.7 54.6 12.0 15.1
Oregon State University 33.5 15.8 20.4 22.3 6.3 1.6
Pepperdine University 3.0 5.4 54.5 20.8 14.5 1.8
Roosevelt University 0.5 11.5 20.8 23.0 14.8 29.4
San Diego State University 9.6 13.2 6.8 32.3 16.8 21.3
Southern Methodist University 6.9 8.8 6.7 16.8 16.2 44.2
Stanford University 8.3 37.6 14.9 12.8 13.7 12.5
Texas Technological University 17.5 13.2 10.6 33.4 9.0 16.1
University of California, Berkeley 17.4 21.0 19.9 18.4 17.1 5.9
University of California, Irvine 5.2 20.1 9.2 3.6 12.0 40.8
University of California, Los Angeles 5.9 22.1 19.7 21.4 22.5 8.3
University of California, Riverside 2.1 39.4 16.6 23.5 12.4 5.9
University of California, Santa Barbara 6.1 26.7 16.8 24.6 21.7 4.1
University of Florida 18.4 23.5 9.9 27.0 10.1 10.9
University of Illinois 22.1 21.1 6.8 20.5 12.8 16.5
University of Miami 7.9 21.1 6.8 20.5 12.8 16.5
University of Maryland 15.3 16.7 8.4 31.9 13.2 14.5
University of Nevada 19.1 11.8 13.1 31.2 16.7 8.0
University of Oklahoma 10.7 19.6 11.4 31.1 13.7 13.4
University of Oregon 7.5 22.0 16.7 37.4 13.4 8.9
University of Southern California 8.0 16.2 43.4 15.7 15.0 1.6
University of Utah 11.7 18.1 9.8 30.0 16.6 13.8
Utah State University 29.6 13.0 7.0 26.2 12.9 11.1
University of Washington 5.0 69.0 2.8 9.0 7.0 6.8
Washington State University 21.8 20.6 19.6 27.5 7.8 2.5
150
Appendix VI
Correlation Matrix
01
i 2 ACAQ~*ir
5 GDI A1 . CN
31 i .or, ooo -0 .515 4? 0 .263 45 -0.2 2 9 1 1 - q .
32 - C.5154? 1.30000 - C . 01543 - 0.3 70 °.? - 0.
Acao-r^r c 0.26345 - 0 . 0 1543 1 .000 00 - 0 . 7 1 99a
-C .
5DCIAL - 0.22511 -0 . 0 70 52 - 0 . 7 1 ° 3G 1 • n 0 c = q V •
3 N - 0 . 1 2 372 -0 . 0 94 92 -0 . 660 79 0.53128 1 .
3FF
0.3C609 -0 .0 23 15 0 . = 7095 - 0 . 6 9 1 2 3 - G .
31A 2.32 784 - 0 . 4 78 30 0 . 4 3 1 6q - 0 . 3 4 4 7 = - 8.
32 A - C . 45773 3.887 94 0 .26511 - 0 . 2 2 1 1 2 -0 .
31 S 0.35395 - 0 . 4 9 1 7 7 0. 121R7 - 0 . 0 a497 - C .
3 2 S - 0.47982 0 .930 80 -0 .13477 0.16532 0.
3 ION 0.97 40G - 0 . 5 0 2 0 9 0 . 173 7q - C • 1 7 = ? 7 - 0 .
3 2 3 N - 0.4=662 0 .= 63 36 - 0 . 1 0 ° 32 0 . 0! 7 « 6 *- •
Dl 0FC 0 . 32 99 8 - 0 . 4 7 9 40 0.42093 - 0 .3 2 6 3 9
- 0 .
320FF
- 0.44 913 0. 97125 0 . 27b5 ~ -G .229 05 - 3 .
R 0.10797 0 .02737 0 .1 8 7 70 0.0 5539 - 0 .
I Ci. 24 218 0. 143 al 0 . 004 50 - 0 . 1 4 891 - P .
- 0.1 3256 0. 13507 - P .1 = 837 0.17624 i> •
-0.3 1 2 1 1 0. 0 0= 2= C , .252 31 - 0.0=501 - 0 .
•
- 0 .C 6 14H 0 . 06146 0 . 08210 - 0 .2 5 0 5 3 0 .
3 0.C7832 -0 . 34209 - 0 . 2 3 2 9? 0 . 1 5 G C C 0.
I F '
>1* 99 A 9 1?
15 3 7 2 0 . 3 0 6 9 3 3 . 9 2 7 8 4 - 0 . 4 5 7 7 t n.9 5399
- 0 . 479R?
f 3 48 2 - 0 . 0 23 1 9
.4 74 .33 0 . 9 R7 = n - 9 . 4 9 1 7 7 0 . 0 3 0 8 0
66 ? 7 ° n . ? 70 3 S 1.4316= 0. 2 651 1 n .1 ? n r - 0 . 1 3 4 7 7
5 P 128 - 0 . 8 9 1 2 3 - 1 . 3 4 4 7 ? - 0. 2 2 1 ’ 2 - 0 .? ?4?7 0 . 1 6 5 3 ?
Or 00 C - 0 . 6 6 8 6 1 - ) . 2 3 3 95 - 0 . =44 7 q - 0 . 2 5705 0 . 0 1 7 8 4
68 66 1 1 . 1 0 3 0 3 3 . 4 4 1 9 & 0. '9 439 9 0 . 1 9 7 9 7 - 0 . 1 5 6 9 5
2 3 3 Q 5 0 . 4 4 3 ? 8
1 . 0 0 1 0 ) - n . 4247ft 0 .7 8893 - 0 . 4462 3
24 4 3 ° 0 . 2 43 9-'
- 3 . 4 2 4 "7 0 1. 2003 0 - 0 .4 3 667 0. 7 3 5 1 4
0 5 7 0 5 0 . 1 8 7 = 7 3 . 7 8 9 = 8 - 2 . 436 5 7 1 .0 1 3 0 03 - 0 . 4 5 7 7 4
•31784 - 0 . 1 3 8 7 6 - 3 . 4 4 5 23 0. 7351 4 - n .4 5774 t . 00 000
0 2 1 0 ° 0 . 2 2 3 9 5 3 . 4 4 ? 1 3 - 0. 4 45 9 5
0 .= 6 06 6 - 0 . 467 34
C 6 9 4 7 - C . l 1 4 ' 9
- 3 . 4 6 ) 7 7 C . 70574
- r .4 7375 0 . ° 4 4 1 *
0 . 4 5 5 2 ? 3 . ? = 3 5 7 - C . 4 2 S 5 o r .8 0 47 6 - 0 . 4 4 6 2 ?
25 4 5 5 0 . 2 6 = 33 - 0 . 4 1 5 7 9 P. 9957 r.
- 8 . 4 7 846 0 . 7 1 4 9 ?
01 6 7 6 0 . 1 9 9 0 9 3 .3 -9 5 7?
Q . 9 4 4 S 0
0 .1 51 84 0. 150 37
35 179 0 . 1 0 3 5 = 3 . 1 - 2 1 3 0. C ° R C 7 0 .3 5081 0. 0 3 5 3 6
2 1 6 7 0 - G• 1 ° 3 13 - ) . 3 5 9 4 7 n. 5 2*1 c.
- 0 . 1 5 5 45 0. 1 9PAI
0 - 2 8 3 0.1 56 2? - 3 . 2 9 4 = 1 0 . 1 7 9 9 J - ° .3 8519 0 . 0 0 4 0 3
C 5 ° 1R 0 . 1 0 7 7 9 - 3 . 3 3 5 6 3 n . P PP 9 x - 0 .1 7 391 - 0 . 0 3 6 = 7
2 5 4 8 4
- 0 .'’ B? 36 3 . 3 4 4 6 8 - r. 7 2=4 7 0 . 9 4 2 06 - 0 . 2 79 0-
31
32
ACAO^irc
3 ?CIAL
;
JFF
3 1 A
2 2 A
31 S
3 2S
3 ION
3 2 ON
313FF
3? OFF
D l? F F 0 2 0FC
c
7
*
5 - 7 013 M D?3 N
0 . 9 2 9 9 8 - 0 . 4 4 9 1 3 0 . 1 0 7 97 0 . 2 4 2 1 9 - 0 . 1 7 2 5 6 - 0 . 3 1 2 1 1
. T
3 61 48 0. 0 7®= = 0 .= 7 4 03
- 0 . 4 9 5 6 3
- 0 . 4 7 940 3 . 8 71 25 0 . 027 37 0 . 1 4 3 = 1 C . 1 7 = 0 7 0 . J c = ? = ■ 5 3 61 46 - 1. 7 4?' - C . 5 = ? 0 = 0 . = 65 56
0 . 4 ? Q93 0 . 2 76 5? 0 . 1977 0 0 .0 0 * 6 0 - 0 . 1 = 8 3 3
0 . = 6 ?3 i
3
1 o j i i
9.1 7375 - 0 .1 0 32
- 0 . 32 638 - C . 229 05 0 • 055 38 - 0 . 1 4 891 0 . 1 7 6 2 4 - 0 . 3 c 5 01 2 33 53 0. 1 60 ) r - 0 . 1 7 ?97 0 . 0 1 5 96
- C . 2 2 =0 3 - 0 . 2 5 4 9 5 - ” . 01 5 7 8 - 2 . 3 3 1 7 9
P . 2 j 5 70 - 0 . 3 9297 3 3 5 9 17 0. ?54= 4 - G . J ! 1 0 = 0 . 3 6 = 4 7
0 . 4 5 5 2 2 G. 2 6 5 33 0 . 15 9 0° U . I O D 1^ - C . 1 = 3 1 3 0 . 1 5 5 2 ? 3 I 0 7 7“ - 0 . ORQ < 6 0.?? 5 Hj - G . 1 1 4 =5
0 . 5 ? 35 7 - 0 . 4 1 6 72 0 . 0 = 5 7 2 0 . 1 5 2 1 3 - 0 . 0 « = 4 7 - C . 2 2 4 =1 3 C 5 60 n. ? 44 6 O 0 .4 4 1 ? - 0 . 4 6 ) 77
- G. 4 2 56" 0 . 993 70 0 . 044 58 0 • C 9 8 n 7 r . u ? = 1 6 0 . 1 S=U1
3
3 0 3 2 7
- P . 7?Q* 7 - 0 . 4 4 5 95
G. 7 .83 74
0 . 8 0 476 - 3 . 428 46 0 . 1 5 1 8 4 0 . 3 5 0 81 - P . 16 545 - 0 . 7 8 5 1 - 3 1 27 =1 C. 0 4 ” '■ : . 95 3 65 - 0 . 4 7 5 7 5
- 0 . 4 4 622 3 . 7 1 4 = 2 0 . 150 3C C.C 3 5 3 6 C. 1 5 9 f i l
0 .0 04 0 7
. )
3 7 6 0 7 - a . =7=) - 0 . 4 5 7 3 4
0 . = 4 4 13
0. 9 4 625 - 0 . 4 3 7 4 5 0 . 0 7 6 1 7 0 . 2 3 6 3 = - G . 1 4 1 0 6 - 0 . 7 03 6=
- y
3 4 9 76 0. 1 373 c- 1 .3 3 3 0 3 - 9 . 4 8 5 6 “
- 0 . 4 6 183 0 . 7 6 2 2 3 0 . 0 6 3 91 . . C 6 6 q 4 r . 1 " = 6 3 0.3 0==:’ 3 3 63 37 - 0 . 7 36! 1 - 0 . 4 7 7 6 =
1 . 3 0 0 9 3
1 . o c o o c - 0 . 4 1 7 6 9 0 - 1 2 3 6 3 2 . 1 9 4 = 6 - C . 1 n 0 5 = - 0 . = 6 = 7 = 3 3 5 0 =
0 . = 74 1 1 0.44 6 °5 - 0 . 4 6 1 83
- 0 .4 1 769 1 . 0 0 0 00 0 . 038 32 0 . 1 1 5 2 1 0 • c. 1 0 8 3 0 . 1 3 7 0 8
3 8 4 10 - G . 7?5- \ - 0 . 4 5 T 45
0 . 7 6 2 = 5
0 . 1 2 368 0 . 038 32 1 . 000 00 0 . 0 5 4 4 6 - D . 3 4 6 5 4
- C . 1 316?
- )
5 34 30 - r . ? . i 7 5 i f
0 . 0 63 0 1
0 . 1 8 4 9 6 0 . 1 1521 0 . Q F 4 46 1 . l j u •: = . 1 6 6 2 7 - 0 . 5 4 3 64 - j
1 7 = 1 7 - ' ' . 4 4 1 9 7 0 . 2 35 3 = C . C 66 5 4
- 0 . 1 0 0 5 = 0 . 0 1 0 8 3 - 0 . 3 4 6 54 - G . 1 6 6 2 7
1 . 0 0 OOP - 0 . 1 451 4 3 1 7 36 5 - n . ^ n s t r - 0 . 1 4 I Ci 0 . 1 =8 6 5
- G . 2 6 079 0 . 1 3 3 G8 - 0 . 1 3 1 6 ? - C .54 0 6 = - 0 . 1 4 6 1 4 1 . ) 0 3 0) 3 75 69 - p . 5= 3 4 - 0 . 3 I 3 62 0 . 0 3 = 9 ;
- 0 . 0 1502 0 . 0 8 4 1 0 - 0 . 5 3 * 30 —= . 1 7 = 1 3 0 . 1 7 3 6 5 - 0 .0 35 5- I 3 3 3 0 3 r . 0 0° - p - ) m 7» = . r 63 57
0 . 0 3 41 1 - 0 . 325 = 1 - 0 . 129 =6 - C . 4 4 1 0 7
- 2 . 4 0 S 3 C
- 0 . 0 5 3 04 j 3 G ' 5 ?
1.ran : - 0 .1 7 < 0 5 - 0 .5.5611
LEGEND— D l: Legally Independent; D2: Editorially Independent; Academic; Intellectual/Academic/Cultural Index; Social; Social Events Index; On: On-
Campus Index; Off: Off-Campus Index; D1A: D l X Academic Interaction; D2A: D2 X Academic Interaction; D1S: D l X Social Interaction; D2S: D2 X Social
Interaction; D IO n: D l X O n Interaction; D20n: D2 X On Interaction; DIO ff: D l X Off Interaction; D20ff; D2 X Off Interaction; R; Realitic PersonalityOrien-
taton Score; I: Investigative Personality Orientation Score; E: Enterprising Personality Orientation Score; S: Social Personality' Orientation Score; A: Artistic
Personality Orientation Score; C: Conventional Personality Orientation Score

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Assessment of the Westmont College campus environment through perceptions of institutional characteristics held by students, faculty, administrators, and trustees

PDF

An analysis of the academic achievement of veterans in a California public junior college

PDF

Characteristics of leadership of selected historical leaders in higher education in the United States with an exploratory study of the applicability of these characteristics to modern educational...

PDF

Higher education and development in Indonesia: The viability of the multi-purpose function of the community college at the undergraduate level of the university system

PDF

Relationships between recalled parent-child relations and adult-level decision making style

PDF

A system dynamics model for the assessment of the effects of tuition on enrollment in a single campus, California community college district

PDF

The relationship of mode of organizing feature in print materials of two readability levels to the retention scores of college undergraduates

PDF

The effects of magazines sent to the homes of second and fifth grade students

PDF

Systems analysis and the development of management information systems in California community colleges

PDF

An investigation of differences in collegiate academic progress among students participating and not participating in advanced placement

PDF

The evolution of consciousness as the foundation of meaning and its implications for education and counseling

PDF

The secularization of American higher education: The relationship between religion and the university as perceived by selected university presidents, 1867-1913

PDF

The effect of seating position on performance and personality in a college classroom

PDF

The history of the American-Armenian International College: Promise and reality

PDF

The relationship between the level of cognitive development and success in first-year algebra

PDF

An evaluation of personnel services in twelve liberal arts colleges

PDF

A study of campus environment: A comparative study of the perception of the campus environment by the several groups affecting a religiously oriented liberal arts college

PDF

A comparative analysis, and consequent synthesis, of selected contemporary psychological concepts of creativity and their implications for education

PDF

A method for evaluating a university physical education program

PDF

Long Beach City College: the development of an instrument and the analysis of perceived functions of staff members and selected community groups

Asset Metadata

Creator Noah, William Warren (author)

Core Title The relationship between the distribution of campus newspaper content and the college environment

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Education

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag education, higher,mass communications,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c26-491515

Unique identifier UC11245975

Identifier usctheses-c26-491515 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier DP24789.pdf

Dmrecord 491515

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Noah, William Warren

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA