University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The relationship of middle-class elementary school students' internal control to intelligence, achievement, self-concept, and teachers' ratings

(USC Thesis Other)

The relationship of middle-class elementary school students' internal control to intelligence, achievement, self-concept, and teachers' ratings

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content THE RELATIONSHIP OF MIDDLE-CLASS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS' INTERNAL CONTROL TO INTELLIGENCE, ACHIEVEMENT, SELF-CONCEPT, AND TEACHERS' RATINGS by Joseph Hyman Share A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the. Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Education) August 1972 INFORMATION TO USERS This dissertation was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page{s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 A Xerox Education Company I I 73-773 SHARE, Joseph Hyman, 1939- THE RELATIONSHIP OF MIDDLE-CLASS ELB4ENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS' INTERNAL CONTROL TO INTELLIGENCE, ACHIEVEMENT, SELF-CONCEPT, AND TEACHERS' RATINGS. University of Southern California, Ph.D., 1972 Education, psychology University Microfilms, A XEROX Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED. U N IV E R S IT Y O F S O U T H E R N C A L IF O R N IA TH E GRADUATE SCHO OL U N IV E R S ITY PARK LOS ANGELES, C A LIF O R N IA 9 0 0 0 7 This dissertation, written by ........ Joseph. H y m a n . ......... under the direction of h.XS... Dissertation Com mittee, and approved by a ll its members, has been presented to and accepted by T h e G rad u ate School, in partial fulfillm ent of require ments of the degree of D O C T O R O F P H I L O S O P H Y D ate i DISSERTATION C O M M ITTE E PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have in d is tin ct p rin t. Filmed as received. University Microfilms, A Xerox Education Company ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Doctoral Committee has provided exemplary I scholarship and help throughout the stages of this program. ;As Committee Chairman, Dr. James Magary offered valuable i assistance during this investigation. Drs. William Ofman and Richard Koch contributed consistent support and encouragement in addition to constructive suggestions. Dr. Myron Dembo provided valuable insight in establishing the early critical stages of this investiga tion. Dr. William Michael greatly assisted in research methodologies through well designed instruction and advice. Finally, the writer is indebted to his wife, Iris; his son, Steven; and his daughter, Kari for their patience and understanding. L TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ....................................... ii ;LIST OF T A B L E S ....................................... v i i |Chapter | I. PRESENTATION OF THE ISSUE................... 1 Introduction Rationale Underlying the Investigation Purpose of the Study Definitions of Terms Organization of the Remaining Chapters II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE................... 16 Parental Influence Ethnic and Socioeconomic Factors Intellectual Ability Reinforcement Achievement Summary III. PROCEDURES OF THE STUDY...................... 29 Theoretical Framework Methodological Assumptions Limitations Method Null Hypotheses iii Chapter Page IV. FINDINGS..................................... 41 Introduction Description of Sample and Variables Discussipn of Findings J Summary of Findings V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . 80 Summary j Methodology Conclusions Recommendations REFERENCES........................................... 94 ; APPENDICES........................................... 100 A. Locus of Control............................... 101 [ B. Teacher Observation Ratings .................... 103 i i i C. The Way I Feel About Myself 105 ’ I Table i : 1. I 2* i I I 3. I i t 4. i 5. 6. 7. I t I 8. i | i LIST OF TABLES Description of Subjects Relative to Complete and Incomplete Data ........................ Description of Instruments by Grade Level . . Descriptive Statistics on Measures of IQ, Internal Control, Self-Concept and Reading for Grade 2 ................................. Correlation Coefficients on Measures of Internal Control, Self-Concept, IQ, and Reading for Grade 2 ........................ Correlation Coefficients on Measures of Internal Control, Self-Concept, IQ, and Reading for Grade 2 Males ................. Correlation Coefficients on Measures of Internal Control, Self-Concept, IQ, and Reading for Grade 2 Females ............... Correlation Coefficients on Measures of Teacher Observation Ratings, Internal Con trol, Self-Concept, IQ, and Reading for Grade 2 ..................................... Correlation Coefficients on Measures of Teacher Observation Ratings, Internal Control, Self-Concept, IQ, and Reading for Grade 2 Males .............................. Correlation Coefficients on Measures of Teacher Observation Ratings, Internal Control, Self-Concept, IQ, and Reading for Grade 2 Females ............................ Page 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 v Descriptive Statistics on Measures of IQ, Internal Control, Self-Concept, Reading, Language, Arithmetic and Total Battery (CTBS) for Grade 4 .......................... Correlation Coefficients on Measures of Internal Control, Self-Concepts, IQ, Reading Language, Arithmetic, and Total Battery (CTBS) for Grade 4 .......................... Correlation Coefficients on Measures of Internal Control, Self-Concept, IQ, Reading, Language, Arithmetic, and Total Battery (CTBS) for Grade 4 Males .................... Correlation Coefficients on Measures of Internal Control, Self-Concept, IQ, Reading, Language, Arithmetic, and Total Battery (CTBS) for Grade 4 Females ................. Correlation Coefficients on Measures of Teacher Observation Ratings, Internal Control, Self-Concept, IQ, Reading, Language Arithmetic, and Total Battery (CTBS) for Grade 4 ..................................... Correlation Coefficients on Measures of Teacher Observation Ratings, Internal Con trol, Self-Concept, IQ, Reading, Language, Arithmetic, and Total Battery (CTBS) for Grade 4 Males .............................. Correlation Coefficients on Measures of Teacher Observation Ratings, Internal Con trol, Self-Concept, IQ, Reading, Language, Arithmetic, and Total Battery (CTBS) for Grade 4 Females ............................ Descriptive Statistics on Measures of IQ, Internal Control, Self-Concept, Reading, Language, Arithmetic and Total Battery (CTBS) for Grade 6 .......................... Table Page 18. Correlation Coefficients on Measures of Internal Control, Self-Concept, IQ, Reading, Language, Arithmetic, and Total Battery (CTBS) for Grade 6 .......................... 63 19. Correlation Coefficients on Measures of Internal Control, Self-Concept, IQ, Reading, Language, Arithmetic, and Total Battery (CTBS) for Grade 6 Males................... 64 20. Correlation Coefficients on Measures of Internal Control, Self-Concept, IQ, Reading, Language, Arithmetic, and Total Battery (CTBS) for Grade 6 Females................. 65 21. Correlation Coefiicients on Measures of Teacher Observation Ratings, Internal Control, Self-Concept, IQ, Reading, Language, Arithmetic, and Total Battery (CTBS) for Grade 6 ..................................... 67 22. Correlation Coefficients on Measures of Teacher Observation Ratings, Internal Control, Self-Concept, IQ, Reading, Language, Arithmetic, and Total Battery (CTBS) for Grade 6 M a l e s .............................. 68 23. Correlation Coefficients on Measures of Teacher Observation Ratings, Internal Con trol, Self-Concept, IQ, Reading, Language, Arithmetic, and Total Battery (CTBS) for Grade 6 Females............................ 69 24. Descriptive Statistics on Measure of Internal Control by Grade Level ...................... 72 25. Analysis of Variance on Measure of Internal Control for Grades 2, 4, and 6 ............. 72 26. Descriptive Statistics on Measure of Internal Control by Sex and Grade Level............. 73 27. Analysis of Variance on Measure of Internal Control between Sexes for Grades 2, 4, and 6 75 vii Table ! 28. I ' 29. i 30. I 31. Descriptive Statistics on Measure of Self- Concept by Grade Level ...................... Analysis of Variance on Measure of Self- Concept for Grades 2, 4, and 6 ............. Descriptive Statistics on Measure of Self- Concept by Sex and Grade Level ............. Analysis of Variance on Measure of Self- Concept by Sex for Grades 2, 4, and 6 . . . viii i CHAPTER I I j PRESENTATION OF THE ISSUE j Introduction I " I A person learns who he is and what he is from the !ways in which he has been treated by those who surround him i in the process of his growing up. This is what Cooley ; (1902) called learning about self from the mirror of other people. One discovers his self-concept from the kinds of i ’ i experiences he has had with life. Combs and Snygg (1959) believe that one learns that he is liked, wanted, accepted and able through the experi ence of being treated as though he were so. This will influence his expectancies to further receive similar treatment according to Rotter's Social Learning theory (1954). I j I A child's perceptions of himself and his perception i of the external world may well be a central factor influenc- !ing his behavior and learning style. Knowledge of such jwould enable parents, teachers and psychologists to better j 2 1 (understand the behavior and development of each child. i This information is vital in order for the school to pro- imote healthy attitudes and realistic goals as part of the |educational process. This study is concerned with the relationship of | ! internal control with academic achievement, intelligence, t ;self-concept and teachers' observations regarding elementary school youngsters. I Rationale Underlying the Investigation Rotter's Social Learning theory (1954, 1955, 1960) provides the theoretical background for this investigation on internal-external control (also referred to as locus of |control). In social learning theory, a reinforcement acts I j to strengthen an expectancy that a certain behavior or i event will be followed by that reinforcement in the future. When an expectancy for a behavioral reinforcement sequence is built up, the failure of the reinforcement to occur will [ reduce or extinguish the expectancy. , Individuals are viewed according to the degree they j accept personal responsibility for what happens to them in contrast to attributing the responsibility to forces outside ;their control. If the person perceives the event as contingent upon his own behavior, he is considered inter- Inally controlled. Externals believe that their reinforce ments are controlled by luck, chance, fate, or powerful others (Rotter, 1966). i The effect of a reinforcement following some behavior on the part of a human subject is not a simple ■ process, but depends upon whether or not the person per- ;ceives a causal relationship between his own behavior and the reward. A perception of such need not be all or none but can vary in degree. Rotter (1966, 1971) describes internal-external control as a generalized expectancy which j i I I operates across a large number of situations. It may vary j depending upon the situation, expected outcomes and reinforcements. Rotter's theory utilizes the reinforcement theory of Hull and the expectancy concept of Tolman. It also includes aspects of the theories of Lewin and Adler. For instance, Rotter concurs with Lewin's phenomenological concept that the individual interacts, not with any real or objective world, but with a meaningful world as perceived ;by the individual. He goes beyond learning theories which are simply adjusted from animals to man. The addition of expectancy to reinforcement gives it an advantage over a single- ! variable drive or need theory. Rotter's theory also goes ;further than orthodox behaviorism in recognizing and |accepting implicit or internal behavior. Some mention is given to the self-concept as the expectancies a person has regarding the outcome of his behavior. Rotter is concerned j with attitudes, feelings, and affects. Patterson (1966) describes Rotter's theory as an advance over traditional learning theory approaches. He stated two major reasons: One is the concept of expectancies, which makes this a theory looking toward the future rather than the past. The second is the concern with the social aspects of learning and behavior. (p. 252) Man is seen by many learning and behavior theorists jas an organism reacting to stimuli in his environment. He j |is defined by his experiences, past learning, and potential reconditioning. Free will is nonexistent. B. F. Skinner (1971) describes behavior as shaped |and maintained by its consequences. He stated that once this fact is recognized, the interaction between the organ ism and the environment could be formulated in a comprehen sive way. He advocated a technology of behavior that does ! inot trace behavior to states of mind, feelings, traits of | icharacter, or human nature.___________________________________ 5 | An individual's behavior is determined by a genetic |inheritance traceable to the evolutionary history of the i species and by the environmental circumstances to which he |has been exposed. Skinner agrees that this is a most difficult issue to prove. He believes that the environment can be changed and that this is presently being done. He explained: 1 As the interaction between organism and environment has come to be understood the effects once assigned to states of mind, feelings, and traits are beginning to be traced to accessible conditions, and a technology of behavior may become available. It will not solve our problems until it replaces traditional prescientific views, and these are strongly entrenched. Freedom and dignity illu trate the difficulty. They are the possession? of the autonomous man of traditional theory, and they a.r essential to practices in which a person is held responsible for his conduct and given credit j for his achievements. A scientific analysis shifts both the responsibility and the achievement to the ! environment. It also raises questions concerning | "values." Who will use a technology and to what ends? I Until these issues are resolved, a technology of behavior will continue to be rejected, and with it possibly the only way to solve our problems. (p. 25) Man's struggle for freedom is not seen by Skinner las due to a will to be free, but to the behavioral proc- i i esses typical of the human organism. A main objective is |the avoidance of or escape from so-called "aversive" conditions of the environment. He is critical of physical ] |and biological technologies since they have been stressing 6 the importance of natural aversive stimuli. Skinner views the struggle for freedom being concerned with stimuli intentionally arranged by other people. He sees many j advantages to be gained from a social environment. ! Rotter (1966, 1971) desires to increase internal |control in individuals and he attributed many of our present |problems due to an increase in external control whereas j Skinner (1971) stated there are many possible positive aspects to external control. Skinner believes that exter nal circumstances which influence a person's behavior seems to threaten his dignity or worth. This incorrect outlook j ; I i I is obtained from our society since we do not give too much j :credit to an individual for his achievements if they are I due to forces which he has no control over. Skinner does I not perceive external control as a threat. ! I Behavior is dependent upon the control exerted by the social environment. When this control is destroyed, only the personal reinforcers remain. The individual may I then turn to immediate gratifications which are possible through such channels as sex or drugs. ! An individual is not only experiencing the contin- i gencies that constitute a culture, he also helps to maintain them, and to the extent that the contingencies inspire him to do so the culture is self-perpetuating. Skinner i describes the reinforcers are a matter of observation and cannot be disputed. He sees the purpose or direction in the evolution of a culture as bringing people under the control of more and more of the consequences of their behavior. ! Skinner does not place much credence on feelings which are verbalized since they only allow one to guess about what is wrong with the contingencies. One must go directly to the contingencies if the contingencies are to be changed. This must be altered if his behavior is to be changed. Philosophies are criticized by Skinner when they state that a man is said to speak or act in a certain way because he has a particular philosophy. Skinner explains this behavior as the effect of environmental conditions which existed but often ignored by philosophers. He advocates a scientific analysis of behavior of j I man and turns the control exerted on man to the environment. Man is controlled by the world he lives in and by the other j men around him. j More attention should be focused upon the physical and social environments instead of just advocating freedom jand dignity. The environment must be altered and not man himself if true freedom and dignity are to be obtained. \ In contrast to Skinner, existentialism which is a viewpoint in philosophy, stresses the centrality of man, 'his freedom and uniqueness, and his paradoxical place in jthe universe. It thus cannot be defined in formal terms. |It is opposed to all forms of abstractionism. It looks to concreteness, to the interior aspects of experience. When Descartes stated that I think therefore I am, he implied that man's existence precedes his reason and reason is only a frail superstructure for man's emotional life. Existentialism in reality is an extremely moral ;philosophy. It calls for commitment, for a way of life. i I jMerely to theorize is inadequate. Merely to describe the i I universe is a superficial occupation; just to use the method of analysis is to remain an outsider, alien to the realities of life. i Sartre's (1956) viewpoint that "in choosing we choose for all" implies real responsibility, not an evasion t | I of our obligations. The existentialist says in effect; I do not want to live a conventional life. I realize that i jthis experience, this moment is unique and hence I want to 9 explore completely my own potentialities and the possibili- i I jties of life. I am conscious that I must make awesome jchoices which involve my total being and that the end may i |not give me greater certainty but more tormenting and agonizing uncertainty. i j Sartre (1966) defined hell as other people. i ] |Responding to the others makes one a "thing" and creates !a loss of freedom. Whatever is done or said is carried out in relation to that other who watches over him. The significance of the self-other relationship was dismissed with the denial of reality. This may be interpreted to I mean that man's existence is only a frail superstructure and he may perish at any time. Sartre seems to strongly i I encourage what might be termed internal control over j |external control. Only man himself has the responsibility i to choose his present and future. In viewing the school environment, the most direct attack of the existentialist is levied upon essentialists who believe that tradition should govern the school, that |the teacher should be the supreme authority, that the ! central need of the student is the knowledge of academic subjects and that formal discipline should prevail in the ;school. This view favors indoctrination which is imposed 10 upon the learner thus leaving him very little control over I his environment. External control is favored. | ! The existential thinkers are not interested in |absolute answers to the ambiguities of life, nor do they develop a systematic view of philosophy, rather they deepen jman's perplexities and indicate that man can find himself i I only by an acknowledgment of the ambivalence of his situa tion. Man is free to choose his destiny. Every man is free and responsible for the situation within which a freedom must choose itself. He can live productively knowing that he is totally responsible for his self-definition and identity and that these do not exist in | !the external world unless he so chooses it. The existen tialist see this life as freer and not false. Their under lying construct is that existence precedes essence and nothing precedes man's emergence into the world. Freedom is man. The above viewpoint is in accordance with Rotter's i I ' (1971) definition of an internally controlled individual being more confident that he can control himself and also jhas a more positive self-concept. An internally controlled I ;person is aware of his ability to change and improve his i I jpresent position without placing the blame on outside 11 (external) forces. But free will does not truly exist for Rotter since ! I he describes behavior as being heavily influenced by prior ! I 'experiences and expectations. Rotter and Skinner both discuss contingencies stressing the social aspects in |shaping learning and behavior. Rotter's theory goes beyond j !orthodox behaviorism in recognizing and accepting internal i |behavior, attitudes, and feelings. In contrast, the psychoanalytic view man as react ing to innate drives and needs. He is influenced by his I past frustrations or satisfactions. The existentialist see j i j man as a being in the process of becoming. He is not just | i an organism controlled by his environment but a being who |exists, thinks and feels, and who develops relationships iwith others. Determinism is rejected. ! Schmuck (1963) stated that academic performance is contingent upon emotional feelings that are associated with |the person's outlook. This includes how he sees himself in jrelation to his environment. Sullivan (1953) indicated that the better one can perceive things and persons around |him, the better he can interact with his environment. | There has been some general agreement among i (theorists and investigators (Keister, 1937; Lewin, 1935; Bialer, 1961) that a child must assume responsibility for his own actions before he can experience success and i failure. Meaning that he perceives himself as influencing ! the outcomes of his events. Performance differs in situa- I tions perceived as determined by skill versus chance i(Rotter & Mulry, 1965). Bialer (1961) developed the Locus of Control scale for children. He found that young children tend to view their experiences as being externally controlled; due to chance, other people, and external forces. As the child matured, he became more aware of his own ability and actions that influence the outcome of events. He is thus more likely to view his situations as being more internally I controlled. i Rotter (1971) described internal individuals as i being more confident that they can control themselves and their destinies as well as being better educated than externals. A person's perception of events as being either i more internally or externally controlled seems to be an important personality variable. i Purpose of the Study To be effective with children it is necessary not jonly to know about their past history, but more important I jto be cognizant about how they presently perceive them selves and their environment. With this information, one i |could then better assist students in a variety of areas. The implications are far reaching from assisting students in improving their academics, increasing internal control (belief that the reinforcements he receives are a result of J his own purposeful action) over their environment and reducing the high drop-out rate within the schools. Despite the number of studies reported in the literature, few studies have been done with children in !regards to internal control. Most of the research has i I focused upon adults. It is the purpose of this study to investigate and analyze internal control of middle-class elementary school |children and its relationship to academic achievement, I intelligence, self-concept, and teachers' observations. I |Its purpose is also to identify those variables which may contribute or inhibit internal control.- 14 Definitions of Terms External control. Individual's perception of the |outcome of an event as resulting from some external force i 'beyond his control or action as measured on the Locus of I ; Control scale. i j I Gamblers fallacy. A change or shift in a person's expectancies following success and failure on a task perceived as chance. Person increases expectancy of success !after a failure and anticipates a failure after a success. | I Internal control. Individual's perception of the outcome of an event as being the result of his actions as ; I measured on the Locus of Control scale. Organization of the Remaining Chapters i Chapter II presents a review of the literature on internal control with recent research pertaining to that subject. Chapter III provides a description of the proce dures, assumptions, the research methodology, and the i {treatment of the data. 15 Chapter IV describes the findings of the study and an interpretation of the findings. Chapter V presents the summary, findings and con clusions, and recommendations resulting from the study. CHAPTER II ! | REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE j | t Locus of control was introduced by Rotter in 1954. The first measure of the construct, as an intrapersonal variable, was developed by Phares (1955) and was later i revised by James (1957). Other measures followed shortly thereafter (Bialer, 1961; Dean, 1961; Graves, 1961; Battle & Rotter, 1963; Crandall et al., 1965; and Rotter, 1966). By 1966 the body of research related to locus of control was sufficient in volume to lead to the writing of i | two major review articles (Lefcourt, 1966; Rotter, 1966). i Since then, Throop & MacDonald (1971) have compiled a bibliography of articles appearing after 1966. They reported that the number of studies on the internal- external control dimension has more than doubled (206 of the 339 articles appeared after 1966). In considering the above literature, this chapter jwill review five areas that the investigator believes to be of importance in shaping and influencing locus of control; ! i I |(1) Parental Influence, (2) Ethnic and Socioeconomic 16 ____________________ 17 Influence; (3) Intellectual Ability; (4) Reinforcement; and :(5) Achievement. j Parental Influence i Despite the number of studies reported in the i [literature, little has been done to investigate the origins I |of internal and external control orientations. Even though this investigation is not directly concerned with such, its importance still must be considered. It has been reported that beliefs in internal con trol are well established during childhood and increase little from the third through the twelfth grades (Crandall et al., 1965). It might be expected that some important I [antecedents of control orientations are to be found in i jparent-child relationships. Chance (1965) reported that maternal permissiveness, early independence training, and mothers' flexibility of expectations for their children were related to internal icontrol of sons, but these maternal variables were not significantly related to the orientations of daughters. j Katkovsky et al. (1967) reported that girls whose I [fathers were affectionate and nurturant were less inclined | jto believe that they had caused their own failures. Their i I _____ _______________________________________________________________________ 18 findings suggested that parent behaviors characterized as warm, praising, protective, and supportive were positively associated with children's belief in internal control. Conversely, parental behaviors as dominance, rejection, and criticality were negatively associated with beliefs in internal control. MacDonald (1971) found parental nurturance was related to externality for both sexes. Another inconsis tent result with the above two studies was that paternal [physical punishment was positively related to internal control orientation among males. His method of obtaining the data from college students regarding their earlier parental contacts may have resulted in the reported differ ences . Ethnic and Socioeconomic Factors Graves (1961) studied ethnic differences in an isolated triethnic community. He found whites to be most internal, followed by Spanish Americans. Indians were most external in attitudes. Although economic factors undoubtedly contributed to differences, Graves felt that "ethnicity" was an important source of variance after other factors were controlled. He concluded that internality 19 resulted from cultural training. Shaw and Uhl (1971) reported that low socio economic level second grade students were more external than upper-middle socioeconomic level students. Upper- middle blacks had higher external scores than whites. Significant relationship was obtained between upper-middle whites with reading and high internal locus of control. They did not find any relationship between race and external scores within the low socioeconomic level group. Battle and Rotter (1963) used a projective type i test on Negro and white students in grades six and eight. They found a significant social-class effect with race and intellectual level controlled. There was also a signifi cant effect for race, but most of the variance was accounted for by an interaction in which the lower-class Negroes were considerably more external than the groups of middle-class Negroes or upper or lower-class whites. Hsieh, et al. (1969) found internal control signif icantly related to ethnic group membership. They indicated that this may be due to a cultural orientation. Individ uals raised in a culture that values self-reliant individualism, pragmatic ingenuity, and personal output of energy are likely to be more internally oriented than 20 individuals from a culture that tends to emphasize a different set of values. Intellectual Ability Some evidence has been obtained suggesting that persons who maintain high internal control expectancies are more cognitively and perceptually alert than those who hold external control expectancies (Lefcourt & Telegdi, 1971). Studies by Bialer (1961), using elementary school subjects, and Crandall, et al. (1965), using elementary and high school students, have shown a positive relation between IQ and locus of control. The higher internal con trol scores being associated with higher IQ levels. Battle and Rotter (1963) found Negro students in grades six and eight to have higher external scores regard less of IQ status, when compared to white students. Race and socioeconomic conditions seem to have affected their findings. Ringness (1961) compared the self-concept of children of high, medium, and low intelligence. Although the self estimates did vary as a result of intelligence, sex, and specific situation: 21 Bright children, as expected, have better formed self-concepts, differentiate better, are better adjusted, and are in closer contact with reality than average or retarded children. (p. 460) Sears (1963) studied 195 boys and girls in the fifth and sixth grades, attempting to relate self-concept, liking their peers, classroom behavior, achievement scores, attitudes toward school, and creativity scores to various teacher variables. Results indicated that the bright students appeared to be more independent of school environ ment in developing self-esteem, obtaining reinforcement jfrom their own accomplishments. The average student, contrastingly, looked to the teachers and peers for his pride and self-esteem. Reinforcement The individual chooses what aspects of his behavior are repeated or strengthened and what aspects are not, depending upon his own perception of the nature of causality of the relationship between the reinforcement and the preceding behavior. If he perceives a reinforcement as contingent upon his own behavior, then the occurrence of either a positive or negative reinforcement will strengthen or weaken the 22 potential for that behavior to appear in the same or similar situation. If he sees the reinforcement as being outside his own control, such as depending upon chance, fate or powerful others, then the preceding behavior is likely to be strengthened or weakened. Differences in behavior seem to be related to task differences along a dimension of skill and chance in learning theory. Goodnow and Postman (1955) and Goodnow and Pettigrew (1955) present data to show that probabilis tic learning theory is not applicable where the subject feels that the occurrence of the reinforcement is lawful. Wyckoff and Sidowsky (1955) similarly believed that the task was a "guessing" problem. Phares (1962) used an ambiguous task and instructed half of the subjects that the task was so difficult as to be a matter of luck and the other half that success was a matter of skill. He concluded that the increments and decrements following success and failure, respectively, were significantly greater under skill instructions than under chance directions. Reinforcements under skill condi tions had a greater effect on raising or lowering expec tancies for future reinforcements. He also found that subjects changed their expectancies more frequently under 23 skill conditions. There was a strong tendency toward the "gambler's fallacy” after success and failure under chance conditions. Rotter and Mulry (1965) placed subjects in an angle-matching experiment which was very difficult. Half were told that the task was chance determined and half that some people were good at it. Internals took longer to decide on a matching standard under skill conditions com pared to externals and they took a shorter time under | } I chance conditions. They concluded that internals value reinforcement for skill more than for chance. Merton (1946) viewed the belief in luck more or less as a defense behavior, as an attempt to serve the psychological function of enabling people to preserve their self esteem in the face of failure. He suggested a rela tionship between passivity and the belief in chance or luck. Alienation has played an important role in sociological theory for many years. This concept does seem related to the variable of internal-external control. The alienated individual described by Seeman (1959) is unable to control his own future existence. 24 Achievement A logical extension of internal-external control may be that those at the internal end of the scale would show more overt striving for achievement than those who felt they had little control over their environment. The child who feels that success or failure is a consequence of his own behavior should show greater initiative in seeking intellectual rewards and greater effort and persistence in |intellectual tasks and situations. The external child may !feel that his rewards and punishments are given him at the whim or design of other people or circumstances, has little reason to exert effort in an attempt to increase the probability of obtaining reward and avoiding punishment. White and Howard (1970) referred to recent research on learning in laboratory settings using internal control of reinforcement as a variable. Findings were that the internal person learns more rapidly, is less variable in his learning, able to better generalize his learning, and remembers more of what was learned. They also reported that externals learn differently under different instruc tional treatments. Externals in a student directed seventh grade science class achieved significantly higher scores 25 than externals placed in a teacher controlled group. Inter nals achieved at the same level under both conditions. Crandall (1962) found internal boys had higher reading achievement test scores, but he did not find a significant relation for the girls. Chance (1965) using third through seventh graders, found internality to be positively related to reading, arithmetic, and spelling achievement test scores for both sexes. A measure of internal-external control was used in the report on Equality of Educational Opportunity, often referred to as The Coleman Report (1966). The experi menters found that among disadvantaged children in the sixth, ninth and twelfth grades, the students with high scores on achievement tests had more internal attitudes than did those with low achievement scores. McGhee and Crandall (1968) indicated that high- internal subjects received better school grades. Boys, grades three through five, who assumed responsibility for their own failures performed more competently on achieve ment tests than boys who blamed external factors. 26 Summary A review of the selected literature, with emphasis upon children, displays a tendency for subjects to attribute internal or external control differently. This does not suggest that there are two distinct personality types, since it may vary depending upon the situation, but that individuals generally possess varying degrees of internal- ity and externality. | Parent-child relationships and expectations seem to influence locus of control (Chance, 1965; Katkovsky et al., 1967) . Further research is needed in this area since MacDonald's (1971) findings differ from the above. Internal-external control is reported to be well established and changes insignificantly from the third to twelfth grades (Crandall et al., 1965). Battle and Rotter (1963) reported differences between lower-class and middle-class children. Middle- class children were more internal. Lower socioeconomic pupils, especially Negroes, were more external in their beliefs. Shaw and Uhl (1971) found upper-middle Negroes significantly higher in external control scores than whites within the same socioeconomic level. 27 Studies have suggested a relationship between IQ and locus of control (Bialer, 1961; Crandall et al., 1965). Higher IQ scores have been associated with higher locus of control. It is important to learn if similar results would have been obtained within a particular socioeconomic group. Phares (1962) and Rotter and Mulry (1965) have demonstrated that the increase and decrease of expectancies for reward vary predictively under different experimental conditions. If the tasks are perceived by the person as I being influenced by chance, luck, or controlled by the experimenter, rather than as a matter of personal skill, internal-external scores would change. It has also been reported that high internal control is associated with more rapid learning and better retention of material (Crandall, 1962; Chance, 1965; McGhee and Crandall, 1968). The above is believed to account for higher performance on achievement tests. These mentioned variables in all probability affect the person's self-concept. The logical assumption would be that generally a person with high internal control would also have a more positive self-concept. Rotter (1971) supports this when he stated that the research suggests 28 that people who believe they do and can control their environments also have faith in their ability to control themselves. Further research is needed in the above areas for clarification. CHAPTER III PROCEDURES OF THE STUDY As a result of a pilot investigation, it was observed that sixth grade students, whose internal control scores were above the mean, also obtained higher scores on group intelligence and achievement tests. Students with ; lower internal control scores did less well on intelligence i 'and achievement group tests and were also described by their teachers as displaying a poorer self-concept. Theoretical Framework From the above pilot study and in reviewing the literature a theoretical framework was developed: 1. Perception of internal control is dependent upon mental age (Bialer, 1961). 2. Internal-external control is a generalized expec tancy which operates across a variety of situations (Rotter, 1966; 1971). 3. Internal-external control is associated with the 29 30 self-concept (Rotter, 1971; Schmuck, 1963; Ringness, 1961) . Internal control orientation is associated with cognitive development (Crandall et al., 1965). Internal control orientation is associated with academic achievement (White & Howard, 1970; Chance, 1965) . Methodological Assumptions The Locus of Control scale was a valid and reliable i measure of internal control (Appendix A). The total IQ of the Primary Mental Abilities tests i and the Verbal IQ of the Lorge Thorndike test were valid and reliable measures of intelligence. The total Reading, Language, Arithmetic, and Total Battery score of the California Test of Basic Skills (grades 4 and 6) and Total Reading score of the Cooperative Reading Test (grade 2) were valid and reliable measures of achievement. The Teacher Observation Rating scale was a valid and reliable measure of a teacher's observations of students in the areas of: (a) classroom behavior, (b) social relations, (c) emotional behavior, 31 (d) class performance, and (e) personal appearance (Appendix B). 5. The Way I Feel About Myself was a valid and reli able measure of the self-concept (Appendix C). Limitations Due to the extent that the conceptual and methodo logical assumptions were not all met, limitations arose. In particular, the following limitations should be noted: i !Sample Size The sample size was limited to the enrollment of students in grades 2, 4, and 6 of the two selected middle- class schools on the day of administration of the instru ments. No attempt was made to test students who were absent during scheduled testing. Missing Data After all instruments were administered and collected, any subject missing data needed for this study was excluded. This standard was upheld in all cases with the exception of the data on grade 4 Primary Mental Abili ties tests. In this case 37 subjects had not been administered this test when in grade 2. They were 32 maintained in this study since only the above information was missing. New Students Students new to the school district may have affected the homogeneity of the sample. Available Data Use of Primary Mental Abilities IQ scores from kindergarten for grade 2 students and use of Primary Mental Abilities IQ scores from grade 2 for grade 4 students may j inot represent present IQ level of functioning at time of study. It was not deemed pertinent or feasible to readminister IQ tests for purposes of this study. Method Subjects The subjects in this study included all students in grades 2, 4, and 6 of the two selected middle-class schools during the 1971-1972 school year. There were ten elementary schools with a total population of about 4,500 students in this school district. This desert community is located | approximately 35 miles north of downtown Los Angeles. The 1970 United States Census data described this 33 predominately Caucasian sample as representing mostly middle-class families. The ethnic composition percentages of this community were 97 for Caucasian, 0.4 for Negro, and 2.6 for Mexican-American and other. The median value of owner occupied homes was $24,700. The composition of the selected sample was consid ered to be fairly representative of the school population. Materials The following instruments were employed: 1. Locus of Control. This instrument was devel oped by Irving Bialer (1960) to measure internal control of elementary school students. The degree to which a child perceives and conceptualizes his experiences as a result of his own abilities or inabilities rather than being the result of some undefined "external" agent is measured. It contains 23 questions so worded that for some items a "Yes" answer, and for other items a "No" answer would indicate internal control. The letter "f" indicates that a "Yes" response is scored as internal control and the letter "p" signifies that an answer of "No" is scored as internal control (the symbol is placed after each numbered item). 34 As a demonstration of validity, Bialer (1960) reported a multiple correlation of .56 between the Locus of Control scores with mental age and chronological age. Reliability coefficients of .87 and .94 have been reported for this scale. Battle and Rotter (1963) reported that their projective measure correlated significantly (.42) with Bialer's instrument. 2. The Way I Feel About Myself. This instrument was devised by Ellen Piers and Dale Harris (1964) to measure the self-concept of elementary school students. It contains 80 "yes" and "no" type statements. Reliability coefficients ranged from .78 to .93 using the Kuder-Richardson Formula 21, which assumes equal difficulty of items. Spearman-Brown odd-even formula applied to grade 6 and 10 students found respective coefficients of .90 and .87. Wing (1966) reported two and four month test-retest coefficients of .77 for 244 fifth graders. The manual for this test (1969) reports several studies by Piers (1965), Mayer (1965) , and Cox (1966) with concurrent validities at the .05 and .01 levels of significance. Correlations with other measures were also presented. 35 3. Teacher Observation Ratings. This instrument was designed by the writer to measure teacher's perception of students in the following areas: (a) classroom behavior, {b) social relations, (c) emotional behavior, (d) class performance, and (e) personal appearance. It is a simple check sheet for teachers to rate their students in the five indicated categories. Each category has a brief explanatory statement. A mark must be placed in any one of the five choices from "Always" | ;(observed this behavior to a very large degree) to "Never" (have not observed this behavior at all) . All statements were worded in the positive manner. A mark in the "Always" box would represent the highest rating and a mark in the "Never" box would be the lowest rating. 4. Intellectual ability scores were obtained from the most recent administered California state approved group test listed in the school records. Total scores from the Primary Mental Abilities (PMA) tests were used for second and fourth grade students. Verbal intelligence scores from the Lorge-Thorndike Intelligence Test were used for sixth grade students. One may refer to their respective manuals for reliability and validity details. 36 5. Achievement scores were obtained from the most recent administered California state approved group test listed in the school records. Achievement scores on the Cooperative Reading Test were used for second grade stu dents in measuring reading achievement. The California Test of Basic Skills (CTBS) was used for fourth and sixth grade students in measuring reading, language, arithmetic, and total battery scores. One may refer to the respective manuals for reliability and validity details. Presentation Experimenter met with each of the two faculties and explained the purposes of the study. All teachers repre senting grades 2, 4, and 6 assisted in the administration of the internal control and self-concept instrument under the supervision of the investigator. Teachers completed a teacher observation rating on each of their students. All the students had the internal control and self- concept measure administered orally in one session. Grade two pupils had a morning recess break between the two tests. Total testing time was thirty minutes for grades |four and six and about forty minutes for grade two students. 37 Data Collection All testing with students was completed within the first two weeks of February, 1972. Teachers completed the Teacher Observation Ratings scale and returned them to the investigator by March 1, 1972. Statistical Analysis The means and standard deviations for all variables were obtained. Analysis of variance for a one-way design | f !and Tukey's HSD were administered to determine whether a | significant difference existed between the three grade levels on the two dependent measures of internal control and self-concept. The same procedure was employed to determine if there were significant sex differences within the three grade levels on the same dependent measures. Pearson correlation coefficients were computed to determine whether a significant difference existed with the various dependent variables and between grade levels and sex. Kendall correlation coefficients were used on the Teacher Observation Ratings since this instrument did not meet the assumption of interval data. 38 Null Hypotheses 1. Internal control scores as measured by the Locus of Control scale for grade two middle-class pupils is not related to IQ scores as measured by the PMA tests. 2. Internal control scores as measured by the Locus of Control scale for grade two middle-class pupils is not related to reading scores as measured by the Coopera tive Reading Test. 3. Internal control scores as measured by the Locus of Control scale for grade two middle-class pupils is not related to self-concept scores as measured by The Way I Feel About Myself test. 4. Internal control scores as measured by the Locus of Control scale for grade two middle-class pupils is not related to classroom behavior, social relations, emo tional behavior, class perforrtiance, and personal appearance as measured by the Teacher Observation Ratings scale. 5. There will be no significant differences between grade two middle-class boys and girls on measures of internal control, IQ, self-concept, reading achievement, and teacher ratings. 6. Internal control scores as measured by the 39 Locus of Control scale for grade four middle-class pupils is not related to IQ as measured by the PMA tests. 7. Internal control scores as measured by the Locus of Control scale for grade four middle-class pupils is not related to reading, language, arithmetic, and total battery scores as measured by the CTBS. 8. Internal control scores as measured by the Locus of Control scale for grade four middle-class pupils is not related to self-concept scores as measured by The I j Way I Feel About Myself test. 9. Internal control scores as measured by the Locus of Control scale for grade four middle-class pupils is not related to classroom behavior, social relations, emotional behavior, class performance, and personal appear ance as measured by the Teacher Observation Ratings scale. 10. There will be no significant differences between grade four middle-class boys and girls on measures of internal control, IQ, self-concept, academic achievement, and teacher ratings. 11. Internal control scores as measured by the Locus of Control scale for grade six middle-class pupils is not related to Verbal IQ as measured by the Lorge-Thorndike Test. 40 12. Internal control scores as measured by the Locus of Control scale for grade six middle-class pupils is not related to reading, language, arithmetic, and total battery scores as measured by the CTBS. 13. Internal control scores as measured by the Locus of Control scale for grade six middle-class pupils is not related to self-concept scores as measured by The Way I Feel About Myself test. 14. Internal control scores as measured by the Locus of Control scale for grade six middle-class pupils is not related to classroom behavior, social relations, emotional behavior, class performance, and personal appear ance as measured by the Teacher Observation Ratings scale. 15. There will be no significant differences between grade six middle-class boys and girls on measures of internal control, IQ, self-concept, academic achievement, and teacher ratings. 16. Internal control scores as measured by the Locus of Control scale for grade two, four, and six middle- class pupils will not be significantly different. 17. Self-concept scores as measured by The Way I Feel About Myself test for grade two, four, and six middle- class pupils will not be significantly different. CHAPTER IV FINDINGS Introduction This chapter presents the results of this investi gation and evaluates the null hypotheses (NH) relative to these results. Level of statistical significance for all i |testing of null hypotheses was set at the .05 level. This significance level was set as the maximum probability at which the null hypotheses could be rejected. Description of Sample and Variables A total of 333 grade 2, 4, and 6 middle-class elementary school students comprised this sample. The number of students tested was 449. A total of 67 pupils had incomplete data and 49 pupils were absent resulting in a loss of 116 subjects (see Table 1). No attempt was made to test subjects who were absent on the day of testing or to obtain data not already available at the time of this study. 41 42 TABLE 1 DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECTS RELATIVE TO COMPLETE AND INCOMPLETE DATA Grade Level Totals 2 4 6 Complete Data 107 96a 130 333 Incomplete Data 32 14 21 67 Absences 15 18 16 49 Total 449 a PMA IQ scores for 59 subjects. Table 2 describes the instruments employed for this study. Intelligence and achievement scores were obtained from cumulative records. The Locus of Control and The Way I Feel About Myself were administered by the investigator with the assistance of the classroom teacher. Each teacher completed the Teacher Observation Ratings scale on pupils in his/her classroom. Discussion of Findings The following hypotheses were considered of interest in this study and are reported here with their accompanying data. 43 TABLE 2 DESCRIPTION OF INSTRUMENTS BY GRADE LEVEL Name of Test Grade Level 2 4 6 Intelligence Primary Mental Abilities (PMA) for Grades K-l, 1963 X Primary Mental Abilities for Grades 2-4, 1962 X Lorge-Thorndike Intelligence Tests Verbal IQ, Level D, Form 1, 1964 X Achievement Cooperative Primary Test, X Reading, Form 23A, 1965 Comprehensive Tests of Basic Skills X (CTBS), 1968 (Reading, Language, Arithmetic, and Total Battery) , Level 2 Comprehensive Tests of Basic Skills X 1968 (Reading, Language, Arithmetic, and Total Battery), Level 2 Locus of Control (Internal Control) X X X The Way I Feel About Myself (Self-Concept) X X X Teacher Observation Ratings Scale X X X (Classroom Behavior, Social Relations, Emotional Behavior, Class Performance, and Personal Appearance) 44 Descriptive statistics on measures of IQ, internal control, self-concept, and reading listing their means and standard deviations for the total grade 2 pupils is shown in Table 3. Findings pertaining to the null hypotheses for grade 2 students are presented in Tables 4 through 9. TABLE 3 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS ON MEASURES OF IQ, INTERNAL CONTROL, SELF-CONCEPT AND READING FOR GRADE 2 <N = 107) IQ Internal Control Self-Concept Reading Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D. 109.5 10.2 12.8 2.6 55.3 11.8 2.1 .1 The NH that internal control scores for grade 2 middle-class pupils is not related to IQ scores as measured by the PMA tests and reading scores as measured by the Cooperative Reading Test were accepted at the P > .05 level (Table 4). These NH were also accepted when the data were evaluated between boys and girls (see Tables 5 and 6) . The NH that internal control scores for grade 2 middle-class pupils is not related to self-concept scores as measured by The Way I Feel About Myself was accepted at the P > .05 level (as cited in Table 4). 45 TABLE 4 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS ON MEASURES OF INTERNAL CONTROL, SELF-CONCEPT, IQ, AND READING FOR GRADE 2 (N = 107) Self-Concept IQ Reading Internal Control .04 .01 .07 Self-Concept X .19* -.05 IQ X X .34* *P < .05. TABLE 5 CORRELATION CONTROL COEFFICIENTS ON MEASURES , SELF-CONCEPT, IQ, AND FOR GRADE 2 MALES (N = 54) OF INTERNAL READING Self-Concept IQ Reading Internal Control .09 .16 .16 Self-Concept X .14 -.16 IQ X X .33* *P < .05 46 TABLE 6 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS ON MEASURES CONTROL, SELF-CONCEPT, IQ, AND FOR GRADE 2 FEMALES (N = 53) OF INTERNAL READING Self-Concept IQ Reading Internal Control -.01 -.11 • o to Self-Concept X .24* in o • IQ X X .33* *P < .05. All the above NH were accepted when internal con trol was correlated with other measures between males and females (as shown in Tables 5 and 6). The NH that internal control scores for grade 2 middle-class pupils is not related to classroom behavior, social relations, emotional behavior, class performance, and personal appearance as measured by the Teacher Observation Ratings scale is described in Tables 7, 8, and 9. Using Kendall correlation coefficients, the NH was accepted at the P > .05 level on measures of social relations, emotional behavior, and class performance for the total grade and between males and females. The NH was rejected on measures of classroom behavior and personal 47 TABLE 7 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS ON MEASURES OF TEACHER OBSERVATION RATINGS, INTERNAL CONTROL, SELF-CONCEPT, IQ, AND READING FOR GRADE 2 (N = 107) Internal Self- Control Concept Reading I ' ' ■ ■ ■ ■ - ■ ■■■■ — Classroom Behavior .26* 0 • 1 .19* .25* Social Relations .02 .11* .18* .21* Emotional Behavior .02 .08 .16* .23* Class Performance 00 o • .05 .34* .37* Personal Appearance .15* .13* .16* .16* P < .05. 48 TABLE 8 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS ON MEASURES OF TEACHER OBSERVATION RATINGS, INTERNAL CONTROL, SELF-CONCEPT, IQ, AND READING FOR GRADE 2 MALES (N = 54) Internal Control Self- Concept IQ Reading Classroom Behavior .34* .01 .21* .07 Social Relations .03 .14 .19* .06 Emotional Behavior 00 o • .14 .09 .05 Class Performance .12 00 o • .20* .30* Personal Appearance .20* .18* .21* -.01 *P < .05. 49 TABLE 9 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS ON MEASURES OF TEACHER OBSERVATION RATINGS, INTERNAL CONTROL, SELF-CONCEPT , IQ , AND READING FOR GRADE 2 FEMALES (N = 53) Internal Control Self- Concept IQ Reading Classroom Behavior .19* -.09 .18* .42* Social Relations .03 .09 .14 .34* Emotional Behavior -.02 .03 .23* .39* Class Performance .12 -.02 .39* .43* Personal Appearance .12 .05 .11 .32* *P < .05. 50 appearance with internal control at the P < .05 level for the total grade and the boys. Only internal control and classroom behavior reached significance at the P < .05 level for the girls (as indicated in Table 9). Correlation coefficients for the total grade 2 group on measures of internal control, self-concept, IQ, and reading achievement is cited in Table 4. The same correlations on this data is also presented between the I sexes in Tables 5 and 6. The NH was rejected at the P < .05 level between self-concept and IQ for the total grade 2 group and for grade 2 females. The NH was accepted between self- concept and IQ for grade 2 males only. The NH was accepted on measures of self-concept with reading for the total grade 2 sample as well as between the sexes. Rejection of the NH was reached at the P < .05 level on measures of IQ with reading. Correlation coefficients on teacher ratings for the total grade 2 group and between boys and girls with measures of internal control, self-concept, IQ, and reading is presented in Tables 7, 8, and 9. Low but significant correlations were obtained on self-concept with measures of social relations and personal appearance for the total 51 grade 2 group. Only self-concept with personal appearance reached significance with grade 2 males when evaluated by sex. All measures correlating IQ and reading with teacher ratings were found to be significant at the P < .05 level for the grade 2 pupils. Sex differences are noted between the boys and girls as cited in Tables 8 and 9. Descriptive statistics on measures of IQ, internal control, self-concept, and academic achievement (CTBS) I listing their means and standard deviations for the total grade 4 students is presented in Table 10. Findings per taining to the NH for grade 4 pupils are shown in Tables 11 through 16. The NH that internal control scores for grade 4 middle-class pupils is not related to IQ scores as measured by the PMA tests was rejected at the P < .05 level as indicated in Table 11. This NH was rejected for the grade 4 boys and accepted at the P > .05 level for the girls (see Tables 12 and 13). The NH that internal control scores for grade 4 middle-class pupils is not related to reading, language, arithmetic, and total battery as measured by the CTBS was accepted at the P > .05 level for the total grade as cited 52 TABLE 10 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS ON MEASURES OF IQ, INTERNAL CONTROL, SELF-CONCEPT, READING, LANGUAGE, ARITHMETIC AND TOTAL BATTERY (CTBS) FOR GRADE 4 (N = 96) Mean S.D. IQ 109.5 12.9 Internal Control 12.8 3.2 Self-Concept 56.2 12.6 Reading 4.3 1.4 Language 3.9 1.2 Arithmetic 3.9 1.1 Total Battery 4.0 1.1 53 TABLE 11 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS ON MEASURES OF INTERNAL CONTROL, SELF-CONCEPTS, IQ, READING, LANGUAGE, ARITHMETIC, AND TOTAL BATTERY (CTBS) FOR GRADE 4 (N = 96) Internal Control Self-Concept IQ Self-Concept .37* X X IQ .26* .22* X Reading .15 .06 .51* Language -.01 .08 .46* Arithmetic .13 .06 .60* Total Battery .11 VO o . .58* *P < .05. 54 TABLE 12 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS ON MEASURES OF INTERNAL CONTROL, SELF-CONCEPT, IQ, READING, LANGUAGE, ARITHMETIC, AND TOTAL BATTERY (CTBS) FOR GRADE 4 MALES (N = 44) Internal Control Self-Concept IQ Self-Concept .46* X X IQ .34* .44* X Reading .09 .08 .38* Language -.08 .02 .46* Arithmetic .11 -.03 .50* Total Battery .04 .01 .48* *P < .05. 55 TABLE 13 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS ON MEASURES OF INTERNAL CONTROL, SELF-CONCEPT, IQ, READING, LANGUAGE, ARITHMETIC, AND TOTAL BATTERY {CTBS) FOR GRADE 4 FEMALES (N = 52) Internal Control Self-Concept IQ Self-Concept .25* X X IQ .22 .02 X Reading .21 .03 .61* Language .05 .13 .45* Arithmetic .16 .14 .66* Total Battery .17 .11 .65* *P < .05. 56 in Table 11. This NH was also accepted when the data were evaluated between males and females (see Tables 12 and 13). The NH that internal control scores for grade 4 middle-class pupils is not related to self-concept scores as measured by The Way I Feel About Myself was rejected at the P < .05 level for the total grade and between the sexes as shown in Tables 11, 12, and 13. The NH that internal control scores for grade 4 middle-class pupils is not related to classroom behavior, Isocial relations, emotional behavior, class performance, and personal appearance was rejected at the P < .05 level as indicated in Table 14. For the grade 4 boys, the NH was only rejected for emotional behavior and personal appear ance. The NH was rejected at the P < .05 level on all measures except personal appearance for the girls as presented in Table 16. Correlation coefficients for the total grade 4 sample on measures of internal control, self-concept, IQ, and achievement measures is presented in Table 11. The same correlations on this data is also shown between the sexes in Tables 12 and 13. TABLE 14 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS ON MEASURES OF TEACHER OBSERVATION RATINGS, INTERNAL CONTROL, SELF-CONCEPT, IQ, READING, LANGUAGE, ARITHMETIC, AND TOTAL BATTERY (CTBS) FOR GRADE 4 (N = 96) Classroom Behavior Social Relations Emotional Behavior Class Performance Personal Appearance Internal Control .17* .14* .19* .14* .17* Self-Concept .14* .12* .16* .11* .27* IQ .27* .22* .28* .30* .16* Reading .28* .13* .12* .50* .08 Language .31* .17* .15* .48* .13* Arithmetic .18* .04 .08 .31* -.03 Total Battery .27* .13* .13* .49* .07 *P < .05. u i TABLE 15 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS ON MEASURES OF TEACHER OBSERVATION RATINGS, INTERNAL CONTROL, SELF-CONCEPT, IQ, READING, LANGUAGE, ARITHMETIC, AND TOTAL BATTERY (CTBS) FOR GRADE 4 MALES (N = 44) Classroom Behavior Social Relations Emotional Behavior Class Performance Personal Appearance Internal Control .14 .04 .18* .10 .20* Self-Concept .24* .27* .27* .18* .43* IQ .23* .12 .22 .26* .26* Reading .21* .19* .15 .57* .17 Language .22* .20* .15 .50* .17 Arithmetic .08 .09 .05 .33* .01 Total Battery .19* .19* .13 .53* .13 *P < .05. m 00 TABLE 16 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS ON MEASURES OF TEACHER OBSERVATION RATINGS, INTERNAL CONTROL, SELF-CONCEPT, IQ, READING, LANGUAGE, ARITHMETIC, AND TOTAL BATTERY (CTBS) FOR GRADE 4 FEMALES (N = 52) Classroom Behavior Social Relations Emotional Behavior Class Performance Personal Appearance Internal Control .22* .23* .23* .20* .09 Self-Concept .06 .03 .09 .08 .08 IQ .32* .26* .31* .32* .07 Reading .34* .05 .07 .45* .01 Language .41* .15 .15 .48* .12 Arithmetic .25* -.03 .09 .31* -.01 Total Battery .36* .07 .10 .47* .04 *P < .05. 60 The NH was rejected at the P < .05 level on measures correlating self-concept and IQ for the total grade 4 sample and for the boys. This NH was accepted for the girls. No significant correlations were reached on measures of self-concept with reading, language, arith metic, and total battery for the total grade 4 sample or between the sexes. Significant correlations at the P < .05 level were I i ‘obtained for the total grade 4 group and between the sexes on measures of IQ with reading, language, arithmetic, and total battery. Correlation coefficients on teacher ratings for the total grade 4 sample and between boys and girls on measures of internal control, self-concept, IQ, and achievement areas are presented in Tables 14, 15, and 16. Self-concept was found to be low but significantly correlated with all teacher ratings for the total grade 4 group as well as for the males. Sex differences are noted (see Table 16). No significant correlations existed between self-concept and teacher ratings for the grade 4 girls. Significant correlations were obtained on IQ with all measures of teacher ratings for the total sample. 61 Sex differences (as noted in Tables 15 and 16) revealed no significant correlations for males on social relations and emotional behavior and females on personal appearance with IQ. Refer to above tables for other correlations relative to CTBS scores with teacher ratings. Descriptive statistics on measures of IQ, internal control, self-concept, and academic achievement (CTBS) listing their means and standard deviations for the total grade 6 sample is presented in Table 17. Findings pertain- i i ing to the NH for grade 6 pupils are shown in Tables 18 1 through 23. The NH that internal control scores for grade 6 middle-class pupils is not related to IQ scores as measured by the Lorge-Thorndike Test was rejected at the P < .05 level as presented in Table 18. Sex differences were noted as the NH was accepted for the grade 6 males and rejected for the females (Tables 19 and 20). The NH that internal control scores for grade 6 middle-class pupils is not related to reading, language, arithmetic, and total battery as measured by the CTBS was rejected at the P < .05 level for the total grade 6 sample as cited in Table 18. Sex differences were noted as the NH was accepted for the grade 6 boys and rejected for the 62 TABLE 17 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS ON MEASURES OF IQ, INTERNAL CONTROL, SELF-CONCEPT, READING, LANGUAGE, ARITHMETIC AND TOTAL BATTERY (CTBS) FOR GRADE 6 (N = 130) i Mean S.D. IQ 103.5 12.2 Internal Control 15.2 2.8 Self-Concept 57.2 14.1 Reading 6.8 1.8 Language 6.5 2.1 Arithmetic 6.3 1.4 Total Battery 6.3 1.5 63 TABLE 18 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS ON MEASURES OF INTERNAL CONTROL, SELF-CONCEPT, IQ, READING, LANGUAGE, ARITHMETIC, AND TOTAL BATTERY (CTBS) FOR GRADE 6 (N = 130) Internal Control Self-Concept IQ Self-Concept .35* X X IQ .28* .21* X Reading .18* .21* .77* Language .19* .20* .73* Arithmetic .15* .20* .68* Total Battery .21* .23* .79* *P < 05. 64 TABLE 19 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS ON MEASURES OF INTERNAL CONTROL, SELF-CONCEPT, IQ, READING, LANGUAGE, ARITHMETIC, AND TOTAL BATTERY (CTBS) FOR (N = 69) GRADE 6 MALES Internal Control Self-Concept IQ Self-Concept .37* X X IQ .15 .18 X Reading .03 .22* .79* Language .11 .16 .71* Arithmetic .06 .25* .72* Total Battery .09 .24* .81* *P < .05. 65 TABLE 20 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS ON MEASURES OF INTERNAL CONTROL, SELF-CONCEPT, IQ, READING, LANGUAGE, ARITHMETIC, AND TOTAL BATTERY (CTBS) FOR GRADE 6 FEMALES (N = 61) Internal Control Self-Concept IQ Self-Concept .34* X X IQ .44* .25* X Reading .37* .21* .75* Language .33* .26* .76* Arithmetic .28* .13* .65* Total Battery .37* .24* .79* *P < .05. 66 grade 6 girls as indicated in Tables 19 and 20. The NH that internal control scores for grade 6 pupils is not related to self-concept scores was rejected at the P < .05 level for the total sample as well as between the sexes as shown in Tables 18, 19, and 20. The NH that internal control scores for grade 6 middle-class pupils is not related to classroom behavior, social relations, emotional behavior, class performance, and personal appearance was rejected at the P < .05 level for the total group as indicated in Table 21. For the ! grade 6 boys, only the NH correlating classroom behavior with internal control was accepted at the P > .05 level. All other measures with internal control between the sexes were rejected at the P < .05 level as cited in Tables 22 and 23. Correlation coefficients for the total grade 6 group on measures of internal control, self-concept, IQ, and achievement measures is presented in Table 18. The same correlations on this data is also shown between the sexes in Tables 19 and 20. The NH was rejected at the P < .05 level on measures correlating self-concept and IQ for the total group and girls. This NH was accepted for the grade 6 boys. TABLE 21 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS ON MEASURES OF TEACHER OBSERVATION RATINGS, INTERNAL CONTROL, SELF-CONCEPT, IQ, READING, LANGUAGE, ARITHMETIC, AND TOTAL BATTERY (CTBS) FOR GRADE 6 (N = 130) Classroom Behavior Social Relations Emotional Behavior Class Performance Personal Appearance Internal Control .23* .24* .27* .20* .23* Self-Concept .18* .33* .31* .23* .28* IQ .14* .17* .11* .43* .15* Reading .29* .25* .19* .48* .19* Language .23* .30* .18* .56* .30* Arithmetic .26* .26* .17* .49* .20* Total Battery .29* .29* .20* .58* .26* *P < .05. o\ -j TABLE 22 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS ON MEASURES OF TEACHER OBSERVATION RATINGS, INTERNAL CONTROL, SELF-CONCEPT, IQ, READING, LANGUAGE, ARITHMETIC, AND TOTAL BATTERY (CTBS) FOR GRADE 6 MALES (N = 69) Classroom Behavior Social Relations Emotional Behavior Class Performance Personal Appearance Internal Control .10 .22* .27* .15* .22* Self-Concept .16* .31* .35* .22* .26* IQ .10 .13 .04 .39* .15* Reading .25* .25* .15* .48* .24* Language .22* .31* .18* .53* .32* Arithmetic .24* .21* .12 .48* .19* Total Battery .26* .27* .17* .56* .27* *P < .05. c\ CD TABLE 23 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS ON MEASURES OF TEACHER OBSERVATION RATINGS, INTERNAL CONTROL, SELF-CONCEPT, IQ, READING, LANGUAGE, ARITHMETIC, AND TOTAL BATTERY (CTBS) FOR GRADE 6 FEMALES (N = 61) Classroom Behavior Social Relations Emotional Behavior Class Performance Personal Appearance Internal Control .40* .29* .29* .33* .30* Self-Concept .21* .35* .27* .30* .33* IQ .19* .24* .20* .49* .16* Reading .35* .24* .23* .51* .13 Language .22* .26* .15* .54* .23* Arithmetic .26* .29* .20* .50* .20* Total Battery .31* .30* .22* .60* .23* *P < .05. ov VO 70 Significant correlations at the P < .05 level were obtained for the total grade 6 group and between the sexes on all measures of self-concept with reading, language, arithmetic, and total battery with the exception of language for the males. The NH was rejected at the P < .05 level on all measures correlating IQ with achievement for the total grade 6 sample as well as between the sexes. Correlation coefficients on teacher ratings for the ■ total group and between boys and girls on measures of !internal control, self-concept, IQ, and achievement areas are presented in Tables 21, 22, and 23. Self-concept was found to be significantly corre lated with all teacher ratings for the total group as well as between the sexes. Significant correlations were obtained at the P < .05 level on IQ with measures of teacher ratings for total sample and with the girls. Only classroom perform ance and personal appearance were found to be significant at the P < .05 level for the grade 6 boys as cited in Tables 21, 22, and 23. All achievement areas as measured on the CTBS reached significant correlations at the P < .05 level for 71 the total group. Only arithmetic with emotional behavior for boys and reading with personal appearance for girls failed to meet significance at established level. The NH that internal control scores for grades 2, 4, and 6 middle-class pupils will not be significantly different was rejected. Descriptive statistics on measure of internal control by grade level is presented in Table 24. Using analysis of variance an F value of 2.26 was needed for significance at the P < .05 level and an F value of 27.17 was obtained as shown in Table 25. ! Comparisons of groups using Tukey's HSD yielded a q of 8.1 and a q of 3.0 was needed for significance at the .05 level in order to reject the NH. Grade 6 pupils obtained significantly higher internal control scores when compared to grade 2 and 4 pupils. No significant differ ences were found between grade 2 and grade 4 students using the same procedure. Descriptive statistics on measure of internal control by sex and grade level is shown in Table 26. An analysis of variance was computed in order to determine if internal control scores were significantly different among the groups. An F value of 2.26 was needed for significance at the .05 level and the obtained F value was 11.50 as TABLE 24 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS ON MEASURE OF INTERNAL CONTROL BY GRADE LEVEL 72 Grade N Mean S.D. 2 107 12.8 VO • CM 4 96 12.8 3.2 6 130 15.2 00 • CM TABLE 25 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE ON MEASURE OF INTERNAL CONTROL FOR GRADES 2, 4, AND 6 Sum of Squares df MS F Between groups 443.2 2 221.6 27.2* Within groups 2691.1 330 8.2 Total 3134.3 332 *P < .05. 73 TABLE 26 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS ON MEASURE OF INTERNAL CONTROL BY SEX AND GRADE LEVEL i Grade Male Female N Mean S.D. N Mean S.D. 2 54 13.1 2.6 53 12.5 2.6 4 44 12.5 3.5 52 13.2 2.9 6 69 15.4 2.9 61 15.0 2.8 74 cited in Table 27. Using Tukey's HSD, all significant differences at the .05 level were found with the grade 6 males and females when compared with grade 2 and 4 males and females. Grade 6 pupils had significantly higher internal control scores than grade 2 or 4 pupils. Descriptive statistics on measure of self-concept by grade level is shown in Table 28. An F ratio of 2.26 was needed for significance at the P < .05 level and an F value of .70 was obtained as indicated in Table 29, using analysis of variance. No significant differences were found on measure of self-concept by grade level. Descriptive statistics on measure of self-concept by sex and grade level is presented in Table 30. An analysis of variance was computed in order to learn if self-concept scores were significantly different among the groups. An F value of 2.26 was needed and the obtained F value was .65. The NH was accepted at the P > .05 level. No significant differences were found on measure of self- concept according to sex or grade level as shown in Table 31. 75 TABLE 27 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE ON MEASURE BETWEEN SEXES FOR GRADES OF INTERNAL CONTROL 2, 4, AND 6 Sum of Squares df MS F Between groups 470.1 5 94.0 11.5* Within groups 2664.2 327 8.2 Total 3134.3 332 *P < .05• TABLE 28 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS ON MEASURE OF SELF-CONCEPT BY GRADE LEVEL Grade N Mean S.D. 2 4 6 107 96 130 55.3 56.2 57.2 11.8 12.6 14.1 76 TABLE 29 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE ON MEASURE OF SELF-CONCEPT FOR GRADES 2, 4, AND 6 Sum of Squares df MS F Between groups 235.0 2 117.5 .7 Within groups 55654.6 330 168.7 Total 55889.6 332 TABLE 30 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS ON MEASURE OF BY SEX AND GRADE LEVEL SELF-CONCEPT Male Female Grade N Mean S.D. N Mean S.D. 2 54 54.5 12.9 53 56.1 10.1 4 44 54.5 14.1 52 57.7 11.2 6 69 57.1 15.3 61 57.5 12.7 77 TABLE 31 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE ON MEASURE OF SELF-CONCEPT BY SEX FOR GRADES 2, A, AND 6 Sum of Squares df MS Between groups 552.1 5 110.4 .65 Within groups 55337.5 327 169.2 Total 55889.6 332 78 Summary of Findings In summary, more significant correlations were obtained with the grade 6 pupils than pupils in grades 2 and 4. Similar results of higher correlations were noted with the grade 4 students when compared to the grade 2 sample. Sex differences were also observed within and between the various grade levels. As expected, the most significant correlations were reached on measures of IQ with academic achievement. The I . ; correlations ranged from a high of .81 for grade 6 pupils ! to a low of .33 for grade 2 students. All were found to be significant at the .05 level. The highest relationships were among the grade 6 pupils, then grade 4, and finally grade 2 students. All the NH were accepted for the grade 2 pupils when comparing internal control with self-concept, IQ, and reading. Significant correlations were reached for grade 4 boys and girls on internal control with self-concept. Internal control and IQ were also related for the boys only. Levels of significance were reported on measures of internal control with self-concept for both sexes in grade 6. All measures of internal control with academic achievement obtained significance exclusively for the grade 6 girls. Low but significant correlations were reached between self-concept and IQ for the grade 2 girls. Self- concept with reading did not reach significance. Self- concept and IQ were found to be related for the grade 4 boys and not for self-concept and achievement. Correla tions at the .05 level were obtained between self-concept and academic achievement for grade 6 boys and girls. Significant correlations were reported for all grade levels j |and for both sexes on measures of IQ and academic achieve ment . Analysis of variance on measure of internal control for grades 2, A, and 6 revealed significantly higher scores for the grade 6 boys and girls. Grade 2 and 4 students obtained the same mean score of 12.8 with a .6 difference on their standard deviations. Approximately one point separated the means in the different grade levels on measures of self-concept.' Each point increase corresponded with the successive grade level from grades 2 to 6 respectively. No significant differ ences were obtained between or within the various grade levels. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary Rotter's Social Learning theory (1954, 1955, 1960) provided the theoretical background for this investigation on internal-external control. In social learning theory, a reinforcement acts to strengthen an expectancy that a certain behavior or event will be followed by that rein forcement in the future. When an expectancy for a behav ioral reinforcement sequence is built up, the failure of the reinforcement to occur will reduce or extinguish the expectancy. Individuals are viewed according to the degree they accept personal responsibility for what happens to them in contrast to attributing the responsibility to forces outside their control. If the person perceives the event as contingent upon his own behavior, he is considered internally controlled. Externals believe that their reinforcements are controlled by luck, chance, fate, or 80 81 powerful others (Rotter, 1966) . Rotter (1971) described internal individuals as i !being more confident that they can control themselves and i :their destinies as well as being better educated than I externals. A person's perception of events as being either I |more internally or externally controlled seems to be an jimportant personality variable. i Parent-child relationships and expectations appear to influence locus of control (Chance, 1965; Katkovsky et al., 1967). Further research is needed in this area since MacDonald's (1971) findings differed from the above two studies. | i i Internal-external control was reported to be well |established and changes insignificantly from the third to the twelfth grades (Crandall et al., 1965). i Battle and Rotter (1963) reported differences between lower-class and middle-class children. Middle- lclass children were more internal. Lower socioeconomic I pupils, especially Negroes, were more external in their beliefs. Shaw and Uhl (1971) found upper-middle Negroes i I |significantly higher in external control scores than i whites within the same socioeconomic level. i i : Studies have suggested a relationship between IQ and !internal control (Bialer, 1961; Crandall et al.; 1965). Higher IQ scores were associated with higher internal con- j |trol scores. It is important to learn if similar results [ I would have been obtained within a particular socioeconomic i group. I It has also been reported that high internal con trol is related to more rapid learning and better retention jof material (Crandall, 1962; Chance, 1965; McGhee and Crandall, 1968). The above is believed to account for higher performance on achievement tests. These mentioned variables in all probability affect the person's self-concept. The logical assumption would be !that generally a person with high internal control would i also have a more positive self-concept. Rotter (1971) i supports this when he stated that the research suggests i I that people who believe they do and can control their environments also have faith in their ability to control themselves. Further research is needed in the above areas for clarification. 1 Purpose of Investigation To be effective with children it is necessary not I I Jonly to know about their past history, but more important 83 to be cognizant about how they presently perceive themselves and their immediate environment. With this information, ! one could then better assist students in a variety of i J |areas. The implications are far reaching from assisting I students in improving their academics, increasing internal control over their environment and reducing the high drop- j jout rate within the schools. I i Despite the number of studies reported in the literature, few studies have been done with children in regards to internal control. Most of the research has focused upon adults. It is the purpose of this study to investigate and analyze internal control of middle-class elementary school |children in grades 2, 4, and 6 and its relationship to academic achievement, intelligence, self-concept and teachers' observations. Its purpose is also to identify those variables which may contribute or inhibit internal control. i I Methodology I subjects j | The subjects in this study included all students in I grades 2, 4, and 6 of the two selected middle-class schools during the 1971-1972 school year. There were ten elementary schools with a total population of about 4,500 students in j this school district. This desert community is located |approximately 35 miles north of downtown Los Angeles. The 1970 United States Census data described this i predominately Caucasian sample as representing mostly middle-class families. The ethnic composition percentages of this community were 97 for Caucasian, 0.4 for Negro, and 2.6 for Mexican American and other. The median value of owner occupied homes was $24,700. j A total of 333 grade 2, 4, and 6 middle-class I students comprised this sample. The number of students tested was 449. A total of 67 pupils had incomplete data I and 49 pupils were absent resulting in a loss of 116 pos sible subjects. j Instrumentation The following instruments were employed: 1. Locus of Control. This instrument was developed by Irving Bialer (1960) to measure internal control of elementary school students. The degree to which a child i perceives and conceptualizes his experiences as a result of j | ihis own abilities or inabilities rather than being the i 85 I result of some undefined "external" agent is measured. It contains 23 questions that require a "Yes" or "No" written circled response. 2. The Way I Feel About Myself. This instrument was devised by Ellen Piers and Dale Harris (1964) to imeasure the self-concept of elementary school students. It j ;contains 80 "Yes" and "No" type statements requiring a j circled response. 3. Teacher Observation Ratings. This instrument was designed by the writer to measure teacher's perception of students in the following areas: (a) classroom behavior, (b) social relations, (c) emotional behavior, (d) class (performance, and (e) personal appearance. j ! It is a simple check sheet for teachers to rate I Itheir students in the five indicated categories. Each i I category has a brief explanatory statement. A mark must be placed in any one of the five choices from "Always" (observed this behavior to a very large degree) to "Never" ! (have not observed this behavior at all). j 4. Intellectual ability scores were obtained from i the most recent administered California state approved (group test listed in the school records. Total scores from | (the Primary Mental Abilities tests were used for second 86 and fourth grade students. Verbal intelligence scores from | :the Lorge-Thorndike Intelligence Test were used for sixth i grade students. t i ; 5. Achievement scores were obtained from the most recent administered California state approved group test listed in the school records. Achievement scores on the I Cooperative Reading Test were used for second grade stu- i I dents in measuring reading achievement. The California Test of Basic Skills was used for fourth and sixth grade :students in measuring reading, language, arithmetic, and I |total battery scores. I Statistical Analysis i | The means and standard deviations for all variables were obtained. Analysis of variance for a one-way design and Tukey's HSD were administered to determine whether a significant difference existed between the three grade levels on the two dependent measures of internal control iand self-concept. The same procedure was employed to idetermine if there were significant sex differences within j the three grade levels on the same dependent measures. j Pearson correlation coefficients were computed to i i determine whether a significant difference existed with 87 the various dependent variables and between grade levels I and sex. Kendall correlation coefficients were used on the 1 ] Teacher Observation Ratings since this instrument did not i {meet the assumption of interval data. i Findings i I ! As expected, the most significant correlations were i obtained on measures of IQ with academic achievement. The i correlations ranged from a high of .81 for grade 6 pupils to a low of .33 for grade 2 pupils. All were found to be I significant at the .05 level. The highest correlations were among the grade 6 pupils which may be the result of the recency in the administration of these particular instruments. The lower correlations for grade 2 pupils may i ! be explained by the use of IQ scores which were two years old being compared to present reading scores. The grade 2 middle-class population consisted of 107 pupils which were almost evenly divided between the |boys (54) and the girls (53). The average IQ was 109.5 I with a standard deviation of 10.2. I | All NH correlating internal control with measures of self-concept, IQ, and reading achievement for grade 2 ] i {students were accepted at the .05 level. The NH was |rejected at the .05 level on measures of self-concept with IQ for the total group. When evaluated according to sex, I I significance was reported for the girls only. The NH jcorrelating self-concept with reading achievement was accepted at the .05 level. Significance was obtained on measures of IQ with reading achievement. i The NH was rejected on measures of classroom i behavior and personal appearance with internal control for the total grade and the boys only. Only internal control and classroom behavior reached significance at the .05 level for the girls. Low but significant correlations were reached on self-concept with measures of social relations and personal appearance for the total grade 2 group. Only t self-concept with personal appearance obtained significance with grade 2 males when evaluated by sex. i All measures correlating IQ and reading with teacher ratings were found to be significant for the total grade 2 group. Sex differences were noted between the ’ boys and girls as cited in Tables 8 and 9. | The grade 4 middle-class group consisted of 96 students (44 boys and 52 girls). Their average IQ was 109.5 with a standard deviation of 12.9. Internal control scores for grade 4 boys were found 89 to be related to IQ. The NH that Internal control scores is not related to reading, language, arithmetic, and total battery as measured by the CTBS was accepted for the total |group as well as between the sexes. Internal control was ifound to be related to the self-concept for the boys and j girls. i i | Significant correlations were obtained on measures !of internal control with emotional behavior and personal appearance for grade 4 boys. Classroom behavior, social ;relations, emotional behavior, and classroom performance |were found to be significantly correlated with internal control for grade 4 girls. The NH was rejected at the .05 level on measures of jself-concept and IQ for the boys only. No significant correlations were reached on measures of self-concept with academic areas (CTBS). Self-concept was found to be low but significantly related with all teacher ratings for the total grade 4 as well as for the males. Sex differences i i iwere noted (see Table 16). No meaningful correlations i j existed between self-concept and teacher ratings for the i j grade 4 girls. i j The grade 6 middle-class sample consisted of j 69 boys and 61 girls totaling 130 students. Their average I IQ was 103.5 with a standard deviation of 12.2. I Levels of significance were reached on measures of internal control with self-concept for both sexes and I Jinternal control with IQ for the girls only in grade 6. i All measures of internal control with academic achievement (obtained levels of significance exclusively for the girls. i i Correlations at the .05 level were noted between i |self-concept and academic achievement for grade 6 boys and girls. Significant correlations were reported for all (grade 6 girls with measures of teacher ratings with i internal control. All teacher ratings with the exception i iof classroom behavior were related with internal control |for the boys. i Reading, language, arithmetic, and total battery (CTBS) were found to be related to all the measures on the teacher rating scale for the total grade 6 group. Sex i differences are noted in Tables 22 and 23. ! Grade 6 pupils obtained significantly higher internal control scores when compared to grade 2 and 4 j istudents. No significant differences were found between i grade 2 and 4 pupils. Using Tukey's HSD, all significant j |relationships at the .05 level were reported with the j j grade 6 males and females when compared with the other 91 grades by sex. No significant differences were found on measure of i j self-concept by grade level or sex. I | Conclusions i The following concluding statements appeared [warranted from the data of this investigation: 1. A consistent pattern of more significant and higher correlations were found with older children for both j |sexes. Data on students in grades 2, 4, and 6 revealed I grade 6 pupils obtained more significant correlations on measures of internal control with other variables than students in grades 2 and 4. This was also noted for grade 4 pupils when compared to grade 2 students. Bialer (1961) jreported that younger children view their experiences as I | being externally controlled. As a child matures, he becomes more aware of his own ability and actions that ! influence the outcome of events. i I 2. Differences were also noted between the sexes. jGirls in grades 4 and 6 obtained more significant findings on internal control measure when correlated with other |variables. Bialer's Locus of Control instrument may not be ! Sappropriate with younger children or more likely internal 92 control is not significantly established by grade 2. Crandall (1965) indicated that internal control is estab- !lished during childhood and changes little from grade 3 jthrough 12. It was considered to be affected by parent- child relationships. 3. Significant correlations were obtained for i igrade 4 and 6 boys and girls on measures of internal con trol with self-concept. Internality and personal adjust ment seem to be related. Tolor and Reznikoff (1967) found J internal adults depict themselves as independent and display a more positive self-concept. 4. Internally controlled students in grades 4 and 6 were described by their teachers as more cheerful and I ipopular with peers. Externality has been reported to be I associated to anxiety and neuroticism (Watson, 1967) and to | both suicide and accident proneness (Williams, 1969) with adults. Assuming that the above two studies also apply to youngsters, the need for increasing internal control with I children appears needed for healthy personal adjustment. Recommendations ! The results of this study advocate the following i i j suggestions for further research: 93 1. Greater in-depth assessment of the rearing I practices within families of youngsters with high and low i i I internal control scores. 2. Children should be screened for internal and I external control and experimental placement made upon different teacher personalities. Interesting to learn if |teacher's personality affects learning and social behavior !and how this may assist in placing students with high or low internal control with certain teachers. I 3. Research should be conducted regarding the | nature of the relationship between internal control and ibehavioral disorders as demonstrated within the schools. REFERENCES 94 REFERENCES ;Battle, E. , and Rotter, J. Children's feelings of personal j control as related to social class and ethnic group, i Journal of Personality, 1963, 31^ 482-490. ! Bialer, I. Conceptualization of success and failure in | mentally retarded and normal children. Journal of ! Personality, 1961, 29, 303-320. j I Chance, J. E. Internal control of reinforcements and the school learning process. Paper presented at the meet ing of the Society for Research in Child Development, Minneapolis, March 1965. Coleman, J., Campbell, E., Hobson, C., McPartland, J., Weinfeld, A., and York, R. Equality of educational opportunity. Superintendent of Documents, Catalog No. FS 5: 23 8:38001. Washington, D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1966. Combs, A., and Snygg, D. Individual behavior. New York: Harper & Bros., 1959. 'Cooley, C. H. Human nature and the social order. New York: Scribners, 1902. I j iCox, S. H. Family background effects on personality development and social acceptance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas Christian University, 1966 Crandall, V., Katkovsky, W., and Preston, A. Motivational and ability determinants of young children's intellec tual achievement behaviors. Child Development, 1962, 33, 643-661. Crandall, V., Katkovsky, W., and Crandall, V. Children's beliefs in their own control of reinforcements in intellectual-academic achievement situations. Child i Development, 1965, 3£, 91-109. 96 j {Dean, D. G. Alienation: Its meaning and measurement. | American Sociological Review, 1961, £6, 753-758. jPiers, E. V., and Harris, D. B. Age and other correlates of self-concept in children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1964, S5, No. 2, 91-95. Goodnow, J., and Pettigrew, T. Effects of prior patterns of experience upon strategies and learning sets. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1955, 4£, 381-389. ( jGoodnow, J., and Postman, L. Probability learning in a I problem-solving situation. Journal of Experimental | Psychology, 1955, 49_, 16-22. ;Graves, T. Time perspective and the deferred gratification pattern in a tri-ethnic community. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1961. Hsieh, T., Shybut, J., and Lotsof, E. Internal versus external control and ethnic group membership. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1969, 33, No. 1, 122-124. James, W. Internal versus external control of reinforce ment as a basic variable in learning theory. Unpub lished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, | 1957. |Katkovsky, W. , Crandall, V. C., and Good, S. Parental antecedents of children's beliefs in internal-external control of reinforcements in intellectual achievement situations. Child Development, 1967, 3Ji, 766-776. i I Keister, M. The behavior of young children in failure: An | experimental attempt to discover and to modify I undesirable responses of preschool children to failure. Iowa University Studies on Child Welfare, 1937, 14, j 27-82. i jLefcourt, H. M. Internal versus external control of reinforcement: A review. Psychological Bulletin, ! 1966, 65, 206-220. 97 Lefcourt, H. M., and Telegdi, M. S. Perceived locus of . control and field dependence as predictors of cognitive activity. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychol- j ogy., 1971, 37, No. 1, 53-56. jLewin, K. A dynamic theory of personality. New York: j McGraw-Hill, 1935. MacDonald, A. P. Internal-external locus of control: Parental antecedents. Journal of Consulting and ! Clinical Psychology. 1971, 3^7, No. 1, 141-147. Mayer, C. L. A study of the relationship of early special class placement and the self-concepts of mentally handicapped children. Unpublished doctoral disserta tion, Syracuse University, 1965. McGhee, P., and Crandall, V. Beliefs in internal-external control of reinforcements and academic performance. , Child Development, 1968, 39, 91-102. I iMerton, R. Social structure and anomie. In Social Theory ' and Social Structure. Glencoe, 111.: Free Press, 1949. Patterson, C. H. Theories of counseling and psychotherapy. | New York: Harper & Row, 1966. jPhares, E. Perceptual threshold decrements as a function j of skill and chance expectancies. Journal of Psychology, 1962, 53, 399-407. Piers, E. V. Children's self-ratings and rating by others. Unpublished paper, 1965. |Ringness, T. A. Self-concept of children of low, average, ! and high intelligence. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1961, £5, 453-461. |Rotter, J. Social learning and clinical psychology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1954. 98 Rotter, J. The role of the psychological situation in determining the direction of human behavior. In M. R. Jones (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1955. I Rotter, J. Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs; General and Applied, 1966, 80, No. 609, | 1-28. ! Rotter, J. External and internal control. Psychology Today, June 1971, 37-42; 58-59. Rotter, J., and Mulry, R. Internal versus external control ! of reinforcement and decision time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1965, 2_* 598-604. Sartre, J. P. Being and nothingness. New York: Philo- i sophical Library, 1956. i Sartre, J. P. In Existentialism in Education, Van Cleve Morris. New York: Harper & Row, 1966. Schmuck, R. Some relationships of peer liking patterns ! in the classroom to pupil attitudes and achievement. School Review, 1963, 71^, 337-359. i I |Sears, P. The effect of classroom conditions on the strength of achievement motive and work output on elementary school children. Cooperative Research Project No. 873, 1963. Seeman, M. On the meaning of alienation. American Sociological Review, 1959, 24^, 782-791. I Shaw, R., and Uhl, N. Control of reinforcement and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 1971, 64, 226-228. Skinner, B. F. Beyond freedom and dignity. New York: Knopf, Inc., 1971. Sullivan, H. The interpersonal theory of psychiatry. New York: W. W. Norton, 1953. 99 Throop, W. F., and MacDonald, A. P., Jr. Internal-external locus of control: A bibliography. Psychological Reports, 1971, Monograph Supplement I, 28, 175-190. |Tolor, A., and Reznikoff, M. Relation between insight, I repression-sensitization, internal-external control, ! and death anxiety. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, ! 1967, 72, 426-430. i Watson, D. Relationship between locus of control and anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1967, 6, 91-92. 1 |White, K., and Howard, J. The relationship of achievement ! responsibility to instructional treatments. Journal of Experimental Education, 1970, 39, No. 2, Winter, 78-82. i i iwilliams, C. B., and Nickels, J. B. Internal-external control dimension as related to accident and suicide proneness. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1969, 3^3, 485-494. Wing, S. W. A study of children whose reported self-concept differs from classmates' evaluation of them. Unpub lished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Oregon, 1966. I Wyckoff, L., and Sidowski, J. Probability discrimination in a motor task. Journal of Experimental Psychology, | 1955, 50, 225-231. APPENDICES 100 APPENDIX A LOCUS OF CONTROL ________________________ Boy Girl ___ Name Circle one Date School Blrthdate Teacher INSTRUCTIONS This Is not a test. I an Interested In learning how students your age think about certain things. There are no right or wrong answers to these questions. Sone of you nay answer 'Tea" and sane nay answer "No". If your answer is "Tes" or noatly yes, circle "Tea”. If your answer Is "No" or nostly no, circle "No”. Raise your hand If you have any questions at any tine. Remember, there are no right or wrong answers. Tes Mo lp. When sonebody gets nad at you, do you usually feel there Is nothing you can do about It? Tes No 2f. Do you really believe a kid can be whatever he wants to be? Tes No 3f. When people are nean to you, could It be because you did •one thing to nake than be nean? Tes No 4f. Do you usually nake up your nlnd about what Is going to happen tooorrow? Tea No 5f. Can you do anything about what Is going to happen tomorrow? Tes No 6f. When people are good to you, Is It usually because you did sane thing to nake then be good? Tes No 7f. Can you ever nake other people do things you want them to do? 102 Tea Ho 6f • When people are good to you, la It usually because you did something to nake than be good? Tes No 7f. Can you ever nake other people do things you want than to do? Tea No 8f. Do you ever think that kids your age can change things that are happening In the world? Tea No 9f. If another child was going to hit you, could you do anything about it? Tea No lOf. Can a child your age ever have his own way? Tea No lip. la it hard for you to know why aone people do certain things? Tea No 12f. When scneone la nice to you, la It because you did the right things? Tes No 13f. Can you ever try to be friends with another kid even if he doesn't want to? Tes No 14f. Does it ever help any to think about what you will be when you grow up? Tes No 15f. When soaeone gets aad at you, can you usually do something to wake him your friend again? Tea No 16f. Can klda your age ever have anything to say about where they are going to live? Tea No 17f. When you get in an argunent, la it sowetlnes your fault? Tes No 18p. When nice things happen to you, la it only good luck? Tea No 19p. Do you often feel you get punished when you don't deserve it? Tea No 20f. Will people usually do things for you if you ask thaw? Tea No 21f. Do you believe a kid can usually be whatever he wants to be when he grows up? Tea No 22p. When bad things happen to you, is it usually soweone else's fault? - .-------* --------------1 — — t - J . r i APPENDIX B TEACHER OBSERVATION RATINGS 103 Name_______________________________________________________ Age_______________ Grade Teacher_________ School______ _________________ Date TEACHER OBSERVATION RATINGS Please rate each and every student by placing an X in the appropriate box after the statement. The boxes are arranged in degrees and should be interpreted as: Always - Observed this behavior to a very large degree. Usually - Observed this behavior to a large degree. Sometimes - Observed this behavior occasionally. Seldom - Observed this behavior to a slight degree. Never - Have not observed this behaior at all. CLASSROOM BEHAVIOR Participates in classroom discussions SOCIAL RELATIONS ALWAYS USUALLY SOMETIMES SELDOM NEVER 104 CLASSROOM BEHAVIOR Participates in classroom discussions................................. - SOCIAL RELATIONS Popular and well-liked by peers.......................................... EMOTIONAL BEHAVIOR Appears cheerful and displays a sense of humor.................. CLASS PERFORMANCE Achieving on or above grade level in most academic areas . . PERSONAL APPEARANCE General appearance is neat and well-groomed..................... ALWAYS USUALLY SOMETIMES SELDOM NEVER --—------ 104 APPENDIX C THE WAY I FEEL ABOUT MYSELF 105 T fIK WAY I FI-EL ABOUT MYSELF NAME: _____________________________ AGE: BOY OR GIRL:_________ DATE:____________ TEACHER: _____________________ SCHOOL: GRADE:_______ Here are a set of statements. Some of them arc true of you and so you will circle the ves. Some are not true of you so you will circle the no. Answer every question even if some arc hard to decide, but do not circle both yes and nfi. Remember, circle the yes if the statement is generally like you, or circle the no if the statement is generally not like you. There are no right or wrong answers. Only you can tell us how you feel about yourself, so we hope you will mark the way you really feel inside. 1. My classm ates make fun of m e ........................ . yes no 21. 1 am good in my schoolwork . . . . . . . yes no 2. Iam a happy person...................................... . yes no 22. I do many bad things............................. . . . yes no 3. It is hard for me to make frie n d s ................... . yes no 23. I can draw w e ll...................................... . . . yes no 4. I am often s a d ................................................ . yes no 24. I am good in m u s ic ............................. no S. I am smart......................................................... . yes no 25. I behave badly at h o m e ........................ . . . yes no IS . I am s h y ......................................................... A i 26. I am slow in finishing my schoolwork . . . yes no 7.1 get nervous when the teacher calls on me . . . yes no 27. I am an important member of my class . . . . yes no 8. My looks bother me........................................... 28. I am nervous........................................... no 9. When I grow up, I will be an important person . . yes no 29. I have pretty eyes................................. . . . yes no 2. Iam a happy person.......................................yes no 3. It is hard for me to make frie n d s ....................yes no 4. I am often s a d ................................................ yes no 5. I am smart..............................................................yes no 6. I am s h y ..............................................................yes no 7. I get nervous when the teacher calls on me . . . yes no 8. My looks bother me...........................................yes no 9. When I grow up, I will be an important person . . yes no 10. I get worried when we have tests in school . . . yes no 11. lam unpopular........................................................yes no 12. I am well behaved in school . ............................yes no 13. It is usually my fault when something goes wrong . yes no 14. 1 cause trouble to my fam ily.....................................yes no 15. I am strong................................................................. yes no 16. I have good ideas........................................................yes no 17. I am an important member of my family . . . . yes no 18. 1 usually want my own w a y .....................................yes no 19. 1 am good at making things with my hands . . . yes no 20. I give up e a s ily ........................................................yes no 22. I do many bad things.............................................. yes no 23. I can draw w e ll.................................................... yes no 24. I am good in m u s ic ...........................................yes no 25. I behave badly at h o m e ...................................... yes no 26. I am slow in finishing my schoolwork . . . . yes no 27. 1 am an important member of my class . . . . yes no 28. lam nervous.............................................................yes no 29. I have pretty eyes................................................... yes no 30. I can give a good report in front of the class . . yes no 31. In school I am a dreamer..........................................yes no 32. 1 pick on my brothers) and sister(s).......................yes no 33. My friends like my ideas..........................................yes no 34. I often get into tro u b le..........................................yes no 35. I am obedient at h o m e yes no 36. I am lu c k y .............................................................yes no 37. I worry a lo t .............................................................yes no 38. My parents expect too much of m e yes no 39. 1 like being the way I am yes no 40. I feel left out of th in g s ..........................................yes no 106 41. I have nice h air................................................... yes no 42. I often volunteer in shcool.................................yes no 43. 1 wish I were d iffe re n t.........................................yes no 44. 1 sleep well at n ig h t ..............................................yes no 45. I hate school............................................................yes no 46. I am among the last to be chosen for gam es . . yes no 47. I am sick a l o t ....................................................... yes no 48. I am often mean to other people...........................yes no 49. My classm ates in school think I have good ideas . yes no 50. I am unhappy yes no 51. I have many frien d s yes no 52. I am c h e e rfu l yes no 61. When I try to make something, everything seem s to go wrong yes no 62. I am picked on at hom e yes no 63. I am a leader in gam es and sports yes no 64. 1 am clumsy yes no 65. In gam es and sports, I watch instead of play . . yes no 66. I forget what I le a rn yes no 67. I am easy to get along w ith yes no 68. I lose my temper e asily yes no 69. I am popular with g ir ls yes no 70. I am a good reader yes no 71.1 would rather work alone than with a group . . yes no 72. I like my brother (sister).................................. yes no 107 46. I am among the last to be chosen for gam es . . yes 47. I am sick a l o t ....................................................yes 48. I am often mean to other people........................... yes 49. My classm ates in school think I have good ideas . yes 50. I am unhappy....................................................... yes 51. I have many frien d s.............................................. yes 52. I am c h e e rfu l....................................................... yes 53. I am dumb about most things................................yes 54. I am good looking...................................................yes 55. I have lots of p e p ...................................................yes 56. I get into a lot of fig h ts......................................... yes 57. I am popular with b o y s ......................................... yes 58. People pick on m e...................................................yes 59. My family is disappointed in m e ........................... yes 60. 1 have a pleasant face..............................................yes 66. 1 forget what 1 le a r n ..............................................yes no 67. I am easy to get along w ith .....................................yes no 68. Ilose my temper e a s ily......................................... yes no l 69. I am popular with g ir ls ......................................... yes no ! 70. I am a good reader yes no I 71. I would rather work alone than with a group . . yes no 72. I like my brother (sister) .....................................yes no 73. I have a good fig u re ..............................................yes no 74. I am often a fra id ...................................................yes no 75. I am always dropping or breaking things. . . . yes no 76. I can be trusted....................................................... yes no 77. I am different from other people........................... yes no 78. I think bad thoughts..............................................yes no 79. 1 cry e a s ily ....................... yes no 80. I am a good p e rs o n ..............................................yes no 107

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The Development And Evaluation Of A Personal Management Program And Its Effects Upon The Self-Concept And Perceived Locus-Of-Control Of Blind Adolescent Females

PDF

A Study Of Relationships Between Group Test Of Creativity (Gtoc) Scores And Achievement Test Scores Of Students With Spanish And Non-Spanish Surnames

PDF

A Study Of The Effects Of Differential Counseling On Self-Concept, Achievement, And Attendance Of Educationally Disadvantaged Children

PDF

The Psycho-Educational Profile Of Galactosemic Children In Relation To Dietary Treatment

PDF

The Effects Of Early Educational Stimulation On Selected Characteristics Of Kindergarten Children

PDF

Factors Affecting Elementary Teacher Retention And Turnover In Selected Unified School Districts Of Southern California

PDF

The Relationship Among Differentiated Cognitive Abilities, Field Dependency, Achievement, And Rated Classroom Behavior Of Ninth Grade Junior High School Students

PDF

The Relation Of Sense Of Humor To Creativity, Intelligence, And Achievement

PDF

Use Of College Students In A Social Therapy Program With Chronic Schizophrenics To Produce Changes In Mood And Social Responsiveness

PDF

Intellectual And Linguistic Development In Treated And Untreated Phenylketonuric Children

PDF

Prescriptive Teaching As A Supplement To Behavior Modification In The Remediation Of Learning Disorders

PDF

Treatment Effects On Physical Growth And Mental Development Among Phenylketonuric Children

PDF

An Empirical Investigation Of F-Test Bias, Disproportionality, And Mode Of Analysis Of Variance

PDF

The Interrelationships Among Grade Point Average, The Manifest Anxiety Scale, The Test Anxiety Questionnaire, And Perceived Testing Situation Stimuli, Rationalizations, And Behavior Responses

PDF

A Follow-Up Study Of A Group Of Academically Talented Students With Reference To Selected Factors Of Vocational Development And Post High School Education

PDF

Field-Independence And Typologies Of Delinquency

PDF

Selected Factors Contributing To Learning Potential Of Children Of Spanish Heritage

PDF

Color Vision Deficiency In Third And Sixth Grade Boys In Association To Academic Achievement And Descriptive Behavioral Patterns

PDF

Relationships Between Counselors' Philosophical Consistency And Congruency With Their Effectiveness As Counselors

PDF

An Investigation Of Leader And Member Helpfulness In Group Counseling

Asset Metadata

Creator Share, Joseph Hyman (author)

Core Title The relationship of middle-class elementary school students' internal control to intelligence, achievement, self-concept, and teachers' ratings

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

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

Tag education, educational psychology,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Advisor Magary, James F. (committee chair), Koch, Richard (committee member), Ofman, William V. (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-770756

Unique identifier UC11364421

Identifier 7300773.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-770756 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 7300773

Dmrecord 770756

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Share, Joseph Hyman

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