University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

To Attend Or Not To Attend College: Some Factors In The Decision Of Qualified High School Graduates

(USC Thesis Other)

To Attend Or Not To Attend College: Some Factors In The Decision Of Qualified High School Graduates

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content T h is d iss e r ta tio n has b een 6 2— 6050
m ic r o film e d e x a c tly as r e c e iv e d
E L L IS, B etty W a lte r s, 1 9 0 9 -
TO A TTEND OR NOT TO A T TEN D COLLEGE:
SOME FACTORS IN THE DECISION OF Q UALIFIED
HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES.
U n iv e r sity of Southern C a lifo r n ia , E d .D ., 1962
E d u cation , p sy ch o lo g y
University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan
Copyright hy
BETTY- WALTERS ELLIS
1963 '
TO ATTEND OR NOT TO ATTEND COLLEGE: SOME FACTORS IN THE
DECISION OF QUALIFIED HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES
by .
Betty Walters Ellis
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
(Guidance)
June 1962
This dissertation, written under the direction
of the Chairman of the candidate’s Guidance
Committee and approved by all members of the
Committee, has been presented to and accepted
by the Faculty of the School of Education in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of Doctor of Education.
D ate.....JUNE ,..1962 .... ........... .....
.........
/ Dean
Guidance Committee
rChairman
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter
I. PRESENTATION OF THE PROBLEM
Statement of the Problem
Importance of the Problem
Methods of Procedure
Scope of the Study
Definition of Terms
Organization of the Remaining
Chapters
II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ............. l6
Surveys of High School Graduates
Value Orientations
Summary of the Chapter
III. SOURCE OF DATA AND METHODS OF PROCE
DURE 37
The Research Sample
The Interview Schedule
Coding the Data .
Statistical Procedures
Summary of the Chapter
IV. LIFE GOALS AND VALUES................. 51
Father’s Occupation and Occupational
Values
Educational Plans and Objectives
The Best Possible Life and Projected
Attainment
Career Expectation, Consultation and
Advice
Preferred Work Satisfactions
The Decision to Attend or Not to
Attend College
Page
1
ii
Chapter
iii
Page
Summary of the Chapter
V. FAMILY BACKGROUND AND VALUES........... 1^1
Socio-economic Status
Other Family Characteristics
Projection of Own Family Values
Summary of the Chapter
VI. SELF AND SCHOOL IN RETROSPECT ..... 180
Change in Relation to School
Subject's Evaluation of the High
School Frogram
Summary of the Chapter
VII. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 193
A Review of the Investigation
A Synthesis of the Findings
Conclusions
Recommendations
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................. 219
APPENDIX A ........................... 227
APPENDIX B ........................... 231
APPENDIX C . . . ........................... . . 251
LIST OP TABLES
Table Page
1. Occupation of Fathers of Non-college and
College Men of Selected Ability Level . . 53
2. The Attitude of Fathers toward Their
Occupation as Perceived by Non-college
and College Men of Selected Ability
Level....................... 56
3. Characteristics of A "Good" Job As Re
ported by Non-college and College Men
of Selected Ability Level . . . ........ 58
4. Father’s Opinion of Son's Job Choice As
Perceived by Non-college and College
Men of Selected Ability Level ........ 61
5. Responses of Non-college and College Men
of Selected Ability Level Concerning
Plans at Time of Graduation from High
School................. 63
6. Plans of 24 Non-college Men of Selected
Ability Level Who Were Not Planning to
Go to Work at Time of Graduation from
High School.............................. 64
7. Educational Objectives of Non-college and
College Men of Selected Ability Level . . 66
8. Years of Schooling Completed by Fathers of
Non-college and College Men of Selected
Ability Level ..................... 69
9. Years of Schooling Completed by Mothers of
Non-college and College Men of Selected
Ability Level................ 70
iv
V
Table Page
10. Education of Fathers and Mothers of Non
college and College Men of Selected
Ability Level by Highest Completed
Level........ . . ............ . 72
11. Reasons for Seeking Additional Education
as Cited by Non-college and College Men
of Selected Ability Level . . ....... 73
12. Characteristics of the Best Possible Life
as Described by Non-college and College
Men of Selected Ability Level ........ 76
13. Characteristics of the Worst Possible Life
as Described by Non-college and College
Men of Selected Ability Level........... 79
14. Placement on a Nine-rung Ladder: Projec
tion of Attainment Five and Fifteen
Years Ahead by Non-college and College
Men of Selected Ability Level ........... 83
15. Placement on a Nine-rung Ladder: Number of
Subjects Selecting Each Rung for Five
and Fifteen Years Ahead................. 84
16. Career Expectation of Non-college and
College Men of Selected Ability Level . . 87
17. Career Expectation of Non-college and
College Men of Selected Ability Level
Compared with Occupational Classifi
cation of Fathers ..................... 89
18. The Best Possible Life by Expected Occupa
tional Groupings.................... 92
19. Source of Career Advice for Non-college and
College Men of Selected Ability Level . . 95
20. Reported Reaction of Parents to Son's
Occupational Plans ..................... 97
21. Median Placement and Quartile Deviation of
Work Satisfactions Ranked in Order of
Preference by Non-college and College Men
of Selected Ability Levels ....... 99
Vi
Table Page
22. Median Ranks of Work Satisfactions for
the Non-college and College Men,
Combined Median, and Chi-Square ..... 103
23. Factors in the Decision Not to Attend
College as Cited by Non-college Men of
Selected Ability Level ................ 107
24. Factors in the Decision to Attend College
as Cited by College Men of Selected
Ability Level ....................Ill
25. A Comparison of the Responses of College
and Non-college Men of Selected Ability
Level to Similar Factors Relating to
the Decision to Attend or Not to Attend
College.......... 114
26. High School Subject Marks as Reported by
Non-college and College Men of Selected
Ability Level ............................ 119
27. Reasons Cited by Non-college and 21 College
Men to Explain Why High School Marks Were
Not Indicative of Ability................. 121
28. Time of Decision Regarding College or Non
college Attendance as Reported by Non
college and College Men of Selected
Ability Level.............. 122
29. Information about College Obtained in High
School as Reported by Non-college and
College Men of Selected Ability Level . . 125
30. The Response of Non-college and College Men
of Selected Ability Level to the Question;
"While in High School, Did You Learn You
Had College Ability?" ................. 127
31. Response to the Questions: "Did Teachers
Talk with You about Your Ability to Do
College Work?" "Did Counselors?" . . . . 129
32. College Ability as Rated by Non-college
and College Men of Selected Ability
Level: Total Score and Mean Rating . . . 130
vii
Table Page
33. Index of Status Characteristics (I.S.C.)
Ratings for Fathers of Non-college
and College Men of Selected Ability
Level................................. 143
34. Social Class of Fathers of Non-college
Men of Selected Ability Level .......... 144
35. Projected Attainment Fifteen Years
Ahead by Ladder Rung and Social Class
Equivalent for Non-college and College
Men of Selected Ability Level ........... 145
36. Number and Percentage of Subjects with
One or Both Parents Foreign Born .... 149
37. Size of Family for Non-college and
College Men of Selected Ability Level . . 151
38. Number and Percentage of Subjects with
Divorced or Deceased Parents ........... 132
39- Order of Birth for Non-college and
College Men of Selected Ability Level . . 153
40. Number and Percentage of Subjects with
Brother or Sister Who Attended
College.....................................155
41. Number and Percentage of Subjects with
Best Friend Who Attended College . . 156
42. The Parent as Confidant and Adviser to
Non-college and College M e n ............ 158
43. The Kinds of Additional Help Desired of
Parents as Reported by Non-college
and College M e n .........................159
44. Parental Understanding as Reported by
Non-college and College Men .... .'. . 161
45. Marital Status and Residence of Non
college and College Men Two Years
after High School Graduation ....... 162
46. Preferred Age for Marriage as Cited by
the Non-college and College Men of
Selected Ability Level ......... 164
vili
Table Pag©
47. Reasons Cited by Non-college and College
Men as to Preferred Age for Marriage . . 164
48. Projection of Family Values in Response
to the Question: "What Sort of Home
and Family Have You Thought You
Would Like to Have?" . . ............... 165
49. - Projection of Family Values in Response
to the Question: "What Do You Think
a Father Should Be Like?" ............. 167
50. Projection of Family Values in Response
to the Question: "Any Particular
Idea About How You Are Going to Treat
Your Children?"............................ 169
51. Projection of Family Values in Response
to the Question: "How Would You Feel
About a Son of Yours Going into Your
Kind of Work?"............................ 171
52. What the Non-college and College Men
Would Do Different (Response to Lead
Question).................................. 182
53. What the Non-college and College Men
Would Do Different (Response to
Primers)....................... 183
54. Desired Improvements in the High School
Program as Cited by the Non-college
and College Men of Selected Ability
Level............ 186
CHAPTER I
PRESENTATION OP THE PROBLEM
Talented young people are the nation’s Invaluable
space-age resource; yet, available data disclose that the
nation is losing annually the talents of able students
who for one reason or another do not continue their
education beyond high school. This loss represents 34
percent of the high school graduates in the top 30
percent ability range (6:30).
It has been said that this democratic culture is
wasteful of its greatest resource, the intellectual power
of its citizens. Dael Wolfle has dramatized the nation's
neglect of human resources in America's Resources of
Specialized Talent, the Report of the Commission on
Human Resources and Advanced Training (42). And, the
problem has been further documented by the President's
Committee on Education Beyond the High School (27).
The retention of able high school graduates as
college entrants is a matter of concern to school
guidance personnel who aim to help boys and girls attain
1
the fulfillment of their capabilities. More information
is needed about those factors which deter young people
of promise from pursuing a higher education. The reason
is not exclusively financial need. Other factors appear
to operate to keep youth of ability from applying for
college admission (7:22). Information is needed, also,
concerning the incentives to be supplied in order to
assure the conservation and nurture of superior ability.
The present study was undertaken for the purpose
of acquiring new insights into a phenomenon noted in the
research literature of follow-up studies of high school
graduates, namely, that some able high school graduates
enter college and some do not. The study was concerned
primarily with the second group who fail to enter college
though qualified to undertake an advanced program of
educational training.
The present research, an exploratory study,
represents an inquiry into the dimensions of the problem.
It seeks information about the social and personal
variables which may discourage able high school graduates
from college attendance, and observes the settings in
which these variables occur.
Statement of the Problem
This study was designed to explore the possible
relationships between non-intellective factors and the
decision of qualified high school graduates not to go to
college. More specifically, why do some high school
graduates who might reasonably be expected to make a go
of it in college decide to conclude their formal edu
cation with a high school diploma? The study was an
inquiry into those factors which persuade high school
graduates of above-average academic ability to forego
the advantage of advanced educational opportunities. The
central problem of the study was stated in the form of
two contrasting questions:
1. What were the factors related to the decision
of a sample of qualified high school
graduates not to attend college?
2. What were the factors related to the decision
of a comparable sample of qualified high
school graduates to attend college?
Additional questions were proposed to guide the
conduct of the study. These questions, components of
the central problem, were:
1. Was the high school graduate who was qualified
to do college work aware of his college
potential prior to high school graduation?
Did he know that he was capable of college
work?
2. Was the capable high school graduate
encouraged by his parents to plan for college?
Did his family hold education in high or low
esteem? Resist or encourage higher educa
tional goals?
Did the high school graduate of high level
ability receive encouragement and advice
from his teachers and counselors, Junior and
senior high school, relative to plans for
college:
a. Was the high school graduate informed
at some point in his high school career
about the various forms of financial
aid available to college students?
b. In the course of his high school career,
was the high school graduate informed
about the educational choices available
to him at the college level? Did he
learn in high school about college courses
and college requirements?
What was the career e^ectation of the high
school graduate of college ability? What
role was he expecting to fulfill as a
lifetime career?
Aside from career expectation, what were the
expressed life goals of the high school
graduate of college ability?
5
Importance of the Problem
It is generally acknowledged that the American
society suffers a loss of talent and manpower when young
men of above-average academic ability conclude their
formal education with graduation from high school. A
large percentage of high school graduates who could
benefit from higher education deny themselves this oppor
tunity.
In a recent study for the National Science
Foundation, Bridgman reviewed and analyzed national
statistics on high school graduates; also for the same
study, he reviewed the findings of several state-wide
surveys and specific studies of selected samples which
dealt with various aspects of college entrance and
graduation (7). A correlation of the various available
data disclosed considerable attrition of high level
ability, nationwide, at the transition point from high
school to college. Of those graduates in the ability
range characteristic of the top 30 percent of all high
school graduates, it was found that 20 to 25 pbrcent of
the boys did not go on to college. For the girls In
this ability group, the loss was much greater. About
45 percent of the girl graduates in the high level
group withdrew from the educational system following
high school graduation. These figures included full-time
entrants after military service or periods of full-time
employment as well as those graduates in the upper
ability level who entered immediately after high school
graduation.
The various studies examined by Bridgman (l)
(10) (21) (38) (4-3) reported that financial problems
deterred many of the nation's capable high school
graduates from going to college. While this factor was
the largest single reason given for failure to enter
college, evidence as to the relative importance of the
economic and other factors was inconclusive. The
response to large-scale surveys of high school graduates
has not been clear on this point. Bridgman reported that
half of the students who placed in the top 30 percent
but who did not go to college would probably have done
so if they had had more money. On the other hand, half
or more of the graduates in the upper ability range who
could expect no more than limited financial assistance
from their parents did enter college immediately
following high school graduation. Disregarding an appar
ent financial limitation, these students did accept the
challenge of college attendance.
Bridgman observed, also, that some of the
graduates who reported financial need as their principal
7
reason for not going to college were possibly more
interested in immediate earnings. In such cases, the
cost of going to college may not have been a serious .
difficulty but merely a convenient reply.
It was thought that the present study, through
the use of the small sample technique and an individ
ualized approach, might contribute to the identification,
and lead to the relative importance, of the more obscure
factors which may prevent the able high school graduate
from entering college. If society is to capitalize on
the talent available to it and if able young people are
to develop their competencies to the fullest, the
percentage of able high school graduates who enter
college might well be increased to its optimum point.
Technological advance has accelerated the demand for
educated manpower.
To provide needed incentives, to make learning
a challenge, information is needed about those factors
which deter high school graduates in the upper range of
ability from pursuing a higher education.
Methods of Procedure
The present study was an exploratory study of
the relationship between certain personal data and the
decision of a select group of high School graduates not
to go to college. It was conducted as an intensive
8
, personalized study of a small group within a larger
sample. -
The data were obtained through Individual
interviews, tape-recorded, of one hundred male graduates
who were regarded as capable of completing four years
of college. Originally, the subjects of the study were
participants in a follow-up survey of 1713 high school
graduates representing one in seven of the high school
seniors, men and women, graduating in a June class from
the high schools of a large city school system. As a
result of this survey, it was known to the investigator
which graduates from among the respondents had entered
or had not entered college in the fall term of the
ensuing school year.
The one hundred male subjects were selected from
the respondents of the larger sample as two contrasting
groups comprised each of fifty men. Any one of these
young men might have pursued a college career. Half of
them were enrolled in college full time; the remainder
were non-college enrollee3. The basis of the selection
was an IQ of 110 or higher on the Otis Quick-Scoring
Test of Mental Ability; or placement in the upper
quartile of achievement with reference to national norms
on the Iowa Tests of Educational Development. For data
on age, IQ, and percentile rank on the Iowa Tests see
9
Appendix A.
An interview schedule, partially structured, was
.used in conducting the interview. Questions for both
groups of subjects related to the following areas:
(l) post-high school education, (2) factors in the
decision to go, or not to go, to college, (3) post-high
school employment, (4) future plans and expectations,
(5) desired work satisfactions, (6) family background
and family values; and in retrospect, (7) the subject’s
evaluation of the high school program. The subjects
were interviewed approximately two years after their
graduation from high school.
The tape-recorded interviews were later
transcribed and the replies to lead questions and
related primers analyzed and coded. Statistical
treatment of the data included various distributions,
correlational procedures, and percentage tabulations.
A more complete and technical discussion of the method
ology which was used is reported in Chapter III.
Scope of the Study
This research was an investigation of the factors
related to the non-college attendance of capable high
school graduates qualified to do college work. The term
"capable" was used interchangeably with "academically
qualified" or "scholastically able."
10
Use of these terms was restricted to subjects
having an IQ of 110 or higher on a mental ability test,
or a composite score on the Iowa Tests of Educational
Development which placed the subject in the top 25
percent of the nation’s high school graduates with
respect to educational achievement.
It Is recognized that the foregoing criteria for
selection of the sample define arbitrarily an upper
level of ability. However, high school graduates who
meet one or both of these criteria are widely regarded
as capable of completing four years of college.
Further restrictions on the study Included the
size and sex of the sample. The study was restricted to
one hundred male high school graduates capable of college
work as defined by the criteria. Women graduates were
not included because of the marked differences between
sexes in the extent to which they reach various stages
of education, and because of differences in vocational
opportunity.
The over-all sample was equally divided into
two contrasting groups. One group was comprised of the
fifty subjects who were attending college full time in
the fall of the year subsequent to June graduation. The
fifty subjects in the other group were not enrolled in
college.
11
Though small, the sample was believed to be
representative of the_male population from which it was
derived. The subjects of the study came from an original
pool of high school graduates selected systematically to
represent one in seven of the June graduates of a large
city school system. The graduates comprising the
original reservoir of cases were contacted in connection
with a follow-up study conducted in the fall of 1958.
Twenty-nine out of the thirty-four high schools covered
by the original survey continued to be represented by
the smaller sample of one hundred male subjects of the
present study.
The findings and conclusions of the present study
may therefore be interpreted with reference to comparable
males of the larger population from which the smaller
sample was derived. However, they are not necessarily
applicable to all male high school graduates of high
level ability who do not go to college. The small size
of the sample precludes such a generalization.
In undertaking this investigation, it was
assumed that there is a loss to the nation of potential
talent and trained manpower when able high school
graduates academically qualified to undertake college
work do not continue their formal education beyond high
school. It was further assumed that these graduates
cannot develop their potentialities to the fullest
without additional education of a formalized content.
In such cases, the loss of talent is an individual loss
as well as a societal deprivation.
For purposes of this investigation, ' ‘college
attendance" was restricted in meaning to full-time
attendance in a four-year college or university. A
full-time student was understood to be enrolled for not
less than twelve units of work per semester Involving
twelve hours or more of class attendance per week.
Because the study was more particularly concerned with
the full and early development of individual poten
tialities, it seemed desirable to focus attention on
the factors connected with full-time college attendance.
No attempt was made in the present study to investigate
the circumstances related to college attendance on a
part-time basis.
It should be emphasized that the present study
is not concerned with causal relationships; rather, it
is an exploratory, comparative investigation.
Definition of Terms
College attendance.--In this study, college
attendance is to be interpreted as full-time attendance
involving twelve or more units of college work on a
semester basis or its equivalent in quarter units.
13
Whenever the term appears, it is to be Interpreted as
the major activity of the student; other interests and
concerns are secondary.
The term "college" as used in this study refers
to a four-year college or university.
College ability.— For purposes of thi3 investi
gation, college ability was arbitrarily defined by an IQ
of 110 or higher on a test of mental ability; or a
composite score on a battery of educational achievement
tests which placed the student in the upper quartile of
the distribution. The male high school graduate who met
either or both of these criteria was said to be an "able"
student in the "upper ability range" and "qualified" to
do college work.
Social class.— The subjects of this study were
classified into social status groupings according to
the method described by Warner and associates (41). As
used in this study, social class is the descriptive
status equivalent of a composite socio-economic rating
based on the 3tatus characteristics of (l) father’3
income, (2) source of income, (3) house type, and
(4) dwelling area. The procedures used in computing an
Index of Status Characteristics (I.S.C.) are described
in Chapter III.
14
Expected occupation.— A3 used in this study, the
expected occupation refers to the subject's reported
perception of his life-time work, that is, the occupation
in which he plans to be established ten or twenty years
hence. It may, or may not be, a wished-for-career.
Work satisfaction.--The study used the term
"work satisfaction" to mean one or more of the psycho
logical components of a work situation or work setting
as perceived and anticipated by the subject.
Organization of the Remaining
Chapters
The opening chapter has Introduced the problem
to be investigated. The problem was identified and
associated with the purpose of the proposed research.
Limitations to the scope of the study were established;
and certain terms subject to varying interpretations
were defined as used in the study.
Chapter II reviews the literature relevant to
the problem. Hnphasis is placed upon comparatively
recent research devoted to the conservation of talent
and the general question of college eligibility and
attendance. Some studies are reported which, though not
immediately relevant to the area, allude to the problem
of educational attrition and loss of talent. These have
!5
been cited for their theoretical considerations sugges
tive of a more adequate and meaningful interpretation
of the findings.
Chapter III discusses the procedures followed in
the selection of the sample and the collection of the
data. The preparation of a data-collecting instrument,
namely, a semi-structured interview schedule is
described and measuring devices included in the schedule
are explained. The technical procedure of coding is
discussed; likewise the method used for classifying
respondents into social status groupings. Statistical
methods applied to the data are reported.
Chapters IV, V, and VI present the findings of
the study with reference to large areas of definitive
information. Chapter IV reports on life goals and
values while Chapter V discusses family background and
relationships. Chapter VI offers in retrospect a
contemporary evaluation of self and school.
Chapter VII presents a summary of the findings;
formulates conclusions with reference to the central
problem as stated in Chapter I; and suggests hypotheses
for further research.
A bibliography and appendices complete the study.
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OP THE LITERATURE
This chapter offers a review of related investi
gations. These include selected surveys of high school
graduates and studies of value orientations. Selection
has been based on the recency and relevancy of the
related research to the central purpose of the present
Investigation.
Customarily, the post-high school experiences
of graduates and the effectiveness of the school program
are the subject and content of follow-up studies. More
recently, the purpose of the follow-up survey has been
enhanced by the increasing emphasis on human .resources
and the conservation of individual talent. Represent
ative surveys of the latter type have been selected for
review in this chapter.
Surveys of High School Graduates
Perhaps the best known of the surveys of high
school graduates is the Minnesota study of 1950 in which
Berdie (3) called attention to the loss of talent in
16
!7
transition from high school to college. Berdie noted
that many young persons of superior ability though
interested in obtaining an advanced education were not
continuing; also, that many of them were not at all
interested in attending college.
Recent studies of high school graduates have
been conducted in other states on a similar scale.
Subsequently, those data pertinent to graduates in an
upper range of scholastic ability have been abstracted
and analyzed as a singular phase of the over-all study.
Other studies on a more limited scale have focused
attention on high aptitude seniors and the psycho
logical and sociological factors which contribute to
non-college attendance.
Three studies, state-wide in scope, a study at
the county level, and a national study are discussed in
the material which follows.
Plans of high school graduates in the state of
Wisconsin.— Directed by Little (21) (22), this investi
gation was a state-wide inquiry into the decisions of
high school graduates about education beyond high school
and factors which influence those decisions. The study
was initiated as one of a series to discover facts and
information upon which to construct an adequate program
of higher education for the state of Wisconsin.
18
In cooperation with the high schools, public
and private, questionnaires were completed by 34,151
graduating seniors in the spring of 1957* a total which
represented almost 95 percent of the state's 36,000
graduates in the spring of that year. The survey
instrument inquired about plans beyond high school;
asked for information about parents, school experiences,
and financial status; and solicited opinions about the
value of a college education.
In the following fall, an inquiry was made of
the parents of a representative sample of the graduates
to determine whether the graduates had followed through
with their plans and to inquire into the attitudes of
the parents toward the desirability of a college edu
cation for their son or daughter. An intensive effort
was made to obtain returns from the parents of all
youth with high potential for college training.
In early 1958, follow-up questionnaires were
sent to the 1,060 graduates, who, though academically
capable, had indicated in the spring of 1957 that they
were not planning to attend college. These students
were defined as those graduates who had scored in the
top one-fourth of Wisconsin high school seniors on a
mental ability test and who ranked in the top one-fourth
of their high school graduating class. Among all
19
graduates, 12 percent of the boys and 16 percent of the
girls qualified for the upper quarter. Replies were
received from 69 percent of the group.
Approximately one out of five graduates of high
level ability was not planning to attend college. One-
third to one-half of these graduates gave lack of money
as the principal reason for not continuing and their
parents agreed. Many of the others did not have a
desire for advanced schooling at the college level.
Respecting a college education, non-college and
college men expressed different values. The non-college
men checked these statements with greater frequency:
"I would rather start earning money quickly and
learn on the Job."
"Skilled laborers get paid as much as college
graduates."
"Learning on the job is more practical than
most school learning."
"Success in life depends on ability and effort,
not amount of education."
The college men, that is, those who were planning
to go, checked the following statements with greater
frequency:
"I am (would be) greatly dissatisfied to stop at
my present level of knowledge."
"Going to college has just been accepted; I have
never thought of anything else."
Parents1 education was found to be more of a factor in
20
college or non-college attendance than parents1 occu-.
pation.
Little recommended that counseling and informa
tion programs to identify, encourage, and enable
qualified graduates to continue their schooling be
directed to parents as well as students.
Arkansas high school graduates and college
attendance.--Stroup and Andrew (3) used the questionnaire
method to examine the background and plans of the
graduating seniors of Arkansas high schools, class of
1957* who had participated in a state-wide testing
program conducted in that year and for whom test scores
on the American Council on Education Psychological
Examination were available. The sample represented 88
percent of the state’s high school graduates or 15,248
seniors. Twelve thousand seven hundred and forty-six
usable forms were returned.
In the conduct of the study, Stroup and Andrew
were guided by two questions:
1. What is the extent of loss in human resources
as indicated by the number of Arkansas high
school graduates of high ability who do not
attend college?
2. To what extent are the factors of rural-urban
background, socio-economic status, and family
21
characteristics related to students'
educational-occupational plans?
A principal concern of the study was the identi
fication of factors predisposing qualified high school
graduates nojt to attend college.
Respondents to the questionnaire were grouped
into terciles according to their score on the ACE. Those
scoring below the 34th percentile were designated as the
first or lower tercile; students who scored from the
34th to the 66th percentile, inclusive, were placed in
the second or middle tercile; those at or above the 67th
percentile comprised the third or upper tercile.
Overall, it was noted that high school seniors
who went to college increased as a percent with each
succeeding tercile rank; thus college attendance was a
function of placement according to ACE score. Also,
completion of the college preparatory curriculum and
size of family income were contributing factors toward
college attendance, increasingly so from the first to
the third tercile rank.
The study of environmental factors was limited
to the respondents who placed in the upper or middle
tercile of the distribution of ACE scores. In reference
to these terciles of placement, the questionnaire data
were analyzed to identify factors which differentiated
22
between the students of high ability who continued to
college and those who did not.
Upon analysis, the able high school graduate in
attendance at college emerged from the data as a person
as yet unmarried and not engaged. He lived with both
parents in a larger home with a smaller family. His
father was a professional worker, owner or manager of
a business, salesman or office worker. There were more
book3 and magazines in the home; and his parents were
active to a greater degree in clubs and community
affairs. Both parents were better educated and fre
quently, the mother had been employed as a teacher or
clerk prior to marriage. The parents wanted the son or
daughter to attend college and usually insisted that he
go.
Stroup and Andrew concluded "that economic status
is related to college attendance largely because seniors
from families of higher economic, levels can afford to go
to college and not because those seniors have greater
aptitude for college work." (38:84)
Non-college attenders in the top 10 percent.—
Data for the study conducted by Wright and Jung (43)
were gathered by interview and questionnaire. Their
purpose was to ascertain why capable high school
graduates in the state of Indiana, approximately
23
one-fourth of the top 10 percent, were not continuing
their schooling beyond the high school level. As
defined in this study, schooling included advanced
training at any po3t-high school educational institution.
The sample consisted of 3,4-79 high school
graduates in the spring class of 1955 who ranked in the
upper 10 percent of their classes. The girls of this
- upper ability group outnumbered the boys by 2 to 1 even
though both sexes were about evenly matched in the
over-all number of total graduates. The 1,011 individ
uals who did not continue their schooling comprised the
smaller sample which was studied. High school principals
completed a questionnaire regarding each of these
individuals. Subsequently, a representative from each
school was interviewed as was also a large number of
parents and students.
An interviewer and three other persons reviewed
the data available for each student and designated
independently the single most important factor associated
with the student's decision not to attend college.
These four persons observed that 59 percent of the boys
and 35 percent of the girls did not go to college for
one or several of the following reasons: (l) they
regarded high school graduation as the termination of
formal education; (2) they desired to begin earning
24
money Immediately; (3) there was a strong competing
interest such as military service or marriage.
In general, the findings of the Indiana study
disclosed that
1. The families of 11 percent of the qualified
graduates who did not continue were in need
of the graduate's financial assistance.
Interviews with school officials corroborated
this information received from the students.
2. Many of the parents of the academically
capable graduates who did not attend college
were opposed to advanced education for their
children:
a. As reported by qualified graduates, non
college attenders, 23 percent of the
parents of the group were opposed.
b. As reported by the principals, 42 percent
of the parents were opposed.
c. Of the 731 parents surveyed, 26 percent
expressed a negative attitude towards
college attendance.
3. Sixty-four percent of the non-college
attenders were married or planned to marry
soon. The percentages for girls and boys
were 68 and 37* respectively.
Of the academically capable males who did
not go on to college, 18 percent enlisted in
the military.
Of those students who were interviewed
(N = 570), approximately 78 percent reported
that a member of the school staff had talked
with them about higher education and the
possibility of continuing. But, more than
20 percent affirmed that no one connected
with their high school had discussed addi
tional schooling with them.
It was pointed out that the latter per
centage should be interpreted with some
reservations due to the fact that frequently
young people of this age are not willing to
credit adults with having influenced their
decisions.
Of the Indiana students who qualified but
did not go to college, 28 percent reported
that information concerning further edu
cational opportunities was not introduced
until the twelfth grade. In 66 percent of
the cases, the subject of educational
opportunities was dealt with at one grade
level only in the course of the high school
career.
26
Background and motivation as factors in non-
college attendance.— One hundred and four high school
graduates of three Colorado counties who qualified for
college but did not enroll were the subjects of Cass'
study of non-college attendance (62). Cass was espe
cially concerned with background and motivation. Data
were collected by questionnaire. In addition, fifteen
of the 104 subjects were interviewed. The purpose of
the interview, according to Cass, was to confirm some
of the Information collected in the questionnaire and
secondly, to obtain a number of case histories exem
plifying the reasons for not going to college.
Major reasons of qualified graduates for not
attending college were reported by this investigator
as: (l) lack of finances, (2) marriage, (3) a vocation
not requiring college preparation, (4) lack of interest,
(5) indefinite plans, and (6) entry into the armed
forces.
Background factors were classified in reference
to each of these major reasons. For example, capable
graduates not interested in a college education came
from smaller-families, had more cultural advantages,
fewer mothers were employed, and fathers were more fre
quently farm owners or managers. A pattern of factors
did not appear consistently from group to group.
27
While 31 percent of the respondents reported
financial need as a principal reason for non-college
attendance, it was noted that less than half of this
group would have gone even though adequately financed.
The parents of these graduates who would have attended
were found to be more favorable towards college.
As an outcome of his investigation, Cass
recommended that attention be given to the education of
parents concerning the purposes of college and that
financial assistance be provided for capable high school
graduates on an individual basis with due consideration
of related background factors.
A nation-wide approach to the problem.--The study
conducted by Stice and associates (l) (36) involved a
systematic sampling of high school students throughout
the United States. The purpose of this investigation
was to determine how many graduates throughout the
country were not planning to go to college because of
such factors as lack of money, lack of interest, and the
like.
The findings were based upon the responses of
the highest scoring 29 perceht of a sample of 33,000
twelfth-year students from 478 public high schools in
45 states. All of the twelfth-year students present in
these schools on a designated day-were given a
28
questionnaire and an ability test. Since the object of
the te3t was to permit selection of students who were
academically able, the items designed for the test were
purposefully difficult. The 29 percent of all students
tested who scored 12 or higher out of a possible score
of 20 were operationally defined as the high-ability
group.
It was found that the best single predictor of
interest in college attendance was the student's voca
tional aspiration. If he aspired to an occupation which
required a college degree, he was much more likely to
wish to attend college than if his idealized occupation
were one for which a high school diploma were sufficient.
In general, the student from a small family whose
father was in a profession, was more likely to attend
college than the student who was one of several children
and. whose father was a farmer or laboring man. And in
either case, a son was more likely to attend than a
daughter.
Eighteen percent of the high-aptitude boys and
30 percent of the high-aptitude girls expressed no
interest In college attendance. However, about seven
out of every ten in this group of seemingly disinter
ested students said they would attend If adequate
financial assistance were available. The second response
29
was interpreted by the investigators to mean that these
students were interested in college but realistically,
had not considered college as a possibility due to
financial restrictions.
This research concluded that if adequate finan
cial resources were available, as many as 95 out of
every 100 boys and 91 out of every 100 girls who are
capable of benefiting from a college education would go
to college. It was the actuality, however, that no
more than 70 percent of the high-aptitude seniors
expected to attend.
Value Orientations
The present study was described in Chapter I as
an investigation concerned with those forces at work
within the individual and present in his circumstances
which have operated to influence educational decision.
As yet to be described in Chapter III, certain features
of an interview schedule were designed to elicit and
measure interiorized values.
In deference to this aspect of the present
investigation, the review of selected literature presents
in resume a conceptual framework for the study of values;
discusses the values of high school students; and reports
on "common man" values.
.3°
Bnergent versus traditional values.— Building on
the previous formulations of Clyde Kluckhohn, Kaspar
Naegele, and G. A. Spindler, Getzels (14) has suggested
a framework or system of personal values as the context
within which to examine the relationships between values
and education. He accepts Kluckhohn's definition of the
term "value'1: "A value is a conception, explicit or
implicit, distinctive of an individual or characteristic
of a group, of the desirable which influences the
selection from available modes, means, and ends of
action."
The framework which Getzels has proposed consists
of a dual and conflicting set of values, traditional
and emergent. He observes that the traditional values
are in a state of flux and undergoing major transfor
mation as the emergent values become ascendant. The
changes have been and are being affected by the demands
of a new technology which has forced a reorganization
of the social structure.
In juxtaposition to the traditional values,
there is in each instance a corresponding emergent value.
Traditionally, for example, there has been the value of
achievement. It has been important to get to the top
and everyone was obligated to try. But this work-success
ethic is being superseded by the emerging value of
I
•3*
sociability and affable interpersonal relations.
Just so, the traditional value of future-time
orientation accompanied by an ongoing self-denial is
being transformed into present-time orientation and the
gratification of immediate desires. Personal inde
pendence, characterized by self-determination, self
activity, self-perfection, is emerging as conformity to
the now more significant group. And the traditional
value of a moral commitment as to what is right and
wrong has moved towards the concept 'of a moral rela
tivism or group morality; what the group thinks is right
is moral.
Getzels has proposed and initiated research in
the area of values and education to investigate the
cleavage in values along the dimensions thus postulated
(14:155-159)• He predicts a general trend towards the
emergent values.
High school students' values.--Thompson has
defined values as "the relatively stable pre-determiners
of action that are developed in each individual through
prizing, cherishing, or holding something dear. In
general, values govern behavior directly" (59:132).
This investigator used the Differential Values Inventory,
a forced-choice questionnaire developed by Prince (66),
to measure the personal values of 100 boys and 100 girls
32
from both the senior and freshmen classes of five
California high schools. In addition, each student
in the sample completed a personal-information blank
and an occupational-values survey.
A comparison of the mean traditional- and
emergent-value scores for all students disclosed that
the values held by the students in these five high
schools were significantly more emergent than traditional.
Also, as between groupings, the mean traditional-value
score was markedly consistent. Differences were not
significant, for example, in mean traditional-value
scores between freshmen and seniors or boys and girls.
In respect to family background, the presence
of both father and mother in the home, as in contrast
to an atypical home situation, appeared not to influence
the traditional or emergent values of students signifi
cantly. However, when the students were grouped by
father's occupation, there was a wide divergence among
the mean traditional-value scores.
Probably, this factor of father's occupation
does influence the values of students, although no
clear-cut pattern of influence was apparent. Of Interest
was the finding that the children of unskilled workers,
both boys and girls, reflected high emergent values.
Additional highlights of the Thompson study noted
a distinct relationship between mean traditional values
and (l) occupational choice, (2) high marks, and (3) the
college-preparatory curriculum. It was apparent that
the nearer the occupational preference to the
professional-managerial grouping, the more traditional
were the values of the students selecting it. High
school students who received high grades and followed
the college-preparatory curriculum were significantly
more traditional than students who received lower marks
and followed other majors.
“Common man” values.— Kahl and associates (54)
interviewed twenty-four high school boys and their
parents as a part of a larger project conducted in the
Boston metropolitan area by the Laboratory of Social
Relations of Harvard University and referred to as
"The Mobility Project." Questionnaire data for the
larger sample of 3971 boys, juniors and seniors of
public high schools, presented a patterned relationship
between the combination of father's occupation and
boy's IQ in relation to college aspiration. A boy with
a father in a "major" white-collar occupation (lawyer,
doctor, executive) who was in the top quintile or top
20 percent of intelligence aspired to college 89 percent
of the time, whereas a boy with father In a semi-skilled
or unskilled occupation and in the bottom quintile of
34
intelligence strove for college 9 percent of the time.
Thus, the combination of IQ and father's
occupation or social class position successfully
predicted educational ambition at the extremes. However,
the two factors were not adequate as predictors of
college expectation for high school boys of high intelli
gence from homes of lower middle status. These boys,
with fathers in "minor" white-collar occupations or in
skilled labor or service occupations showed almost a
50-50 chance of aiming for college.
In an attempt to explain this variance in
expectation, twenty-four boys of high intelligence Were
selected for interview analysis from the middle range
of the occupational distribution. Half of the interview
sample aspired to college; the other half did not intend
to go to college.
Kahl reported that the interviews disclosed a
characteristic way of life for the families of these
boys. Some parents were content with their way of life;
the parents of the college aspirants were not. The
discontented parents trained their sons from the earliest
years of elementary school to take school seriously and
to use education as a means to move upward into the
middle class.
The sons who internalized middle class values
were sufficiently motivated to overcome the obstacles
which faced the common man boys in school. They saw a
reason for good school performance and college aspi
ration. Sons who showed in their early school
performance signs of talent were pushed forward by the
discontented parents and encouraged to climb. Kahl
views the school primarily as a means to ascent, the
family as the initiator of ascent.
Summary of the Chapter
In recent years, surveys of high school graduates
have focused attention on students of upper-level ability
who have not continued from high school to college. The
present chapter has reviewed some of these surveys.
For the most part, the findings were comparable.
It was observed by the several investigators that certain
factors were operative in the decision of qualified
graduates not to attend college. These were: (l) parents'
attitude towards education, (2) parents' education,
(3) father's occupation, (4) size of family, (5) finan
cial need, (6) Indefinite plans, (7) lack of interest
in further education, (8) competing attractions, as
marriage, a job, entry into the armed forces, and (9) a
set of values which did not include education.
Additionally, the review of the literature
presented a conceptualization of value structure as a
framework for research on the relationships between
values and education. A study of high school students'
values conducted within the framework of traditional
versus emergent values was reported. Emergent values
were found to outweigh the traditional among high school
t
students. It was noted also, that traditional values
supported educational achievement and that students
with high traditional-value scores directed their choice
of occupation towards the top rungs of the occupational
ladder.
A second study was reviewed to illustrate the
relationship between social class membership and the
individual's value system.
CHAPTER III
SOURCE OP DATA AND METHODS
OP PROCEDURE
The present chapter affords an overview of the
design of the study. It describes the research sample
and the method of selection, the procedures followed in
the construction of an interview schedule for collecting
the data, the technical procedures applied to the
synthesis of unstructured responses, and the statistical
procedures applied to the analysis of the organized
data.
The Research Sample
The sample of individuals studied in the present
research was comprised of one hundred male high school
graduates derived from a sampling of all June high school
graduates for a given year, male and female, of a large
city school system.
A large sample was obtained by selecting system
atically from the Iowa Test lists of thirty-four high
schools every seventh name of a graduating high school
37
38
senior. The thirty-four clusters thus obtained by the
systematic sampling method comprised the basic sample
for a large-scale survey of the school district's June
graduates of 1958.
Among the respondents to the city-wide survey,
it was noted that a number of the graduates of above-
average ability had not entered college. To investigate
the factors involved, a sample of fifty subjects was
accumulated from such respondents on the basis of the
following specifications:
1. The subjects were restricted to males.
2. The subjects were known to have (a) an IQ
of 110 or higher or (b) a percentile rank of
75 or above on the Iowa Tests of Educational
Development, a battery of educational
achievement tests for high school seniors.
Fifty additional subjects who were attending college
were selected as a contrasting group on the basis of the
same specifications. For data on age, IQ, and percentile
rank on the Iowa Tests of the two subsamples, see
Appendix A.
The Interview Schedule
The data-gathering instrument was an interview
schedule, partially structured, addressed to men of the
non-college and college groups. The two forms of the
39
interview schedule are shown in Appendices B and C. The
interviews were conducted in the spring of i960 approxi
mately two years after the subjects had graduated from
high school. Each subject was individually interviewed,
usually in his home and by appointment, for approxi
mately one hour and thirty minutes. Subsequently, the
recorded interview was transcribed to the standard form
of the interview schedule for review and analysis.
The schedule was constructed, pre-tested and
revised in accord with the six steps recommended by
Kornhauser and Sheatsley (3^:5^6-552). The implemen
tation of these steps in the present study is described
below.
1. Deciding what information should be sought.--
The central problem of the study was used as the starting
point for the development of questionnaire content.
Specific information to be elicited by the questionnaire
was suggested by the questions subsumed under the
problem and stated in Chapter I.
2. Deciding what type of questionnaire should
be used.— An interview schedule was needed which would
permit the interviewer to explore little-known areas;
therefore, it was decided to construct an interview
guide comprised principally of lead items, that is,
40
open-end questions, followed by fixed primers In the
manner of Super (40:117-128).
This type of approach permits the respondent to
express his own line of thought in reply to the lead;
at the same time, he is preparing himself for the
primers to follow. On the other hand, it is possible
for the interviewer to retain control of the direction
of the interview. He lets the respondent talk; then
he closes in with primers keyed to the lead. The primers
strengthen his hand in confining the respondent to the
issues and provide him with comparable Information from
one interview to the next.
Additional follow-up questions, or probes, not
printed in the guide, were used at the discretion of the
interviewer, who was also the investigator, to clarify
or amplify, the initial response. To this extent, the
interview was "partially structured" (34:549; 263-268).
3. First draft of the questionnaire.— Topics
to cover the major areas of inquiry were arranged in a
sequence designed to establish and maintain rapport.
The sequence of topics and items was carefully considered
as an aid to free and spontaneous response.
Various studies were consulted for assistance
in the preparation of appropriate items (21) (30) (40)
(46) (47) (55) (64) (67) (68). Pertinent questions
41
previously used were revised and adapted to meet the
needs of the present investigation. Additional questions
were devised to supplement these. Special devices were
built Into the interviewing Instrument to enlist the
active interest and cooperation of the respondent. These
included the use of a miniature ladder to measure
Individual aspiration, a set of Job satisfactions on
cards for ranking, a form for listing six important life
events in relation to estimated age at the time of the
event, and a checklist of factors contributing to the
decision to go or not to go, to college.
4. Re-examination and revision of the
questions.— The first draft of the Interview schedule
was submitted to a number of experts for critical
reaction. These persons included three individuals
employed In educational research, a social psychologist
and educational statistician, a specialist In curriculum,
and a specialist In the techniques of interviewing. In
accord with their suggestions, certain items were added
and some reworded.
5. Pre-testing the interview schedule.— The
interview schedule as revised wa3 tried out prior to
the beginning of the full-scale study. Three young men
who were about to complete the second year of college
42
were interviewed in the counseling offices of the college
which they were' attending. The subjects of the pre
testing volunteered for the interview. They were not
informed that it was a tryout.
The volunteers met the criterion of IQ required
of the subjects of the sample, but they were not
graduates of the same city school system and had not
taken the Iowa Tests of Educational Development in their
senior year of high school. However, the characteristics
of age, sex, educational level and scholastic ability
were similar to those of the college men who would be
interviewed in the final study.
In general, the questions a3 written were under
standable and the answers supplied by the respondents
were pertinent. However, the tryout did disclose a
need to improve the techniques of administration so as
to reduce the length of the Interview period. To this
end, additional Instructions to guide the interviewer
were written Into the schedule.
6. Editing the interview schedule and specifying
the procedures for its use.--A final check of the inter
view schedule was made to insure comparability of the
two forms, insofar as this was possible, in relation to
the experiences of college and non-college men. For
example, the parallel wording of identical or contrasting
43
questions was carefully examined.
The final editing considered also the spacing,
arrangement and appearance of the material. Lines were
added to provide ample space for the transcribed
responses. Directions to guide, the interviewer were
revised and extended to make them more explicit.
Coding the Data (34:391-406)
The transcribed responses of both college and
non-college men to the open-end lead questions were
reviewed in each instance prior to a definition of
categories for classifying these unstructured responses.
As a point of departure for the establishment
of categories, similarities and differences which
appeared to be outstanding, were especially noted.
These were used as bases for the identification of
classifications to which the responses might be assigned.
Content to be included in a category was specified by an
explanatory sentence and the meaning illustrated by
several examples taken directly from the responses.
The tables contained in Chapter IV illustrate the appli
cation of this principle.
A primary purpose of the lead question was to
elicit the subject's definition of the question in terms
of the experience known to him, that is, to observe his
selective perception of the situation. For this reason,
44
the entire content of the subject's response to an
open-end lead question was categorized. In other words,
the established categories were not restricted to
selected elements of the response.
The responses were tallied by category and
summarized as tabular material.
Statistical Procedures
Various statistical procedures were used to
compare the responses of the non-college with those
of the college men. The significance of the difference
between alternate categories for a particular response
was checked by means of the chi-square test. In the
case of a difference between two percentages, the
significance of the difference was evaluated by means of
the pooled critical ratio formula with reference to the
Lefever tables of minimum percentage differences
required for statistical significance (65). A "key"
number was used to identify an appropriate table of
minimum differences between percentages significant at
the .05 and .01 levels.
The median and the quartile deviation were used
to assess the distribution of each group, non-college
and college, in ranking a number of work satisfactions;
and Siegel's test of medians was used to compare the
relation of the obtained medians to a combined median
for each work satisfaction (35:111-115).
When appropriate, the critical ratio was
computed for differences between the means of comparable
distributions.
Index of Status Characteristics ratings.— An
Index of Status Characteristics (I.S.C.) was computed
for each individual in accord with the methodology
described by Warner and associates (41:34—44; 121-159).
To obtain thi3 composite index, each of four components
was rated by the investigator on a seven-point scale
devised by Warner, which ranged from a rating of "1",
very high status value, to a rating of "7", very low
status value. The ratings on the separate status
characteristics were combined into a single numerical
index by assigning to each one a prescribed weight and
securing a weighted total of the separate ratings. The
four component status characteristics and their
respective weights were:
Father’s Occupation ............... 4
Source of Father’s Income ........ 3
House Type......................... 3
Dwelling A r e a ..................... 2
An equivalent social class position was obtained
for the Individual index through the use of a conversion
table of social class equivalents for I.S.C. ratings
46
(cf. 41:127).
Subject'a evaluation of work satisfactions.— A
set of work satisfactions prepared on cards was provided
each interviewee with the request to sort and shuffle
the cards until they were arranged in the order of his
preference. The least preferred satisfaction was to be
placed at the bottom of the stack; the most preferred
on top. The subject then numbered the cards of his set,
giving a rank of 1^ to the most preferred satisfaction,
a rank of 2 to the next most preferred satisfaction and
so on to the lowest rank of 19 for the least preferred
satisfaction. Instructions to the interviewer for
ranking the work satisfactions are set forth in the two
forms of the interview schedule (cf. Appendix B or C,
referring to the section titled "Job Satisfaction").
The rankings thus obtained from the non-college
and the college men were treated statistically through
the use of the median, the quartile deviation, ahd
Siegel's test for the significance of the difference
between two medians. The Siegel test of medians
involves the deployment of the two distributions above
and below a combined median and the application of
ehi-square (35:111-115).
Evaluative rating scales.--Whenever the question
47
required the use of an evaluative rating scale, a card
reproducing the question and scale was handed to the
interviewee with the Instruction to reply by number.
This technique, adapted from Centers (47:203-204),
permitted the subject both to hear and see the question
with its several ratings. Thus, there was opportunity
to compare and reflect before replying, and if and when
as an afterthought, a second choice was indicated, it
was possible to correct the first given response.
Questions of this type were used primarily as
jfcrimers in connection with a checklist of factors
relating to the decision to attend or not to attend
college. The checklist, too, was handed to the subject,
but in this instance, because of its length and the fact
that a yes or no response was expected to each item,
the interviewee did not reply by number.
The differences in the responses of the non
college and college men to the rating scalesand checklist
were evaluated for significance by means of the chi-square
test or the pooled critical ratio formula. The latter
technique was applied to differences between percentages
with the assistance of the Lefever tables for the
determination of the real difference between two per
centages (65).
*
Self-anchoring scaling.--Measurement of the
48
subject’s aspiration.and life goals was accomplished
through the use of a miniature ladder which was pre
sented to the subject after he had defined the two
self-anchoring-points for the scale, namely, his concept
of the "best possible life” for the uppermost rung and
the "worst possible life" for the lowest rung on the
ladder.
In the words of the originators of the device:
A self-anchoring scale is simply one in which
each respondent is asked to describe, in terms
of his own perceptions, goals and values, the
top and bottom, or anchoring points, of the
dimension on which scale measurement is
desired, and then to employ this self-defined
continuum as a measuring device (46:158).
Cantril and Kilpatrick extend their definition
of this scaling technique by referring to it as "an
attempt to apply the first-person approach to the
measurement of psychological variables." In Its appli
cation, self-anchoring scaling Is a combination of
open-ended probing, Interviewing, content analysis, and
non-verbal scaling.
The Interviewer’s approach to the use of the
miniature ladder is presented in the two forms of the
Interview schedule (cf. Appendix B or C, referring to
the section titled "Plans"). Statistical consideration
of the content responses, which were categorized,
involved an evaluation of the percentage differences
between the non-college and the college groups.
Projected attainment was estimated by the subject who
placed himself on a numbered rung of the ladder with
respect to a time Interval of five, and again, fifteen
years ahead. The mean placement of both groups, non
college and college, was calculated for each of the two
spans of extended time; and the significance of the
difference between the means obtained in each instance
was checked against the critical ratio.
Summary of the Chapter
Chapter III has considered the source of the
data and methods of procedure. One hundred male high
school graduates who qualified for college work in terms
of specified criteria were subjects for the study. The
sample was accumulated as two subsamples of non-college
and college men from a larger sampling of June high
school graduates, male and female, of a large city
school district.
Subjects were interviewed approximately two
years after they had graduated from high school. The
interviews were tape-recorded.
The process of constructing an adequate inter
view schedule was described. Mainly, questions were
devised for the interview guide which, it was believed,
would elicit information suggestive of answers to the
questions growing out of the problem at issue.
A number of measuring devices were built into
the schedule. These included among others, a miniature
ladder for the appraisal of aspiration, a set of work
satisfactions on cards, and a checklist of factors
relating to college or to non-college decision.
The data obtained in the recorded interview
were later transcribed to the schedule form, tabulated,
coded and analyzed. Statistical procedures used in the
analysis of the data included the chi-square test, the
pooled critical ratio formula applied to percentage
differences, and the computation of an index of status
characteristics for each subject.
The quartile deviation was used to assess com
paratively the dispersal of two sets of ranks about
their medians; and the two medians compared for inde
pendence by means of the chi-square formula according
to Siegel (35:111-115).
CHAPTER IV
* LIFE GOALS AND VALUES
In Chapter I, this research was referred to as
an exploratory study directed primarily toward the
development of relevant hypotheses. The investigation
was designed to focus attention on a sampling of able
high school graduates who had elected not to go to
college; and the problem as formulated was concerned
with the factors affecting this decision. A number of
subproblems in the form of questions were posed as a
framework for operational procedures (see page 3).
Chapters IV, V, and VI present the findings in
answer to these previously stated questions; and cite,
additionally, findings which go beyond the scope of the
present study but which suggest hypotheses that may
serve as leads for further, more definitive investi
gation. Chapter TV discusses more particularly the
responses to those questions aimed at the long-term,
life goals and values of the subject.
During the course of the interview, an attempt
51
52
was made to identify the subject's life aspirations and
such goal-related variables as striving, self-evaluation
and future expectancy. The approach to these areas was
made through an assessment of the father's occupation
and his occupational values; the son's educational plans
and objectives; and a self-estimate of projected
attainment and expected career.
The findings presented in Chapter IV focus
attention, therefore, on these patterned relationships
and culminate with an interpretation of the responses
of subjects to two corresponding checklists of factors,
keyed respectively to college and non-college decision.
Father's Occupation and Occupational
Values
Information on post-high school employment led
to a discussion of the father's occupation and work
values as perceived by the son.
Classification of fathers by occupation.--Table
1 presents the distribution of fathers' occupations for
the non-college and the college men according to the
occupational groupings of the Dictionary of Occupational
Titles (ll). The occupations of the fathers of non
college men ranged through all of the occupational
groupings with the largest number employed as skilled
53
TABLET 1
OCCUPATION OP FATHERS OP NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE
MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Occupational
Classification
Fathers of
Non-college Men
Fathers
of College Men
(1)
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
w
Per-
cent-
T )
Professional 4 8 10 20
Semi-professional 2 4 * 4 8
Officials and owners,
large businesses • • • • 2 4
Owners and managers,
small, businesses 6 12
7
14
Salesmen
5
10
9
18
Clerical
3
6
3
6
Skilled9 , 20 4o 12 24
Semi-skilled
7
i4
3
6
Unskilled 2 • • • •
Unknown 1 2 • « • •
a
Percentage difference is significant at the .01 level of
confidence.
54
or semi-skilled workers. These two groups combined
included 54 percent of the fathers of non-college men.
The managerial, sales, and clerical groupings accounted
for 28 percent of these fathers; and the professional
and semi-professional categories for 12 percent. Two
fathers of non-college men were unskilled workers and
the occupation of one father was unknown.
With respect to the occupations of the fathers
of college men (columns 4 and 5), the skilled and
semi-skilled groupings included 30 percent of these
fathers as against 54 percent for the non-college group.
On the other hand, the owner, managerial, sales, and
clerical categories in combination accounted for 42
percent of the college fathers; and the professional
and semi-professional for 28 percent. There were no
unskilled workers, among the fathers of the college men.
The percentage difference in placement of
fathers at the skilled category distinguished between
the two groups at the .01 level of confidence. The
differences for the remaining categories were not signif
icant. As a point of special interest, it should be
noted that the majority of college men did not come
from a professional background.
Father^ attitude toward his occupation.— Sixty-
eight percent of the non-college men and 72 percent of
55
the college men described their fathers as being happily
satisfied or at least reasonably satisfied with their
occupation. Nine fathers in both groups had expressed
dissatisfaction with their work. Of these, two fathers
of college men and the father of a non-college man had
advised their sons to get into something better. These
data are shown in Table 2.
Fathers reasonably or somewhat satisfied with
their work expressed this satisfaction with reference
to some extrinsic aspect of the work. They accepted
the job because of the hours; or the pay was adequate
to support a family; there was opportunity to meet and
work with celebrities; the job offered security, and
so on.
Among the seven non-college men who did not
know the father's opinion of his Job, were four young
men who had never known or scarcely known their father.
Actually, there were eight such men in the non-college
group, but four of the eight had lived with a step
father from five to fourteen years and the stepfather's
opinion was reported in lieu of real father's. Lack of
contact with father was not a factor for the college
men who replied "don't know."
The difference between the percentages of the
non-college and college fathers who were "very satisfied"
56
TABLE 2
THE ATTITUDE OF FATHERS TOWARD THEIR OCCUPATION AS PERCEIVED BY
NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Attitude of Fathers Non-college Men College Men
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
W
Per
cent
age
(5)
Very satisfied8 . 11 22 26 52
He's happy with it. He
loves it. He likes the
work and he's good at it.
It makes a nice living
for him and he thinks a
lot of it.
-
Q
Somewhat satisfied
23
H6 10 20
He likes it. He’s more
or less satisfied. It's
all right.
Not at all satisfied
9
18
. 9
18
He doesn't like it. It's
a living but that's all.
He'd rather be in some
thing else.
Don't know
7
14 5
10
He doesn't say. He has
never discussed it, never
voiced an opinion. I
really don't know.
Percentage difference is significant at the .01 level of
confidence.
57
or "somewhat satisfied" with their occupations was in
each instance a significant difference. More fathers
of college than of non-college men were very satisfied
with their occupation. Contrariwise, more fathers of
non-college than college men were merely tolerant or
somewhat satisfied with their occupation. These differ
ences between the two parental groups were significant
at the .01 level of confidence.
Fatherfs opinion of a "good" job.— A description
of the "good" job as perceived by the father was
obtained from forty non-college men and forty college
men. In both groups, ten interviewees were totally
unfamiliar with the father’s opinion of a good job and
were unable to reply to the question. Table 3
summarizes the responses of the remaining interviewees.
The number of mentions for each characteristic is
identical with the number of non-college or college
respondents reporting the characteristics.
Speaking for their fathers7 the non-college men
emphasized job security. Forty percent of the non
college interviewees as compared with 16 percent of the
college men identified security as an important com
ponent of the good job. The percentage difference
between the two groups was found to be significant at
the .01 level of confidence.
58
TABLE 3
CHARACTERISTICS OF A "GOOD" JOB AS REPORTED FOR FATHERS BY
NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Non-college Men College Men
Designated
Characteristics
Per Per
Num cent Num cent
ber age ber age
(1)
(2) (3)
(*>
(5)
Security 20 IfOa 8 26
It pays enough to live
comfortably and it's
steady, always there.
A profession or top job in
management 7 1^ - 13 26
A white-collar job, more
mental than physical, using
your head more than your
hands. In management-
office work where you're one
of the top officials.
Contacts with people 5 10 . . . .
Type of people you work with
and their outlook on life;
dealing with people.
Money ! * ■ 8 13 26
Money first of all. The
job makes lots of money.
Interest in the work k 8 11 22
Something you like doing,
a creative outlet.
You're using your
initiative.
59
TABLE 3— Continued
Designated
Non-college Men College Men
Characteristics
(1)
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
<*)
Per
cent
age
(5)
Independence on the job
3
6
5
10
Your own boss, running
your own show. -
Opportunities for advance
ment
3
6 1 2
The job has a future; you
can work yourself up to
the top.
A respected position • • • • h 8
Socially acceptable.
You're.needed.
Other k 8 2 k
A chance to travel. You
like the management.
Your talents are
appreciated.
Don't know 10 20 10 20
Eave no idea. Hard to
say.
Percentage difference is significant at the .01 level of
confidence.
60
On the other hand, the fathers of college men
gave priority to money and the professions. Thirteen
college men, 26 percent, said their fathers defined the
good job as a profession; and as many reported money to
be a prime consideration. Not infrequently, higher pay
was associated with the professions. These jobs were
believed to be easier and to pay better. Although these
two characteristics were, reportedly, of concern to the
fathers of the college men, more so percentagewise than
to the fathers of the non-college men, the difference
between the two parental groups was not great enough to
distinguish them significantly.
Pour college men mentioned, also, the desira
bility of a "respected" position, Insofar as their
fathers were concerned. This aspect of a good job was
not mentioned by any one of the non-college men.
Father's opinion of son'3 job choice.— As shown
in Table 4, 66 percent of the fathers of non-college
men and 7^ percent of the fathers of college men
approved and encouraged the son's choice of job or were
at least neutral toward it, neither approving or dis
approving. In this respect, they were much alike and
the difference was not significant. Only two non-college
fathers and three college fathers had expressed dis
approval .
6l
TABLE U
FATHER'S OPINION OF SON'S JOB CHOICE AS PERCEIVED BY NON-COLLEGE
AND COLLEGE MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Father's Opinion
Non-college Men College Men
(1)
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
(k)
Per
cent
age
(5)
Approves
25
50
30 60
He likes my choice. He's
all for it, hacking me all
the way. He likes to see
me follow in his footsteps.
'
Neutral 8 16
7
Ik
If it's what I want to do,
it's what he would like.
He figures it's up to me.
No particular objection.
Disapproves 2 k
3
6
He says steady pay is
better. He's always
wanted a white-collar job
for me. He'd rather see
me go into something else.
Don't know
7
Ik 6 12
No job choice 8 15 k 8
62
Almost the same number of non-college and college
men were unable to report their father’s opinion of the
son's Job choice. Of the non-college men, five had not
known a father due to death or divorce during infancy
or in early childhood. Two fathers of college men had
died before the son’s choice was made and four fathers
of college men had not been informed of the son’s Job
choice. In the last-named instance, the reply to the
interviewer was commonly, "I haven’t really discussed
that with him,” or, "he hasn’t heard of it yet."
Eight non-college and four college men were still
uncertain of their life work although they were now two
years removed from high school graduation.
Educational Plans and Objectives
A question on post-high school education ini
tiated a discussion of the subject's post-high school
plans and educational objectives, information was
obtained also about the schooling of father and mother.
Plans at time of graduation.— At the time of
graduation from high school, twenty-four of the non
college men had no plan at all or some plan other than
employment in view (Table 5). For these twenty-four,
the intended plan is disclosed in Table 6. At the time
of graduation, ten of the twenty-four were planning to
63
TABLE 5
RESPONSES OP NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE MEN OP SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
CONCERNING PLANS AT TIME OP GRADUATION PROM HIGH SCHOOL
Question
(1)
Yes No
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
<*>
Per
cent
age
(5)
Noncollege
At time of graduation
from high school, were
you planning then to go
to work? 26 52 2l* U8a
College
At time of graduation
from high school, were
you planning then to go
to college?
1*9
58* 1 2
St
Percentage difference between the "no" respondents in the
non-college group and the "yes" respondents in the college group is
significant beyond the .01 level of confidence.
64
TABLE 6
PLANS OP 24 NON-COLLEGE MEN OP SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL WHO WERE NOT
PLANNING TO GO TO WORK AT TIME OF GRADUATION PROM HIGH SCHOOL
Plans
Non-college Men
(1)
Number
(2)
Percentage
(3)
College 10 20
Armed services
5
10
Post - graduate work in high school 1 2
Travel abroad 1 2
Undecided; no plans
7
Ik
go to college but found it desirable or necessary to
change their plans between the time of graduation in
June and college enrollment in the fall. Seven of the
twenty-four, 14 percent of the over-all group of non
college men, were completely undecided as to their future
course of action. On the other hand, slightly more than
half of the non-college group were planning to enter
employment upon graduation from high school.
The college men appeared to be more certain of
their future plans. All but one were planning at the
time of high school graduation to go to college. The
one young man who was undecided explained that he made
up his mind at the last moment. Friends and father
contributed to his decision.
Educational objectives.— Sixty-eight percent of
the non-college men were engaged in, or aspired to, some
*
form of post-high school education. Theirs, and the
educational objectives of the college men are shown in
Table 7. With few exceptions, the differences in
objectives were highly significant and real differences.
Seventeen young men in the non-college group,
34 percent, said they were aiming for a bachelor's
degree or higher. Five of these individuals were not
yet enrolled in college but were planning to enroll in
the fall of i960. The majority of the non-college men
66
TABLE T
EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES OP NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE
MEN OP SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Educational
Non-college Men College Men
Objective
(1)
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
(*0
Per
cent
age
(5)
Doctorfsa 1 2 18
36
Master's
3
6 6 12
Bachelor1s°
13
26
23
k6
Courses in junior college
or adult school8 . Ik 28 • • • •
Private instruction (art,
dancing, acting, music) 2 k • • • •
Correspondence courses 1 2 • • • •
None; I don't need any
more 6 12 • • • •
Don't know*5 10 20
3
6
Percentage difference is significant beyond the ,01 level
of confidence.
b
Significant at or beyond the .05 level of confidence.
67
who were enrolled at the time of the interview were
attending college on a full-time basis.
Six of the non-college men declared there was
no need for additional education Insofar as they were
personally concerned; and ten could not say what kind
of education they wanted. In the latter instance, the
responses were characterized by uncertainty and inde
cision. For example.
*
"I would have liked a college education but
didn’t grasp the opportunity. I took the
tests and passed those but didn't enroll.
I still hope to go back. Actually, I don't
know what course I'd enroll in. I'd have to
talk to counselors."
"I'm not really certain as to the extent."
"I can't decide what I'd like to take. I'm
interested in lots of things but can't decide
what I'm Interested in more than the rest."
"I'm uncertain. As soon as I decide what I
want to do, then I'll be able to go to school
and that'11 break the barrier a little bit.
I still haven't decided what I want to do."
"At this particular point I'm rather unde
cided. "
"I don't have any major plans. I don't even
know what I want to do In life."
Almost half of the college men, 48 percent,
were aiming f*or a master's or doctor's degree with the
doctoral aspirants In a 3 to 1 ratio. Almost as many,
46 percent, were aiming for a bachelor'3 degree. Three
college men were dropouts. One of the three had
68
transferred his affections from college to a Job. The
two remaining dropouts in the "don't know" category
were uncertain, regarding their future plans and
questioned the advisability of returning to college so
long as they did not have a vocational goal. One of
them had a wife and child to support and a second child
was expected.
Education of parents.— Tables 8 and 9 present
data on years of schooling completed by the fathers
and mothers, respectively, of the non-college and college
men.
The range in years of schooling completed by the
fathers varied for the two groups by two years, three
through eighteen years for fathers of non-college men
as compared with three through twenty for fathers of the
college men. A gap of one year in average number of
years of completed schooling favored the fathers of the
college men. However, in terms of the critical ratio,
the obtained difference in means was not large enough
to be significant.
As shown in Table 9> years of completed
schooling ranged from seven through sixteen years for
mothers of the non-college men as compared with eight
through seventeen years for mothers of the college men,
the variation again in favor of the parent of the
69
TABLE 8
YEARS OP SCHOOLING COMPLETED BY FATHERS OF NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE
MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Years of Schooling
Range M SD o'M °bltf CR
(1) (2) (3) (h) (5) (6)
Fathers of:
Non-college men 3-18 10. T 3.01
•^3
College men 3-20 j
H.7
3.28
•Vf
,6k 1.56
70
TABLE 9
YEARS OF SCHOOLING COMPLETED BY MOTHERS OF NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE
MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Years of Schooling
Range M SD «£>iff CR
(1) (2) (3)
(*) (5)
(6)
Mothers of:
Non-college men 7-16 11.2 1.87
.26
•
College men 8-17
12.9 1.88
.27
.37 h.6&
a
Significant beyond the .01 level of confidence.
71
college men. The difference in mean years of schooling
completed by mothers of the two groups was found to be
highly significant beyond the .01 level of confidence.
Or, stated another way, the chances are fewer than 1 in
100 that distributions drawn at random from the same
population would exhibit equal or greater divergence.
The distribution of fathers and mothers of both
groups by highest completed level is shown in Table 10.
A significantly larger number of fathers and mothers of
the non-college men terminated their education at the
Junior high school level. At the college level, the
percentage difference between the fathers of the non
college and college men was significant at the .01
level, the fathers of the college men having completed
this educational level in greater frequency than the
fathers of the non-college men. The same distinction
may be noted as between the mothers of the two groups,
this difference significant at the .05 level of confi
dence.
Reasons for seeking additional education.— Both
non-college and college men said they were seeking
additional education because of its importance to their
work or expected occupation, but the college men gave
this reason with greater frequency (Table 11). Forty-
three college men were seeking additional education in
72
TABLE 10
EDUCATION OP FATHERS AND MOTHERS OF NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE MEN OF
SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL BY HIGHEST COMPLETED LEVEL
Fathers Mothers
Highest
Level
Completed
< X>
Non-collage College Non-college College
Num-
Per-
■ cent-
■Ts)
Num
ber
(k)
Per
cent-
T)
Num
ber
(6)
Per
cent-
Tt)
Num
ber
(8)
Per-
cent-
f5>
Lower primary
(Grades 1-3) 2 k 1 2
Upper primary
(Grades h-6) 1 2
Junior high
school
(Grades 7-9)
13
26
5
10 10 20
3
6
Senior high
school
(Grades 10-12) 2k kQ 22 kk
31
62
27
5k
Junior college
(Grades 13-l5) k 8 8 16
7
lk 11 22
College1 3
(Grades 15-16) 1 2 8 16 1 2 6 12
Post-graduate 2 k 6 12 • • • •
3
6
Unknown
3
6 • • • • 1 2 • • • •
Percentage difference for both fathers and mothers is
significant at the .05 level of confidence.
For fathers only, percentage difference is significant at
the .01 level of confidence. For mothers only, percentage
difference is significant at the .05 level of confidence.
*
73
TABLE 11
REASONS FOR SEEKING ADDITIONAL EDUCATION AS CITED BY NON-COLLEGE AND
COLLEGE MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Reason
Non-college Men College Men
(1)
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
00
Per
cent
age
(5)
It relates to my work; to
prepare for a career8 .
29
58
^3
86
I want a well-rounded,
broad, liberal education
to help me live my life
better 6 12 1^ 28
With a college education,
I've more opportunity and
choice; a college educa
tion is going to helpa • • • •
9
18
Just a pure interest and a
chance to use my ideas'3 • • « • 6 12
I don't really know
(college dropouts) • • • • 2 k
I have to know where I'm
at, to see if I can do it 1 2 • • • •
a
Percentage difference is significant at the .01 level of
confidence.
b
Significant at the .05 level of confidence.
74
preparation for a career (86 percent); while twenty-nine
non-college men gave this reason (58 percent). The
difference was statistically significant at the .01
level of confidence.
College men gave other reasons for pursuing a
higher education. For some (N = 14), it meant a broader
view of life, an intellectual and cultural background.
For others (N = 9)* it was a means to advancement or
preparation for a wider range of career alternatives.
Some few (N = 6) regarded it as an opportunity to
explore and cultivate an outstanding and fascinating
interest preference. The last two reasons were statis
tically significant.
It should be noted that one non-college man had
returned to school, on a part-time basis, enrolled for
a course in college chemistry .to find out if he were
capable of college work.
Overall, the college men were more expressive
regarding their reasons for seeking additional education.
There were seventy-four mentions from this group as
compared to thirty-six mentions from the non-college
group. However, it should be remembered that no more
than thirty-four of the non-college men were taking, or
aspired to, some kind of education beyond the high
school level (see Table 7).
The Best Possible Life and
Projected Attainment*
Non-college and college men were asked to
describe the best and worst possible life as they would
imagine it to be; and subsequently, within this frame
of reference,to make a projection of personal attainment
for five, then fifteen years ahead. The nine rungs of
a miniature ladder suggested position in life with the
uppermost rung representing the best possible life, as
defined, and the lowest rung indicative of the worst
possible life. The subjects then gave consideration to
their life work and the expected occupation ten or
twenty years hence.
Characteristics of the best possible life.--In
their description of the best possible life, both
groups gave priority to "financial security" with a
"family" next in order of importance. The components
of the good life as viewed by non-college and college
men are listed in Table 12. Rank placement (columns 4
and 7) is by number of mentions within each subsample.
College men exceeded non-college men signifi
cantly in their mention, and presumably desire, of the
following characteristics: "recognition and social
position" (19 to 6), "making a social contribution"
(18 to 2), and "peace and happiness" (21 to 9). For the
76
TABLE 12
CHARACTERISTICS OP TEE BEST POSSIBLE LIFE AS DESCRIBED BY NON-COLLEGE
AND COLLEGE MEN OP SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Mentions
Non-college College
Characteristics
Per- Per-
Num- cent- Num- cent-
ber age Rank ber age Rank
(1) (2) (3) (k) (5) (6) (7)
Financial security
3k
68 1 3k 68 1
A family
29 58 2 28 56 2
Time for my interests
19 38
3 19 38 5.5
Work in my chosen field 18
36 k 20 1 * 0 1 *
A nice home
17 3k 5
IS 32 8
A good education 10 20 6 12 21*
9
Peace, happiness, harmony8 .
9
18
7
21 1 * 2
3
Friends
7
1 * 4 - 8
Recognition and social
position1 3 6 12
9 19
38 5.5
A place in the country; or
life in a small town; abroad 1 * 8
11.5 k 8
11.5
My own business k 8
11.5
Ties with a church k 8
11.5
Travel k 8
11.5
8 16 10
Doing things creative
3
6 Ik 1 2
13
Making a social contribution1 3 2 1 *
15
18 36 7
77
TABLE 12— Continued
Mentions
Characteristics
Non-college College
(1)
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Hank
00
Num
ber
(5)
Per
cent
age
(6)
Rank
(7)
Understanding life and
people k 8
11.5
Other 11 22 • • 8 16 • •
Percentage difference is significant at the .05 level of
confidence.
h
Significant at the .01 level of confidence.
78
first two of these three designated characteristics,
the percentage difference was significant at the .01
level of confidence; for peace and happiness, at the
.05 level. Non-college men named several components
which were not named by the college men. However,
because so few of the non-college men included these
characteristics in their description of the best
possible life, it is not possible to interpret them as
being of consequence to the group.
Characteristics of the worst possible life.— The
two groups were agreed, also, concerning the principal
components of the worst possible life which they
declared as "work I didn't like" and "no security"
(Table 13). Life's catastrophes appeared to be of some
concern to the non-college men. This component ranked
fourth in the non-college listing. With the college
men, the same characteristic by number of mentions
ranked midway between 8 and 9; furthermore, this
ranking was shared with three other dissimilar character
istics, two of them ignored by the non-college men,
namely, "loss of public or self-respect" and "little or
no time to enjoy life."
Overall, however, there were no significant
differences between the two groups in their descriptions
of the worst possible life, although there was a slight
79
TABLE 13
CHARACTERISTICS OP THE WORST POSSIBLE LEPE AS DESCRIBED BY NON
COLLEGE AND COLLEGE MEN OP SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Character1stlcs
(1)
Mentions
Non-college College
Per-
Num- oent-
ber age Rank
(2) (3) (k)
Per-
Num- cent-
ber age Rank
(5) (6) (7)
Work I didn't like; a non-
skllled labor Job that
would get you nowhere 27
No security in any phase of
life; not knowing what the
future' s going to bring 17
Without, a family, wife,
children; no friends;
not accepted U
A catastrophe such as loss
of health, possessions; war 9
To have to quit school, to
flunk out of school, no
time to became more
educated b
An unhappy home life, con
stant quarreling b
Subject to desires of people
who disagreed with my
philosophy of life 3
Nothing but failure 2
Not having any goals; not
striving for anything in
particular 2
5^ 1
3^ 2
22 3
18 k
20 kO 1
16 32 2
10 5.5
8 8.5
8 5-5 7 1^ 3.5
8 5.5 7 lb 3.5
6 7.5 4 8 8.5
b 9.5 3 6 11
b 9.5 5 10 5.5
80
TABLE 13— Continued
Mentions
Non-college College
Characteristics_________ _________________________________
Per- Per-
Num- cent- Num- cent-
ber age Rank ber age Rank
(1) (2) (3) W (5) (6) (7)
Can’t picture worst possible
life 3 6 7.5 1 2 13
Life of ignorance 1 2 11.0 2 k 12
Loss of public or self-
respect ^ 8 8.5
Little or no time to
enjoy life . . . . . . 4 8 8.5
Other 8 l£ . . 10 20 . .
81
tendency for the non-college men to be more concerned
than the college men about the prospect of work at the
unskilled level, menial and underpaid. Generally
speaking, the non-college and college men were in
agreement as to what constitutes the best or the worst
possible life. They seemed to look at life in much the
same way. But, the variety of reported characteristics
was suggestive of a wide range of Individual values and
life expectations.
Interestingly, three non-college men and one
college man found it Impossible to picture the worst
possible life because they had experienced only the
best.
A measure of projected attainment.— With
reference to the best and worst possible life, subjects
were shown a miniature ladder "with steps leading to
the top." The interviewer continued, "Up here is the
'best possible life'; down here is the 'worst possible
life'", pointing to the highest and lowest rungs of
a nine-rung ladder. The subject was then asked: "Where
do you expect to be five years from now on the ladder?
Please point to the appropriate rung."
Following the answer to this question, the
subject was asked: "Ten years after that, where do you
think you'll be?"
82
The projected attainment for both groups, non
college and college, is shown in Table 14. If the
experiment were to be repeated, two out of three time3
the mean would vary no more than .24 or .23 with
respect to five years ahead, or .20 or .24 with respect
to fifteen years ahead, as shown by the standard error
of the mean.
Although in terms of the five-year prospect, the
mean for the college men is slightly greater than the
mean for the non-college men, the reverse is true with
respect to the fifteen-year prospect. However, the
difference in means in each instance was not significant
as determined by the critical ratio.
Distribution on the ladder.— Table 15 shows the
distribution of non-college and college men by rungs on
the ladder for five and fifteen years ahead. With
respect to five years ahead, placement varied widely,
ranging from a low on the second rung to a high on the
ninth rung for the non-college men; and from the third
to the ninth for the college men.
Looking fifteen years ahead, or ten years
beyond the initial five-year placement, the non-college
men moved up from the second to the fourth as the
lowest rung on the ladder with thirty non-college men
declaring they would be at or near the top, on Hung 9
83
TABLE 14
PLACEMENT ON A NINE-RUNG LADDER: PROJECTION OP ATTAINMENT FIVE
AND FIFTEEN YEARS AHEAD BY NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE
MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Rungs on the Ladder
5 Years 15 Years
Ahead Ahead
(1) ( 2)
Range
Non-college 2-9 4-9
College 3-9 5-9
Mean
Non-college 5*6 7*8
College 6.2 8.0
Standard deviation
Non-college 1.7 1.4
College 1.6 1.7
Standard error of the mean
Non-college .24 .20
College .23 .24
Standard error of the difference .32 .30
Critical ratio 1.9 .63
TABLE 15
PLACEMENT ON A NINE-RUNG LADDER: NUMBER OP SUBJECTS SELECTING
EACH HUNG FOR FIVE AND FIFTEEN YEARS AHEAD
Rung: 1 2
3
k
5
6
7
8
9
Not
Sure
Maybe
Nowhere
Five years ahead
Non-college . . 2 k
7
8
15
6 k
3
1 • •
College • « • •
3
2 12 10 11
5 . 5
2 • •
Fifteen years ahead
Non-college 2 k
3
10
13 17
• • 1
College 1 k 8 ik
23
• ♦ • •
85
or 8. No college man located himself below Rung 5 in
terms of the fifteen-year prospect, and thirty-six
college men declared they would be at or near the top
by that time.
Subjects accepted the ladder as a measuring
device of aspiration and projected attainment but
ascribed to the concept varying interpretations. For
some, the best possible life was a receding goal with
the ladder comprised of an infinite number of steps.
Several individuals declared they were right now at the
top of the ladder in that they were doing what was
important to them. One person stated that it was not
possible to forecast his position on the ladder without
knowing what was on the top:
I wish I knew. Then I could go after it. Of
course, money and success are an object but
I'm not sure that is a part of the good life.
You have to know first of all what is on the
top and if I find that out,then I can start
up.
The data presented in Tables 14 and 15 offer an
approximation of motivation for the non-college and
college groups. Because of the Individual variations in
meaning ascribed to the ladder and its purpose, the
results by groups should be interpreted with appropriate
caution.
Career Expectation, Consultation
and Advice
Expected careers toy occupational groupings.— More
than half of the non-college group, 56 percent, planned
to enter the professional, semi-professional, or mana
gerial ranks of workers. By contrast, almost all of the
college men expected to pursue a lifetime career in one
of these groupings. With respect to professional
aspiration, the difference between the two groups was
significant at the .01 level. Table 16 reports expected
careers by occupational groupings.
Some of the non-college men (N = 8) reported
a skilled occupation as the expected occupation but none
of the college men expected to be employed as skilled
workers ten or twenty years ahead. Again, the differ
ence was significant at the .01 level. The one semi
skilled worker noted in the college listing was a college
droupout who indicated that he expected to remain in his
current job and would take his chances on whatever lay
ahead.
The non-college man who expected to be an
unskilled laborer was definite about his expected
career. He said:
I tell you, reason I like packing is you travel
around a lot. You got a lot of free time.
Whereas if you work in city, you have regular
87
TABLE 16
CAREER EXPECTATION OF NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE
MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Occupation
Classification
(1)
Non-college Man College Men
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
(*0
Per
cent
age
(5)
a
Professional 20 bo
39
78
Semi-professional
3
6 2 b
Managerial or proprietors
5
10
7
lb
Clerical-sales k 8 1 2
Skilled1 3 8 16 • • • •
Semi-skilled 1 2 1 2
Unskilled 1 2 • • • •
Don't know 8 16 • • • •
a
Percentage difference is significant at the .01 level of
confidence.
b
Significant at the .05 level of confidence.
88
hours, regular pay. Can't hit big. Like pack
ing, you can make big money, then loaf it off
for week or so. Regular work in the city, have
maybe a two-week vacation but regular time.
It's a grind. That's the reason I like fruit
packing. I have no ambitions— not right now
anyway.
It should be noted that eight of the non-college
men reported no career expectation. This characteristic
distinguished significantly the non-college from the
college men, the degree of confidence at the .01 level.
Career expectation compared with father's
occupation.— The career expectation of both non-college
and college men exceeded substantially the occupational
level of their fathers (Table 17). Upward aspiration
was most evident in the professional and skilled cate
gories, the percentage difference between fathers and
sons significant at the .01 level of confidence. Sons
increased significantly in the professional category;
declined significantly in the skilled category.
Again, fathers and sons of the college group
were differentiated at the .01 level of confidence by
the sons' disinclination to enter the clerical and sales
occupations. For the non-college men, a drop in the
semi-skilled occupations was found to be significant at
the .05 level.
The managerial group held its own, as between
fathers and sons/ for both the non-college and the
TABLE IT
CAREER EXPECTATION OP NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE MEN OP SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
COMPARED WITH OCCUPATIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF FATHERS
Occupational
Clas sification
(1)
Non-college Men
Fathers of
Non-college Men College Men
Fathers of
College Men
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
(*>
Per
cent
age
(5)
Num
ber
(6)
Per
cent
age
(7)
Num
ber
(8)
Per
cent
age
(9)
a
Professional 20 1*0 k 8
39
78 10 20
Semi-professional
3
6 2 k 2 1 * k 8
Managerial or proprietors
5
10 6 12
7
ll*
9
I0
b
Clerical-sales k 8 8 16 1 2 12 2l*
Skilled5 8 16 20 1*0 • • • • 12 2l*
Semi-skilled0 1 2
T
lk 1 2
3
6
Unskilled 1 2 2 k • • • . • • • • •
TABLE 17— Continued
Fathers of Fathers of
Non-college Men Non-college Men College Men College Men
Occupational
Classification
Per Per Per Per
Num cent Num cent Num cent Num cent
ber age ber age ber age ber age
(1)
(2) (3)
w
(5) (6) (T) (8) (9)
Don't know 8 16 1 2 • « • * • • • •
Sor both groups, non-college and college, percentage difference between fathers and sons is
significant at the .01 level of confidence.
Significant at the .01 level for college men and fathers.
Significant at the .05 level for non-college men and fathers.
vo
o
91
college men.
Characteristics of the best possible life by
expected occupational groupings.— A discussion of
expected occupation and the occupational groupings
raises a number of questions relating to the subjects'
descriptions of the best possible life. For example,
do the occupational groupings of non-college and college
men differ in their expectations of the best possible
life? What do non-college and college men aiming for a
professional or semi-professional career want out of
life? Do the managerial-business aspirants of the two
groups hold similar or dissimilar values? And, what
differences are there, if any, between the occupational
groupings themselves as to what constitutes the best
possible life?
The data in Table 18 suggest some answers to
these questions. The professional and semi-professional
aspirants, non-college and college, were distinguished
at the .01 level of confidence in respect to "peace and
happiness" and "recognition and social position"; and
at the .05 level by the desire for "making a social
contribution." In each instance, the named character
istic was favored significantly by the men of the
college subsample.
"Travel" was a distinctive response from the
TABLE 18
THE BEST POSSIBLE LIFE BY EXPECTED OCCUPATIONA]
Professional
and
Semi-profe s s ional
Managerial
and
Business
Characteristics
Non
college
N = 23
College
N = 42
Non-
College
N = 9
College
N = 7
Noi
col!
N »
(1)
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
(4)
Per
cent
age
(5)
Num
ber
(6)
Per
cent
age
(7)
Num
ber
(8)
Per
cent
age
(9)
Num
ber
(10)
Financial, security 12 52
27
64 6
67
6 86 8
A family
13 57 23 55 7
78 4
57
4
Time for interests
9 39
16 33 3 33 3 43 3
Work in chosen field 8
35
18
43
4 44 1 14
3
A nice home 6 26 11 26
5 55
4
57
2
A good education
7 30 11 26 • * + * l 14 1
Peace and happiness
3 I3a
20 48
3 33
1 14 2
Friends 2
9
• • • • 2 22 • • • • 2
Recognition and
Social position 2
9a 17
4l 2 22 2
29
• •
Place in the country,
life in small town 2
9
6
13
1 11 1 14 1
Own business 2
9
2
Ties with church 2
9
• • • • 2 22 • • • • • •
Travel 2
9 3 7
1 lla
5 71
• •
Doing things creative
3 13
1 2
-
• •
TABLE 18
POSSIBLE LIFE BY EXPECTED OCCUPATIONAL GROUPINGS
1
aal
Managerial
and
Business
Skilled
and
Semi-skilled0
No
Expected
Occupation
lege
= k2
Non
college
N a 9
College
N = 7
Non
college
N * = 9
College
N = 0
Non
college
N « 8
College
N = 1
Per
cent
age
(5)
Num
ber
(6)
Per
cent
age
(7)
Num
ber
(8)
Per
cent
age
(9)
Num
ber
(10)
Per
cent
age
(11)
Per-
Num- cent-
ber age
(12) (13)
Num
ber
(1*0
Per
cent
age
(15)
Num
ber
(16)
Per
cent
age
(17)
6k 6
67
6 86 8
89s
• • • • 8 100 1 100
55 7
78 1 +
57
1 + 1 + 1 + * • • • «
5 63b
1 100
38 . 3 33 3 ^3 3 33b
• • • • 1 + 50b ♦ • • •
^3
1 + 1 + 1 + 1 Ik
3 33b
• » • •
3
38a • • * •
26
5 55
1 +
57
2 22 • • • • 1 + 50b * • • •
26 • • • • 1 Ik 1 11 • • • • 2
25
• • • •
kQ
3 33
1 li+ 2 22 1
13
• • « •
• « 2 22 ♦ • • • 2 22 • • • * 1
13
• • • •
l+l 2 22 2
29
2
25
• • • •
13
1 11 1 Ik 1
2
11
22
• • 2 22
7
1 na
5 71
1
13
e • • •
2
-
TABLE 16— Continued
Professional
and
Semi-professional
Managerial
and
Business
Characteristic s
Non
college
N * 23
College
N = 1+2
Non
college
N = 9
College
N = 7
Non
coll
N =
(1)
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
w
Per
cent
age
(5)
Per-
Num- cent-
ber age
(6) (7)
Num
ber
(8)
Per
cent
age
(9)
Num
ber
(10)
Making a social
contribution 2
9b 15 35
b
• • • •
3 ^3
• •
Understanding life • • • *
3 7
• • • • 1 ll+ • •
Percentage difference within occupational group is significant at or t
b
Significant at the .05 level of confidence.
c
One non-college man not included expected to be an unskilled laborer.
TABLE 18— Continued
ifessional
and
■rofessicnaal
Managerial
and
Business
Skilled
and
Semi-ski .lied
No
Expected
Occupation
Non Non-
-
Non
»
College college College college College college College
5 N - k2 N = 9 N «
- 7 N = 9 N = 0 N ■ 8 N - 1
Per- Per- Per Per- Per- Per- Per-
it- Num- cent- Num■ cent- Num cent Num- cent- Num- cent- Num- cent- Num- cent-
k
ber age ber age ber age ber age ber age ber age ber age
1) (*0 (5)
(6) (7) (8) (9)
(10) (11)
(^) (13)
(lk) (15) (16) (17)
15 35
• •
b
• •
3 k3
»
3 7
• • • • 1 lk
rithin occupational group is significant at or beyond the .01 level of confidence.
level of confidence.
; included expected to be an unskilled laborer.
94
college men of. the managerial-business grouping; as was
also, and for a second time, the characteristic "making
a social contribution."
Other significant comparisons may be noted
within the remaining occupational groupings. Comparisons
may also be made, horizontally, from group to group.
The omission of mentions for certain characteristics by
particular groups would appear to be of'some importance.
And, it should be noted that "financial security" and
"family" received the highest percentage of mentions
from both non-college and college men in each of the
occupational groupings. .
Source of career advice.— For the most part,
both non-college and college men reported that they
consulted with parents and friends when seeking advice
concerning a proposed career (Table 19). Other sources
of advice and counsel were mentioned but with less fre
quency as, for example, a wife or girl friend, fellow
worker or student, teacher or counselor. The teacher
or counselor was named more often by college than non
college men, possibly because schooling continued to be
a way of life for the college men and there was more
opportunity to confer with teaching or counseling per
sonnel; or possibly because of greater Interest on the
part of school personnel for students who were college
95
TABLE 19
SOURCE OP CAREER ADVICE FOR NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE
MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Mentions
Source
Non-college Men College Men
(1)
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
(*>
Per
cent
age
(5)
Parents 32 6b 2^ bS
Friends 10 20 10 20
Girl friend
9
18
3
6
Wife 8 1 2
Fellow workers b 8 • • f t f t
Relatives 2 b 2 b
Fellow students 2 b • •
Teacher or counselor0 . 2 b
9
18
Successful people in my field 1 2 • • • •
My employer 1 2 • • • •
My agent 1 2 » • • •
Anyone who will listen • • • • 2 b
No one b 8 11 22
a
Percentage difference is significant at the .05 level of
confidence.
9 6
bound. For thi3 item, the percentage difference between
the two groups was significant at the .05 level of con
fidence.
Some of the men of both groups indicated they
did not consult with anyone concerning their occupational
plans. Usually, this seemed to be a matter of pref
erence and not lack of opportunity. The parents of
these men were usually aware of the son's plans for a
career although the son did not discuss his plans with
them (Table 20). Forty-six parents of non-college men
and forty-seven parents of college men were aware of
their sons' plans and were satisfied or in any event
neutral concerning them, although no more than thirty-
two and twenty-four sons, respectively, had or made
opportunity to talk with their parents about their
plans (see Table 19). As one young man said, "I don't
discuss them. I decided what I was going to do and
told them."
With the one exception referred to above, the
comparable percentages reported in Tables 19 and 20
were not significantly different.
Preferred Work Satisfactions
Satisfactions prized by the individual and
perceived in association with his desired occupation
were ranked by the subject to show order of preference.
97
TABUS 20
REPORTED REACTION OF PARENTS TO SON'S OCCUPATIONAL PLANS
Non
college Man College Men
Per- Per-
Num- cent- Num- cent-
ber age ber age
( 2) ( 3) (h) ( 5)
Satisfied
Neutral
Dissatisfied
Not aware of my plans
I don't know
26 52 30 60
14 28
9
18
6 12 8 16
2 k
3
6
2 k • • • •
Parental
Reaction
(1)
98
Each subject was given a set of nineteen cards, an
occupational satisfaction or value written on each card.
He was Instructed to place the least important satis
faction at the bottom of the deck; the most important
on top. The intervening satisfactions were to be
arranged in relation to these two extremes.
It was conjectured that the preferred satis
factions, a kind of work expectations set, might serve
to distinguish the non-college from the college men;
and by inference, if there were a distinction, be
construed as predeterminers of the decision not to
attend college.
The work satisfactions assessed in the present
study were selected from various studies of employees
and their attitudes toward the work situation (30) (47)
(48) (53) (55).
Median and quartlle deviation for ranked work
satisfactions.— The median and the quartile deviation
of the distribution of ranks for each work satisfaction
are shown in Table 21. Comparable data are reported for
both non-college and college men. It should be noted
that position in rank declines as the numbers increase
and the smaller the number the higher the rank.
The work satisfaction "opportunity to be
creative" received the highest median ranking from the
99
TABLE 21
MEDIAN PLACEMENT AND QUARTILE DEVIATION OF WORK SATISFACTIONS
RANKED IN ORDER OF PREFERENCE BY NON-COLLEGE AND
COLLEGE MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVELS
Work Satisfactions
( 1)
Non-college Men
Median Quartile
(2) (3)
College Men
Median Quartile
(*0 (5)
Opportunity to be creative, to
show what you can do, to
express your ideas, talent or
skill 4.8 4.7'
Nature of the work 5*7 3*0
Opportunity to get ahead, to
advance to higher positions 6.6 2.9
Interesting, varied
activity; change in the
content and pace of the work 6.9 3*4
Good working conditions: good
hours, pleasant surroundings,
up-to-date equipment,
benefits 7*8 3*6
Working with people you like 7*8 2.8
Freedom from supervision; the
chance to work more or less
on your own; independence 7*9 3*6
Opportunity to learn new skills 8.3 3.3
Service to others; helping
other people 8.5 3.8
Recognition and prestige; the
chance to be somebody, to be
highly respected by your
fellow nan 9*8 3*5
Opportunity to make money; a
very highly paid job 10.3 3*8
3.8
3.4
9.2
6.3
9.4
7.6
6.9
10.7
6.5
3.4
3-9
3.0
2.3
3-4
2.3
2.9
4.0
4.5
7.5 3.1
10.5 3*6
100
TABLE 21— Continued
Non-college Men College Men
Work Satisfactions
Median Quartile Median Quartile
(1) (2) (3) (*) (5)
Steady job; security and
regular take-home pay 10.5 i»-.o
8.5 5.1 *
Managing and directing the
activities of others 13 A 3.2
13.3
2.6
Doing something everybody
else can't do
13-5 3.7
ik.Q ^.0
Large responsibilities; control
over others
13-7 3.7 13.8 2.8
Healthy, outdoor work 1^.6
2.3 15.9 1.7
Opportunity to make a name for
yourself, to become famous
15.5 3.0 13^
3.0
Familiar, easy work 16.9 2.2 17.2
2.5
It provides a living 18.1 l.ij- 18.7 l.k-
101
non-college men and next to the highest from the college
men. The reverse Is evident with respect to "nature of
the work" which ranked highest with the college men and
next to the highest for the non-college men. These two
satisfactions may have been interpreted by both groups
to be somewhat similar in meaning. Their juxtaposition
in rank suggests the presence of a single factor rather
than two.
Lowest in rank for both groups was the satis
faction "it provides a living." "Familiar, easy work"
was likewise accorded low placement, falling next to
last In the rank-order list of both groups. As a point
of interest, both non-college and college men all but
denied as expected satisfactions the work values of
"managing and directing" and "large responsibilities."
These work satisfactions were accorded the low median
ranks of 13.4 and 13.7* respectively, by the non-college
men; and 13.3 and 13.8, respectively, by the college
men.
With some few exceptions, the quartile deviations
for the distributions are relatively large. A large
quartile deviation would seem to Indicate considerable
variation among-the members of the group in respect to
the ranking of a satisfaction.
Closest agreement within either group on the
102
ranking of a satisfaction was obtained for the satis
faction, "it provides a living." The ranks accorded
this satisfaction were for both groups concentrated
about the median. For the noncollege, the chances are
50 in 100, or one in two, that any rank for this
particular satisfaction if taken at random from the
group, would fall within the limits of Md 18.1 - Q 1.4.
For the college men, the middle 50 percent of the cases
would fall within the limits of Md 18.7 - Q 1.4.
The college men were comparatively well-agreed,
also, concerning the rank order of the satisfaction,
"healthy, outdoor work," for which the middle 50 percent
of the ranks fell between Md 15*9 - Q 1.7.
Median ranks of the work satisfactions. — Siegel1 s '
test of medians was applied to estimate the significance
of the difference between the two median ranks accorded
each work satisfaction by the non-college and the college
men (35:111-115). Shown in Table 22 are the two median
rank orders for each satisfaction; the combined median
rank computed for the total sample according to Siegel;
and the chi-square value to indicate the extent of the
difference between the two groups.
There was only one of the nineteen ranked
satisfactions which showed a marked and significant
difference between the work values of the non-college
103
TABLE 22
MEDIAN RANKS OF WORK SATISFACTIONS FOR THE NON-COLLEGE AND
COLLEGE MEN, COMBINED MEDIAN, AND CHI-SQUARE
Work Median Ranks Chi-
Satisfactions ; ________ Square
Non-
(1)
College
(2)
College
(3)
Combined
<*0 , (5)
Opportunity to Be creative 4.8 3.8 3.9
0.12
Nature of the work
5-7
3.4 4.6 3.61
Opportunity to get ahead 6.6 9.2 8.4
1.36
Interesting, varied activity
6.9 6.3 6.7
0.58
Good working conditions 7.8 9.4
8.9
i.o4
Working with people you like 7.8 7.6 7.7
0.01
Freedom from supervision
7.9
6.9
6.9 0.02
Opportunity to learn new skills
8.3 10.7 8.9 n.92a
Service to others
8.5 6.5 7.9 0.17
Recognition and prestige 9.8
7.5 9.2 1.12
Opportunity to make money
10.3 10.5 10.3
0.00
Steady job, security
10.5 8.5 9-3
0.50
Managing and directing
. 13*^ 13.3
13.4 0.11
Doing what everybody
else can't
13.5
14.8 14.4 0.70
Large responsibilities
13.7
13.8
13.9
0.01
Healthy, outdoor work 14.6
15.9 15.3
0.88
Opportunity to make a name 15.6 13.4 14.3 3.10
Familiar, easy work 16.9 17.2
17.3
0.12
It provides a living 18.1
18.7
18.3
1.49
Significant at the .01 level of confidence•
104
and the college men. This was the satisfaction "oppor
tunity to learn new skills," significantly more
Important to the non-college than the college men and
differentiating the two groups at the .01 level. The
chi-square value of 11.92 obtained for this work
satisfaction would occur in the long run in only 1 out
of every 100 random samples, and there are, therefore,
fairly safe grounds for rejecting the null hypothesis
that there is no difference between the true medians of
the two groups.
The medians of the rank orders for the remaining
satisfactions disclosed no significant differences
between the non-college and the college men. Although
the remaining satisfactions failed to differentiate
between the two groups at statistically significant
levels, there were two satisfactions which approached
the .05 level of significance. These were "nature of
the work" and "opportunity to make a name," both of
greater consequence, apparently, to the college than to
the non-college men.
As a point of interest, both groups devalued
the work satisfactions of management and large respon
sibilities. The combined median ranks for these two
satisfactions were 13.4 and 13.9* respectively.
105
The Decision to Attend or
Not to Attend College
To Initiate this aspect of the investigation,
the interviewee was asked to fill in a checklist of
statements designed to facilitate the identification,
and disclosure, by the subject himself of those factors
which related to his decision to attend, or not to
attend, college. Necessarily, there were two separate
checklists, one for the non-college men and an alternate
form for the college men. However, a number of matched
statements were retained on both lists for comparative
purposes.
It should be pointed out that the subject was
not asked for his opinion concerning these statements;
rather, he was asked to check each item "yes" or "no"
as it applied to him in arriving at his decision.
A series of questions followed upon the check
list, most of them primers and pre-coded. Thus, the
responses to questions of this section of the interview
were usually assigned by the subject himself to some
pre-determined category or to placement on a rating
scale. Whenever a question required the use of a rating
scale, a card reproducing the question and scale was
handed to the interviewee with the instruction to reply
by number. This technique, adapted from Centers (47),
was used to sustain the interest of the subject and to
106
encourage his active participation in the interview
procedure.
Factors in decision for the non-college men.—
Table 23 presents the responses of the non-college men
to,the checklist "Factors in Decision."
Sixty-two percent of the non-college men, more
than half of the group, cited the factor "success in
life depends on ability and effort" as applying to
their decision not to go to college. Presumably, it may
be inferred that, in their opinion, a college education
was not a prerequisite to a satisfying, successful life.
This interpretation appears to be confirmed by the next
two highest factors "I could get a good job without
a college education" and "life can be Just as happy and
satisfying without a college education." These two
components in the decision-making process were of
concern to almost half of the non-college group.
Lack of money was not a factor in decision for
thirty-four of the non-college men; while forty-six out
of fifty indicated that the family was not in need of
their'financial assistance.
With some encouragement, possibly fourteen men
out of the group might have attended college. These
men checked "yes" for one of the following four factors:
"I felt I did not have the scholastic ability to do
107
TABLE 23
FACTORS IN THE DECISION NOT TO ATTEND COLLEGE AS CITED
BY NON-COLLEGE MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Non-college Men
Factors in Decision
Yes No
(1)
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
(k)
Per
cent
age
(5)
Success in life depends on ability
and effort
31
62
19
38
I could get a good job without a
college education 2k k8 26 52
Life can be just as happy and
satisfying without a college
education
23
k6
27 5^
I would rather start earning money
quickly and learn on the job 21 k2
29
58
My high school major did not pre
pare me for college 18 36 32 6k
Lack of money prevented me from
going to college. I couldn't
afford it 16 32 3^ 68 ’
Learning on a job is more practical
than most school learning
15 30 35 70
I don't like to study
13
26
37 7^
My high school subject marks were
too low 11 22
39
78
I felt I did not have the
scholastic ability to do college
work
9
18 kl 82
108
TABLE 23— Continued
Non-college Men
Factors In Decision
Yes No
(1)
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
(4)
Per
cent
age
(5)
Going to college would "be a waste of
time for me 8 26 42 84
College isn't worth the effort. It's
too much work 6 12 44 88
Skilled laborers get paid as much as
most college graduates 6 12 44 88
My family needed my financial
assistance 4 8 k6 92
I planned to get married 4 8 k6 92
My family discouraged me 2 4 kQ
96
Going to college costs more than
it’s worth 1 2 49 98
Persons who do not have a college
education usually make better
leaders • * « • 50 100
Other:
I felt I should get my military
requirements out of the way
7
14 • • • •
Having the chance to travel to
Europe stopped me from entering
college immediately after high
school 2 k • • • •
I couldn't think of any reason to
go. I did not have the desire 2 4 • • • •
TABLE 23— Continued
109
Non-college Men
Yes No
Per-
Num- cent-
ber age
(2) (3)
Per-
Num- cent-
ber age
W ( 5)
2
1
Factors in Decision
( 1)
I wanted to get out on my own
No one else in my family went
110
college work"j "my family discouraged me"; "I couldn't
think of any reason to go"; and "no one else in my
family went."
It is worth noting that not one yes was accorded
the factor "persons who do not have a college education
usually make better leaders."
Factors in decision for the college men.--Table
24 presents the responses of the college men to a
similar checklist, "Factors in Decision," the statements
in this instance keyed to the decision to attend college.
The first two factors in order of acceptance
approached unanimity among the college men. Family
encouragement was high as was also the self-estimate
of scholastic ability. In addition, most of the college
men indicated a desire and need to continue with their
education. There was the conviction, also, that "college
graduates get Jobs with better pay" (N = 40). But, as
a balance to the economic factor, thirty-one college
men acknowledged that "a college education helps you
live a happier, more satisfying life."
A comparison of matched factors.— As previously
stated, both groups of subjects, non-college and college,
were asked to indicate those factors on their respective
checklists which influenced the decision to enroll or
TABLE 24
111
FACTORS IN THE DECISION TO ATTEND COLLEGE AS CITED BY
COLLEGE MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
College Men
Factors in Decision
Yes No
(1)
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
(4)
Per
cent
age
(5)
My family encouraged me to go 48 96 2 4
I felt that I had the scholastic
ability to do college work
vr
94
3
6
I am greatly dissatisfied to stop
at my present level of knowledge 88 6 12
College graduates get jobs with
better pay 44 88 6 12
My high school major prepared me
for college entrance 4o 80 10 20
MY family was able to assist me
financially 38 T6 12 24
I could afford college
33
66
34
A college education helps you live
a happier more satisyfing life a
31
62 18 36
My high school subject marks
were high
31
62
19 .38
Going to college has just been
accepted; I have never thought of
anything else 30 6o 20 4o
College graduates usually have the
leadership positions
29
58 21 42
The country needs more people who
have highly developed skills and
knowledge “
29 58
19 38
Going to college enables you to
study more lines of work before
deciding on a career
25 50 25 50
112
TABLE 2 l t — Continued
College Men
Factors in Decision
Yes No
(1)
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
(M
Per
cent
age
(5)
You can't get a good job without
a college education
23
k6
27 &
I like to study; it's the challenge
of learning new concepts 22 28 56
Without a college education I would
be at a social disadvantage in life 36 32
33
66
Other 1 2 • • • •
aOne college man did not check this item,
h
Two failed to check this item.
113
not to enroll In college. Table 25 presents a chi-square
comparison of the yes-no responses of non-college and
college men to matched statements contained in the two
checklists.
Essentially, the chi-square value (see column 6)
is a test of the null hypothesis against the direct
determination of probable outcomes (13:254-257); that is,
a comparison of the experimentally observed frequencies
with those to be expected from probability theory. The
hypothesis asserts that the frequencies of the observed
event are equally probable.
With twelve out of 22 items, the response shows
a deviation from chance expectancy which is greater
than that required by the .01 level of significance.
With these items, the divergence of experimentally
observed from expected results is too large to be
attributed solely to sampling fluctuation and the null
hypothesis of equal probability or equal answers must
be rejected.
For the college men, the size of the chi-square
confirms that the following factors were definitely
operative in the decision to attend college: (l) my
family encouraged me to go; (2) I felt that I had the
scholastic ability to do college work; (3) college
graduates get Jobs with better pay; (4) my high school
TABLE 25
A COMPARISON OF THE RESPONSES OF COLLEGE AND NON-COLLEGE MEN OF SELECTED AI
FACTORS RELATING TO THE DECISION TO ATTEND OR NOT TO ATTEND
S1.m1.Iar Factors in Decision
Yes
Per-
Num- cent-
ber age
(1) (2) (3)
College Men: My family encouraged me to go 48 96
Non-college Men: My family discouraged me 2 4
College Men: I felt that I had the scholastic ability to
do college work 47 9k
Non-college Men: I felt that I did not have the scholastic
ability to do college work 9 18
College Men: College graduates get jobs with better pay 44 88
Non-college Men: Skilled laborers get paid as much as most
college graduates 6 12
College Men: My high school major prepared me for
college entrance 40 80
Non-college Men: My high school major did not prepare me
for college entrance 18 36
College Men: My family was able to assist me financially 38 76
Non-college men: My family needed my financial assistance h 8
College Men: I could afford college 33 66
Non-college Men: I could not afford college 16 32
College Men: A college education helps you live a happier,
more satisfying life3 , 31 62
Non-college Men: Life can be just as happy and satisfying
without a college education 23 46
College Men: My high school subject marks were high 31 62
Non-college Men: My high school subject marks were too low 11 22
College Men: You can't get a good Job without a college education 23 46
Non-college Men: I could get a good job without a college education 24 48
TABLE 25
ESPOUSES OP COLLEGE AND NON-COLLEGE MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL TO SIMILAR
3 RELATING TO THE DECISION TO ATTEND OR NOT TO ATTEND COLLEGE
Yes No
____________________ Chi- Signifi
3 Ion
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent -
age
(3)
Num
ber
(10
Per
cent
age
(5)
Square
(6)
cance
(7)
jed me to go k8 96 2 1 4 142.2 .01
: : our aged me 2 4 1 4 - 8 96 142.2 .01
the scholastic ability to
kT 9b 3
6 38.36 .01
did not have the scholastic
9
IB in 82 20.1*8 .01
get jobs with better pay kb 88 6 12 28.88 .01
srs get paid as much as most
6 12 1 * 88 28.88 .01
Jor prepared me for
bo 80 10 20 18.0 .01
L major did not prepare me
18 36 ,32 6b 3.86
.05
2 to assist me financially
38 76 12 2b 13.52 .01
led my financial assistance b 8 k6 92 35.28 .01
liege
33
66
17 3^
5.12 .05
fford college 16 32 3b 68 6.28 .02
yn helps you live a happier,
31
62 18 36 3.1A
.10
ist as happy and satisfying
23
1 4 6
27 5I 4 .32 .70
aject marks were high
31
62
19 38 2.88 .10
L subject marks were too low 11 22
39
78 15.68 .01
Dod Job without a college education
23
k6
27 5 * 4 - • 32 •70
good job without a college education 2 1 4 - 14 8 26 I 42 .08 .80
TABLE 25— Continued
Yes
Similar Factors in Decision
Per
Num cent
ber age
(1)
(2) (3)
College Men: I like to study 21 k2
Non-college Men: I don't like to study
13
26
College Men: College graduates usually have the
58 leadership positions 29
Non-college Men: Persons who do not have a college
education usually make Letter leaders • • • *
aOne college man did not check this item.
TABLE 25--Continued
Yes No
_________ Chi- Signifi-
1
Num-
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
(*>
Per
cent
age
(5)
Square
(6)
cance
(7)
21 k2
29
58 1.28 • 30
study
13
26
37 7^
11.52 .01
ually have the
29 58 21 h2 1.28 .30
ot have a college
eaders ♦ • • « 50 100 50.0
H
O
•
beck this item.
116
major prepared me for college entrance; (5) my family
was able to assist me financially; and (6) I could
afford college.
For the non-college man, the yes-no responses
to corresponding items stated negatively were likewise
differentiated at statistically significant levels but
in favor of the negative response. Although the double
negative may not be interpreted as an affirmative, it
does suggest for the most part that
1. The families of non-college men did not
discourage them from attending college.
2. Non-college men believed they had the
ability to do college work.
3. In the opinion of the non-college men,
skilled laborers do not get paid as much as
most college graduates; or conversely,
college graduates do get Jobs with better
pay.
4. The high school major did prepare the non
college men for college; or at least, it
was not a factor in the decision not to
attend.
5. The families of non-college men did not need
their financial assistance.
6. The non-college men could afford to attend
college.
117
7. High school subject marks were not too low;
or at least, they were not a deterring
factor.
8. Some non-college men may like to study; at
least, the dislike of study was not a
deterring factor.
9. In the opinion of the non-college men,
persons with a college education usually
make better leaders.
The interpretation of the responses in Table 25
will in each instance be in accord with the direction
of the responses that produced the chi-square. For
example, in the case of the forty-eight non-college men
who replied "no" to the factor "my family discouraged
me," it may be said that family discouragement was
definitely not a factor in their decision. In this
connection, it should be noted, however, that it does
not follow, conclusively, that the non-college men were
encouraged to attend. Probably, a response that contains
a double negative, as does this one, does not mean the
same as an outright, affirmative response. On the other
hand, the "no" response previously referred to, does
suggest that the family may have encouraged these non
college men to attend; or at least, the family may have
maintained a neutral position regarding an individual
118
decision.
High school subject marks.— A statement on high
school subject marks was included in both checklists as
a possible contributing factor to college or non-college
decision. Lat§r, the men were asked directly about
their subject marks. Their replies are summarized in
Table '26.
Thirty-seven college men reported that they
received high marks in high school whereas no more than
eight non-college men received high marks. The per
centage difference with respect to this response was
significant at the .01 level of confidence with more
college than non-college men receiving the high marks
of A, B+, or B. The evidence is strong that the obtained
difference cannot be attributed solely to sampling
fluctuations.
The differences between the two groups were
likewise significant with respect to average and below
average marks, again in favor of the college men who
were scarcely noticeable in these two categories.
Interestingly, a sizable majority of the non
college men declared that their high school marks did not
give a fair picture of their ability (N = 36); and
almost half of the college men felt the same way
(N = 21). As between the two groups, the preponderance
119
TABLE 26
HIGH SCHOOL SUBJECT MARKS AS REPORTED BY NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE
MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Description
Non
college Men College Men
of Subject Marks
( 1 )
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
w
Per
cent
age
(5)
High (A, B+1 B)a 8 l£
37 7^
Somewhat above average
(B-, C+) 16 32 1 1 22
Average ( c ) a l8
36 1 2
Below average; or very lowa
(C-, D , D) 8 16 1 2
^Percentage difference is significant at the .01 level of
confidence.
120
of the non-college men was significant beyond the .01
level of confidence. The reasons of both groups are
presented in Table 27.
It should be noted that twenty-reight men in the
non-college group acknowledged that they "did not try
hard enough" or they were too "interested in social
activities" to do any studying. The reported reason
"I didn't try hard enough" differentiated between the
non-college and college groups at the .01 level of
confidence, the non-college men reporting this reason
significantly more often than the college men.
Eight men in each group complained that high
school was too easy. Possibly, this and the two reasons
previously cited may be related to the school's expec
tations and requirements for competent work performance.
This possibility is discussed at greater length in
Chapter 6.
Time of decision.— Table 28 presents data to
confirm the time of decision regarding college or non
college attendance. For the most part, the college men
had decided in junior high school, or earlier, that
they would attend college (N = 39) although five college
men had delayed this decision until the senior year of
high school, and one college man did not make up his
mind until the summer following high school graduation.
121
TABLE 27
REASONS CITED BT 36 NON-COLLEGE AND 21 COLLEGE MEN TO EXPLAIN WHY
HIGH SCHOOL MARKS WERE NOT INDICATIVE OF ABILITY:
Reasons
Non
college Men College Men
(1)
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
(*0
Per
cent
age
(5)
I didn't try hard enough. Definitely,
I could, have done much Letter3 ,
23
k6 10 20
High school is too easy. Anyone can
pick up and say the right answer.
I took easy classes mostly. Certain,
courses were Mickey Mouse 8 16 8 16
I didn't have a desire to study. I
was more interested in social
activities and goofing around than
(in) making a good deal in school
5
10 1 2
Other:
I changed high school three times • • • • 1 2
I was working all the time • • • • 1 2
Percentage difference is significant at the .01 level of
confidence.
122
TABLE! 28
TIME OF DECISION REGARDING COLLEGE OR NON-COLLEGE ATTENDANCE
AS REPORTED BY NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE MEN
OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Time of Decision
Non-
college Men College Men
(1)
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
w
Per
cent
age
(5)
&
In Junior high school or earlier 2 b
39
78
In 10th grade 1 2
3
6
In 11th grade
5
10 2 b
In 12th grade8 .
19 38 5
1 0
Sometime in high school b 8 • • • •
In the summer, or September following
high school graduation8 . 10 20 1 2
After enrolling in college (in the
semester following high school
graduation) 2 b • * • •
I never decided I wasn't going8 .
7
l l j - • • • •
^Percentage difference is significant at the .01 level of
confidence.
123
The time of decision at the Junior high school level
differentiated between the two subsamples at the .01
level of confidence. The percentage of differences were
significant, also, at the twelfth grade level and again
in the summer following high school graduation, though
in the opposite direction.
At some point during the high school years,
twenty-nine non-college men made the decision not to
attend college. Ten men of this group deferred decision
until September following high school graduation; and
two actually enrolled in college but withdrew almost
immediately.
One of the seven non-college men who "never
decided" was enrolled in a two-year technical institute.
The others commented:
"I figured if I had the chance, I'd go, and
wouldn't worry about it if I didn't.
"It's hard to say you decide not to go. You
Just don't go. College is more or less a
challenge and you either react to it or you
ignore it. I didn't grasp the opportunity at
the time."
"I couldn't say. I never made any definite
plans as to what I'd do in June. When I got
out, I thought 'Well, what am I going to do
now?'"
"I was Just putting it off until I was finan
cially prepared. I made up my mind to go shortly
after I went to work carrying hod."
"I don't know. I never thought about going to
college."
124
"I just sort of took It for granted I was going
and never really worked for it."
College information in high school.— Both non
college and college men were asked: "What information
did you get about college while you were in high school?"
The results are shown in Table 29. The replies, if yes,
were usually qualified by such remarks as, "well, some,"
"a little," "mostly scholarships," or "there was a film
on that." These comments should bfe considered in
reviewing the yes responses.
Both groups gave priority to information given
them about the junior colleges of the school district
and most of the men, non-college and college, were
aware of the scholastic standards and entrance require
ments imposed by colleges.
The percentage response for "fees" and "junior
college schools" differentiated the two groups at the
.05 level of confidence. In the case of fees, the
difference may be interpreted in part as a function of
greater concern on the part of the non-college men.
With respect to information about Junior colleges, the
greater "no" response on the part of the college men
could be a reflection of disinterest and lack of concern
about junior colleges.
125
TABLE 29
INFORMATION ABOUT COLLEGE OBTAINED IN HIGH SCHOOL AS REPORTED BY
NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Non-college Men College Men
Kinds
of
Information
Yes No Yes No
CD
Num
ber
( 2 )
Per-
■ cent-
age
( 3 )
Num
ber
w
Per
cent
age
( 5 )
Num
ber
( 6 )
Per
cent
age
( 7 )
Num
ber
( 8 )
Per
cent
age
( 9 )
Course offerings
3 3
6 6
17 3b 28 56 2 2 kb
Entrance
requirements
3 9
7 8 1 1 2 2
3 1
6 2
1 9 3 8
Scholastic
standards lK> 80 10 2 0
&
6 8 16 3 2
Fees and other
expenses8 . 2 8 5 6 22 kb 16
3 2 3 ^
6 8
Scholarships, loans
part-time work,
etc. 2 8 56 22 kb
2 9
58 2 1 bz
Social life 2 2 kb 28 5 6
1 3
26
3 7
7b
a
Junior colleges 8 8 6 1 2
3 ^
6 8 16 3 2
a
Percentage difference between the two groups .is significant
at the .05 level of confidence.
126
Advance knowledge of college ability.— Eleven
non-college and six college men did not learn in high
school that they had college ability (Table 30). The
difference between percentages was not large enough to
differentiate the two groups significantly.
Generally speaking, the non-college men in their
comments disclosed a lack of self-confidence, fear, and
uncertainty. The uncertainty was apparently enhanced
by hearsay and the comments of teachers regarding the
rigors of college. For example:
"Teachers harped on the opinion that high school
didn't train you for college because it was a great
jolt to a lot of high school students when they
went to college. They didn't get away with a lot
as they did in high school."
"I didn't know whether I had college ability or
not. I was afraid 'cause I'd heard all these
things— ten hours of study and you lock yourself
in your room— whether I could weather the storm or
not. I didn't know whether I had the ability to
complete college courses since I realized the
inadequacies of the high school courses."
Similar replies came from the six college men who did
not learn of their college ability in high school, as
for example:
"I wasn't really sure. I didn't know whether I
had college ability or not. I heard a lot of rumors
about how tough college was, but after I got in,
I found the first semester was not quite as hard
as I expected it to be."
"The teachers told me, 'you can't do college work.'
The counselors told me, 'you shouldn't go to
college; you should Join the Navy.'1 '
127
TABLE 30
THE RESPONSE OF NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE MEW OF SELECTED ABILITY
LEVEL TO THE QUESTION: "WHILE IN HIGH SCHOOL,
DID YOU LEARN YOU HAD COLLEGE ABILITY?"
Yes No
Per Per
Num cent Num cent
ber age ber age
(1) (2) (3)
w
Non-college men
College men
39 78 11 22
1+1 88 6 12
128
"I was discouraged in high school from going to
college. One teacher in particular; in fact
[this teacher] told my mother I wasn't college
material. But I always thought I had the
ability. I believe I can do anything I really
set my mind to do and I Just kinda set my mind
to get a good grade in college."
On the other hand, as shown in Table 31, many
of the interviewees reported that teachers and counselors
did advise them of their college ability. The encourage
ment and assistance of both teachers and counselors
reached about the same number of students, approximately
half in each of the two groups of graduates.
Self-rating of college ability.— Each interviewee
was asked to rate his ability to do college work.
Statements descriptive of college ability were reproduced
on a card which was handed to the subject with the
request to call out the number of the statement that
applied to him. The results are shown in Table 32.
There was a tendency for the college men to rate
themselves somewhat higher than the non-college men but
the differences were not statistically significant. On
a scale of 1 to 5 points, from low to high, the means
for the two groups, non-college and college, were 3.2
and 3.6 respectively.
Summary of the Chapter
The discussion of Chapter IV focused upon those
129
table 31
RESPONSE TO THE QUESTIONS: "DID TEACHERS TALK WITH YOU ABOUT YOUR
ABILITY TO DO COLLEXJE WORK?" "DID COUNSELORS?"
Teachers Counselors
Yes No Yes No
Per- Per-
Num- cent- Num- cent-
ber age ber age
(1) (2) (3) 00
Per- Per-
Num- cent- Num- cent-
ber age ber age
( 5) ( 6) (7) ( 8)
Non-college men 28 56 22 Ml- 2k M3 26 52
College men 33 66 17 3^ 26 52 2k M3
130
TABLE 32
COLLEGE ABILITY AS RATED BY NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE MEN OF
SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL: TOTAL SCORE AND MEAN RATING
College Ability
Non
college Men
Score
College Men
Score
(1)
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3) (*0
Num
ber
(5)
Per
cent-
age
(6) (7)
Learn very slowly and
with great effort 2 k 2
Learn somewhat less
rapidly and with more
difficulty than most
students 8 16 16
3
6 . 6
Learn about as rapidly
and with about same
difficulty as do most
students 22 66 18 36 &
Learn somewhat more
rapidly and with less
difficulty than do most
students 16 32 6i t -
25
50 100
Learn very rapidly and
with little effort 2 i t - 10 h 8 20
Total score • • • • 158 0 • • • 180
Mean 3.2
3.6
131
findings related to life goals and values of the non-
eollege and college men. The two groups were compared
in respect to certain aspects of goal-striving and
aspiration. These were: (1) father’s occupation and
occupational values, (2) educational plans and objective^
(3) the best possible life and projected attainment,
(4) career expectation, consultation and advice,
(5) preferred work satisfactions, and (6) the decision
to attend or not to attend college. Findings to dis
tinguish the two groups of non-college and college men
were reported by area as follows:
Father’s Occupation and
Occupational Values
1. The fathers of noncollege men significantly
outnumbered the fathers of college men in
the category of skilled workers.
2. More fathers of college than of non-college
men were highly satisfied with their
occupation.
3. Conversely, more fathers of non-college than
college men were merely tolerant or somewhat
satisfied with their occupation.
4. The fathers of non-college men to a greater
extent than the fathers of college men
identified and stressed security as an
132
Important component of the "good" Job.
Educational Plans and Objectives
5. The educational level aspired to by the
. college men was significantly beyond that
of the non-college men.
6. The non-college men expressed an interest in
courses offered by the adult school and
Junior college whereas the college men did
not mention courses as such.
7. A significantly large percentage of the non
college men did not aspire to further edu
cation.
8. A significantly larger percentage of the
non-college men did not know what kind of
additional education they might undertake,
if any.
9. In significantly greater numbers, the fathers
and mothers of non-college men had terminated
their education at the Junior high school
level.
10. The number of fathers and mothers of college
men who had themselves completed college
was significant.
11. The difference in mean years of schooling
completed by the mothers of the two groups
133
was found to be highly significant beyond
the .01 level of confidence.
12. Of the reasons cited for seeking additional
education, the college men were more inclined
them were the non-college men to regard
advanced education as preparation for a
career, and a means to increased oppor
tunities for choice. Of itself, it was an
opportunity to learn, "a pure interest" and
"a chance to use my ideas."
The Best Possible Life and
Projected Attainment
13. To a greater degree, the college men defined
the best possible life as comprised of
"peace, happiness, harmony"; "recognition and
social position"; and "making a social con
tribution. The two groups, non-college and
college, were in close agreement concerning
the following desired aspects of the best
possible life: (a) financial security,
(b) a family, (c) time for Interests,
(d) work in a chosen field, (e) a nice home,
and (f) a good education.
14. There were no significant differences
between the two groups in respect to their
concepts of the worst possible life. Mainly,
the non-college and college men defined the
worst possible life as a condition of con
tinuing insecurity closely tied to an
unsatisfactory work situation.
15. In terms of projected attainment five and
fifteen years ahead, the non-college and
college men, as groups, did not differ
significantly in their estimate of expected
placement.
Career Expectation, Consultation
and Advice
16. In significantly greater numbers, the college
men expected to pursue a lifetime career in
a professional occupation.
17. Some of the non-college men, as in contrast
with none of the college men, expected to
work at a skilled occupation.
18. Significantly more of the non-college than
the college men reported no career expec
tation.
19. The career expectation of both non-college
and college men exceeded substantially the
occupational level of their fathers. Upward
aspiration was most evident in the
20.
21.
22.
135
professional and skilled categories, the
percentage difference between fathers and
sons significant at the .01 level of con
fidence. The upward aspiration was noted
as an increase of sons in the professional
category of expected occupationsj as a
decline in the skilled category.
The non-college sons of fathers who worked
at a semi-skilled or skilled occupation
expected in significant numbers to move out
of the father’s occupational classification.
The college sons of fathers who worked in a
clerical or sales occupation expected in
significant numbers to move out of the
father’s occupational classification.
Within the same occupational grouping,
college men revealed a significantly differ
ent concept of the best possible life. In
contrast with the non-college men of the
professional-semi-professional grouping,
they specified in greater frequency the
characteristics of "peace and happiness,"
"recognition and social position," and
"making a social contribution." Within the
managerial grouping, "travel" and "making a
136
social contribution" were distinctive
aspects specified by the college men.
23. More college than non-college men reported
the teacher or counselor as a source of
career advice.
24. With few exceptions, parents of the men of
both groups, non-college and college, were
informed and satisfied concerning the son’s
career plans.
Preferred Work Satisfactions
25. The non-college men prized most highly as a
desired work satisfaction the "opportunity
to be creative"; college men gave first
place to "nature of the work."
26. Of least consequence to both groups was the
work satisfaction "it provides a living";
and next to this, "familiar, easy work."
27. Both groups placed a low value on the two
work satisfactions "managing and directing"
and "large responsibilities."
28. The work satisfaction "opportunity to learn
new skills" was significantly more important
to the non-college men than the college men.
137
The Decision to Attend or
Not to Attend College
29. More than half of the non-college men
affirmed that "success in life depends on
ability and effort" and declared this belief
was a factor in their decision not to attend
college. Ability was by them not construed
as an outcome of educational preparation.
30. Of about the same importance to the non
college men were these two factors: (a) "I
could get a good Job without a college edu
cation" and (b) "life can be Just as happy
and satisfying without a college edu
cation. "
31. With some few exceptions, the families of
the non-college men were not in need of
their financial assistance (N = 46); and
68 percent of the group (N = 34) indicated
that lack of money was not a factor in the
decision to forego college.
32. No one of the non-college men admitted to
the following factor as a component in the
decision-making process: "persons who do not
have a college education usually make the
better leaders.1 1
33. Preponderantly, college men cited the fol
lowing components as factors in the decision
to attend college: (a) family encouragement,
(b) scholastic ability, (c) a pronounced
dissatisfaction with present state of
knowledge, (d) the presumably better pay
accorded college graduates, (e) academic
preparation to meet the admission require
ments, and (f) financial help available from
the family. Still additional factors were
noted as characteristic of 50 percent or
more of the group (cf. Table 24).
34. A chi-square comparison of the yes-no
responses made by the non-college and the
college men to corresponding factors differ
entiated between the yes-no responses for
twelve out of twenty-two items at the .01
level of confidence (cf. Table 25).
35. The high school subject marks reported by
the college men were significantly higher
than those reported by the non-college men.
36. A sizable majority of the non-college men
(N = 36) and almost half of the college men
(N = 21) declared that the high school marks
received and reported did not give a fair
139
ploture of their ability. As between the
two groups, the preponderance of the non
college men was significant beyond the .01
level of confidence.
37. Significantly more non-college than college
men declared they could have done better in
school.
38. In marked degree, the college men had
decided in junior high school or earlier to
attend college.
39* The non-college men with greater frequency
postponed the decision not to attend until
the twelfth grade or until the summer
following high school graduation.
40. In significantly greater numbers, the non
college men said they had received infor
mation about college fees and expenses, and
junior colleges, while in high school.
41. In approximately equal numbers, teachers
and counselors shared the responsibility of
college advisement. However, about half of
'V
the group, non-college and college, were not
advised by teachers or counselors that they
had college ability.
42. Non-college and college men differed in
140
their self-estimate of ability to do college
work. College men tended to rate themselves
higher. However, the difference between the
two groups were not statistically signifi
cant.
CHAPTER V
FAMILY BACKGROUND AND VALUES
The present chapter is a continuation of the
findings which grew out of the study of non-college and
college, men of selected ability level. Previously,
Chapter IV focused attention on those findings pertinent
to life goals and values. Chapter V is concerned more
particularly with responses keyed to home background and
family relationships. Presumably, the kind of role one
may play in life begins to emerge during the childhood
within the home.
Socio-economic data are presented as an intro
duction to the chapter and serve as a frame of reference
for reporting career aspiration. In addition to social
class status, family characteristics of size and ethnic
origin are discussed.
The chapter concludes with findings relevant to
ongoing personal responsibilities in relation to family
and a forward look at the sort of home and family the
subject would like to have, support, and sustain.
141
Socio-economic Status
A number of studies have disclosed a positive
relationship between college attendance and certain
indices of social status such as father's income, occu
pation or education (21) (36) (3S). For purposes of the
present investigation, an index comprised of four status
characteristics was computed for each subject in the
sample. The four characteristics of status were:
(1) father's occupation, (2) source of father's income,
(3) house type, and (4) dwelling area. Warner's pro
cedures were followed in rating these characteristics
and in computing the composite index (cf. p. 45).
Tables 33 and 34 clarify the socio-economic
status of the families of the non-college and college
men. Table 35 is a summary by social class of aspiration
level.
The index of status characteristics (I.S.C.).—
Table 33 presents a comparison of the index of status
characteristics for the fathers of the non-college and
college men. In reading the table, it should be
remembered that the lower the rating, the higher the
status; conversely, the higher ratings denote lower class
positions.
The obtained difference of eight points between
the two means is highly significant as 3hown by the
143
TABLE 33
INDEX OF STATUS CHARACTERISTICS (i.S.C.) RATINGS
FOR FATHERS OF NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE
MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Index of Status Characteristics Ratings
Range
(1)
M
(2)
SD
(3)
°k
(4)
°f>iff
(5)
CR
(6)
Fathers of:
Non-college men 26-78 52 11. 1.6
College men 24-62 44 10.
1.5
2.19 3.65*
a _ _
Significant at the .03 level of confidence.
144
TABLE 34 ,
SOCIAL CLASS OP FATHERS OF NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE
MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Fathers
of Non- . of
college Men College Men
Social Class
(1)
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
(4)
Per
cent
age
(5)
Upper Upper (UU) • • • • • • • •
Lower Upper (LU) )
Upper Middle (UM) )
• • • • 2 4
7
14
15 30
Lower Middle (LM) 20 40
19 38
Upper Lower (UL) 38 l4 28
Lower Lower (LL) 4 8 • • • •
aThe descriptive equivalent
characteristics ratings (41:127).
for the index of status
v
Percentage difference for 1 a combined classification of LU
and UM is significant at the .05 level of confidence and beyond.
145
TABLE 35
PROJECTED ATTAINMENT FIFTEEN YEARS AHEAD BY LADDER RUNG AND
SOCIAL CLASS EQUIVALENT FOR NON-COLLEGE AND
COLLEGE MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Average Placement on the Ladder
Non-college:
College;
7.0
• •
7.5
8.4
7.6
7.4
8 . 1
8.5
• •
8.5
Social Class Equivalents
Rung L L
84-67
U L
66-54
L M
53-38
U M
37-25
U
24-18
Row
Totals
9
1 NC
9 C
5 NC
5 c
9 NC
8 c
3 NC
1 C 23 c
18 NC
8
1 NC
2 C
8 NC
4 c
2 NC
6 C
2 NC
1 C 13 C
13 NC
7
1 NC
2 C
1 NC
5 c
3 NC
1 C
2 NC
8 C
7 NC
6 1 C
3 NC
4 C
2 NC
5 c
5 NC
5 1 C
3 NC
1 C
3 NC
4
1 NC 2 NC
0 C
3 NC
Column
Totals
0 c
4 NC
14 C
19 NC
19 C
19 NC8 ,
15 C
7 NC
2 C
0 NC
Q ,
One non-college man, Lower Middle Class, refused to esti
mate placement on the ladder and is not included in the table.
146
critical ratio of 3.65. A difference as large as the one
found would be unlikely to occur on the basis of chance
variations in the selection of the two groups and the
difference between the two means is significant with
respect to the variable of social class. The two groups,
non-college and college, in this instance represent two
different populations.
Based on the composite index, a distribution of
the fathers by social class equivalents is shown in
Table 34. Apparently, there is a tendency for the
fathers of the college men to rate at the higher social
class levels. For example, 34 percent of the fathers of
college men were in the Upper or Upper Middle social
class as compared with 14 percent of the fathers of non
college men; and although the fathers of the two groups
numbered about the same for the Lower Middle classifi
cation, the fathers of the college men were exceeded in
the Upper Lower and Lower Lower classification in a
ratio of 3 to 2. The percentage difference in the first
instance goes beyond the .05 level of confidence. With
respect to the combined Upper Lower and Lower Lower
classifications, it approaches the .05 level.
Aspiration by social class.— It will be recalled
that a miniature ladder was used by the interviewer to
obtain from each subject an estimate of his projected
147
attainment fifteen years ahead (cf. p. 49). The subject
was asked: "Where do you think you’ll be on the ladder
fifteen years from now?" The responses to this question
are plotted In Table 35 ty ladder rung and social class.
The data in Table 35 disclose certain rela
tionships between level of aspiration, or attainment as
projected, and the social class equivalents for 1.3.C.
ratings. For example, it is of interest to note that
there are no college men from the Lower Lower social
class (LL); and at the opposite extreme, no non-college
men in the Upper social class ( u ) .
There appears to be considerable upward
aspiration on the part of both non-college and college
men with most of them concentrated on the uppermost
rungs of the ladder, namely, Rungs 7, 8, and 9. Also,
the two groups distribute themselves about equally by
ladder rung from top rung down to and including Rung 6
(see Row Totals).
The two lower rungs, however, are occupied
almost exclusively by non-college men. This circum
stance could be a function of no career expectation,
for three out of the six non-college men at this level
had no career plans. It might also be ascribed to early
family responsibilities, for two of the six were already
married and supporting a wife and one or more children.
148
As for the sixth man, admittedly he was aiming low. In
his own words: "I have no ambition. I don’t like
responsibility. I shed responsibility."
Average placement on the ladder suggests that
the men of the two groups, by social class, are more
alike than different in their aspirations. The average
placement for the men in the Upper Lower social class
(UL) shows a difference of about one rung in favor of
the college men. This may be Interpreted to mean a
somewhat greater striving on the part of the college men
of the Upper Lower class for upward mobility.
As might be expected, nearly all of the men in
the Upper and Upper Middle social classes have placed
themselves at the top of the ladder on Rung 9 or 8.
Probably, these men can afford to be more certain of
future attainment.
Other Family Characteristics
Ethnic background.— Fifteen non-college (30
percent) and 14 college men (28 percent) came from
families Identifiably ethnic In terms of foreign birth
of one or both parents. The country of origin for these
parents Is shown in Table 36.
The foreign-born parents of the fifteen non
college men included nine fathers and eleven mothers.
In addition, both parents of one non-college man, though
149
TABLE 36
NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OP SUBJECTS WITH ONE OR
BOTH PARENTS FOREIGN BORN
Non
college Men College Men
Birthplace
of Parent Per Per-
Num cent Num- cent-
ber age ber age
(1)
(2) (3) (4) (5)
Austria 1 2 • • ♦ •
Belgium ♦ • • • 1 2
Canada
3
6
3
6
England 2 4 • « • •
Germany 2 4 1 2
Hawaii8 , • • • • 1 2
Italy • • • • 2 4
Japan 2 4 2 4
Korea 1 2 • • • •
Mexico 1 2 • • • •
Poland 1 2 • • • •
Russia 1 2 4 8
Sicily 1 2 • « • •
b
Native bora
35 TO 36 . 72
Hawaii is listed apart from native born due to the fact
that it was still a dependency at the time of the parent's birth.
b
Includes one Negro in the .non-college group.
150
native-born, were Negro. The foreign-born parents of the
fourteen college men included eleven fathers and six
mothers.
Family size and stability.— The families of the
non-college men were larger than those of the college
men. The number of children in the families of the non
college men ranged from 1 to 13 as compared with a range
of 1 to 5 for the families of the college men. On the
average, there were 3 children in a non-college family
as compared with 2 children in a college family. The
obtained difference between the means of the two sub
samples was significantly beyond the .01 level of con
fidence as determined by the critical ratio of the
difference between the means to the standard error of
this difference (Table 37). Also significant was the
observed fact that more non-college than college men
came from broken homes (Table 38)•
As 3hown in Table 39, about half of the men in
both groups, non-college and college, were first-born
sons. As a matter of interest, seven non-college and
six college men who were first-born sons were the only
child of the parents.
College attendance by brother, sister, or best
friend.— Thirty-eight non-college (76 percent) and
151
TABLE 37
SIZE OF FAMELY FOR NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE
MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Number of Children in Family
Range Mean SD ®Diff CR
(1)
(2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
Families of:
Non-college men
1-13 3.0 2 .29
• 32 3.l6a
College men
1-5
2.4 1 .14
Significant beyond the .01 level of confidence.
152
TABLE 38
NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF SUBJECTS WITH
DIVORCED OR DECEASED PARENTS
-
Non
college Men College Men
Parent(s)
Num
Per
cent Num
Per
cent
ber age ber age
(1)
(2) (3)
(M
(5)
> a
Divorced ) 10 20 1 2
)
Deceased ) h 8
3
*
6
a
Percentage difference combined for the two categories is
significant at the .01 level of confidence.
153
TABLE 39
ORDER OF BIRTH FOR NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE
MEIN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Number
Order
of Birth
(1)
1st 26 27
2nd 17 21
3rd k 1
4th . . . .
5th 2 1
6th » • • •
13th 1
Non
college Men College Men
(2) (3)
154
thirty-two college men (64 percent) reported that no
brothers or sisters had attended college (Table 40).
However, It should be remembered that slightly more
than half of each group of subjects was comprised of
first-born sons who would themselves be the first among
the siblings to attend college (cf. Table 39). The
percentage difference In this Instance was not signif
icant.
Of the college men reporting no brothers or
sisters in attendance, twenty-four out of thirty-two
were first-born sons and were setting the precedent of
college attendance for the immediate family. Twenty-six
of the thirty-eight non-college men who reported no
brothers or sisters in college were likewise first-born
sons.
The presence of a best i*riend at college appears
to be more of an Indicator of college or non-college
attendance than does the example of brother or sister.
Only six college men (12 percent) reported that their
best friend was not In college. This figure compares
with twenty-six non-college men (52 percent) who
reported that their best friend was not attending college
(Table 4l). The significance of the percentage differ
ence in this instance exceeded the .01 level of con
fidence.
155
TABLE 40
HUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF SUBJECTS WITH BROTHER
OR SISTER WHO ATTENDED COLLEGE
Yes No
Per- Per-
Num- cent- Num- cent-
ber age ber age
( 1 ) ( 2 ) ( 3 ) fr)
Non-college men 12 2^ 38 76
College men IB 36 32 6^
TABLE 41
NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF SUBJECTS WITH BEST
FRIEND WHO ATTENDED COLLEGE
Yes No
Don't
Know
No Best
Friend
Per- Per- Per-. Per-
Num- cent- Num- cent- Num- cent- Num- cent-
ber age ber age ber age ber age
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
Non-college mena 20 40b 26 52
cu
• • • •
College men 42 84 6 12 • * • • 2 4
a
Two non-college men were not asked this question.
b
Percentage difference between the two groups exceeds the
.01 level of confidence.
157
Parent-son relationships.— College men were more
prone than the non-college men to discuss problems and
plans with their parents as may be noted in Table 42.
The difference in general was highly significant at the
.01 level of confidence.
On specifics, that is, "plans for the future"
and "your troubles," the differences were significant at
the .05 level which makes it probable that the two sub
samples represent two different populations with respect
to parent-son relationships.
In one respect, however, the two groups did
agree and that was in respect to reporting to parents
their success and good fortune, a behavior which is
characteristic of most individuals.
For the most part, non-college and college men
were satisfied with the parental advice they were
receiving (Table 43). In reply to the question, "What
sort of things do you wish you could get more help on
from your parents?" forty non-college and thirty-seven
college men reported that they knew of no additional
areas in which they would like to receive more help.
However, it should be noted that five college
men, as in contrast to none of the non-college men,
reported that their parents were not qualified to help
them in areas where they needed advice and counsel. The
158
TABLE k2
THE PABENT AS CONFIDANT AND ADVISER TO
NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE MEN
Non
college Men College Men
Per Per Per- Per
Num cent Num cent Num- cent- Num cent
ber age ber age ber age ber age
(1)
(2) (3) w
(5) (6) (T) (8)
Do you talk,
over with your
parents things
that bother
you?
25
a
50
25
50 38 76 12 2 k
Your plans for
the future? 1*0 00
°o*
10 20
1+7 9^ 3
6
Your troubles? 26 52* 2 k 1+8 38 7 6 12 2 k
Your successes?
(". . . some
thing good that
happens to
you.") 1+8 96 2 k 90 5
10
a ,
Percentage difference is significant at the .01 level of
confidence.
b
Significant at the .05 level of confidence.
159
TABLE * 4 - 3
THE KINDS OP ADDITIONAL HELP DESIRED OP PARENTS AS REPORTED BY
NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE MEN
Kinds of Help
Non-
college Men College Men
(1)
Num
ber
(2)
Per-
- cent-
age
(3)
Num
ber
(M
Per
cent
age
(5)
Just guidance
5
10 k 8
Finances
5
10 2 k
Marriage • • • • 2 k
Parents not qualified
in areas where I need
help • * • •
5
ioa
Don't know; nothing
more; I don't want
advice ko 80
37 7^
a
Percentage difference is significant at the .05 level of
confidence.
l6o
percentage difference between the non-college and college
men was, in this instance, significant at the .05 level
of confidence, suggesting a greater awareness on the
part of the college men of personal needs and individual
problems.
Nonetheless, the college men and parents were
apparently communicating within a broader area of agree
ment and understanding than were the non-college men and
their parents. This finding is disclosed by the data
presented in Table 44. The percentage differences with
respect to parent-son understanding, distinguished
between the non-college and college men, at the .01 level
of confidence.
Marriage and family responsibility.— Data on
marital status and family residence are shown in Table
45. Eight non-college as compared with one college man
had married since graduation from high school, a per
centage difference which distinguished between the two
groups at the .01 level of confidence. And, six of the
non-college men, as compared with the one college man,
were financially responsible for one or more dependents,
a significant difference at the .05 level.
More college than non-college men continued to
live with their parents and in this instance, too, the
difference between the response percentages of the two
161
TABLE
PARENTAL UNDERSTANDING AS REPORTED BY
NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE MEN
Non- a
college Men College Men
Yes No Yes No
Per Per Per Per
Num cent Num cent Num cent Num cent
ber age ber age ber age ber age
(1) (2) (3) (M (5) (6) (T) (8)
Do you think your
folks understand
"young people? 32 17 3^
hk 88 6 12
Do you and your
parents generally
see things the
same way?
27 5^
22 hh hi Sh
3
6
One non-college man lost both parents in early childhood
and could not answer this question.
Percentage difference is significant beyond the .01 level of
confidence
162
TABLE ^5
MARITAL STATUS AMD RESIDENCE OF NON-COLLEGE AMD COLLEGE MM
TWO YEARS AFTER HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION
Married Dependent(s)
Living with
Parents
Per- Per Per
Num- cent- Hum cent Num cent
ber age
(1) (2)
ber
(3)
age
(*0
ber
(5)
age
(6)
Non-college men 8 l6a 6b c 12 38 76
College men 1 2 1 2 k6 92
a
Percentage difference is significant at the .01 level of
confidence.
b
Significant at the .05 level of confidence.
c
The wives of two non-college men were employed.
163
groups may not be attributed to chance variations in
sampling; the difference is significant.
On the average, non-college men said they would
like to be twenty-three years of age when they married
whereas college men preferred to wait almost two more
years (Table 46). The value of the critical ratio of
the difference between the two means to the standard
error of this difference disclosed a significant differ
ence between the two groups respecting the preferred age
to marry. An Important reason for the delay, as cited
by the college men, was the desire to complete their
schooling, a difference significant at the .01 level of
confidence (Table 47).
Projection of Own Family Values
The subjects of the sample were asked to give
some thought to the kind of home and family they would
like to have. Formulated as an open-end, lead question,
this inquiry was pursued further through the use of
related primers which were phrased to help the subject
recognize and discuss his value orientations towards
home, family relationships, and father's role. The
findings which serve to project the subject'3 own family
values are reviewed in a set of four tables, Tables 48,
49, 50, and 51.
164
TABLE k6
PREFERRED AGE FOR MARRIAGE AS CITED BY THE NON-COLLEGE AND
COLLEGE MEN OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Preferred Age for Marriage
Ran^e Mean SD
(2) (3)
M Diff
00 (5)
CR
(6)
Non-college men 18-30 23.0 2.8 Ai
2^.6
.55 2.9
College men 18-30 2.6
• 37
Significant beyond the .01 level of confidence.
TABLE * 4 - 7
REASONS CITED BY NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE MEN
AS TO PREFERRED AGE FOR MARRIAGE
Reasons
(1)
Non-
college Men
Per-
Num- cent-
ber age
(2) 13)
College Men
Per-
Num- cent-
ber age
00 (5)
I'll be a little more settled, in a
position to assume responsibilities,
more mature and ready for it 32 6 k
27
5k
I do want to finish school 10 20a 26 52
I would like to get certain things
done first (other than school)
9
18 k 8
I'm engaged and plan to marry then
5
10
3
6
I want to marry fairly young, to
share life with my wife 2 k • • • •
Can’t say; or other 2 k k 8
Married 8 l6a 1 2
a
Percentage difference is significant at the .01 level of
confidence.
165
TABLE 48
PROJECTION OF FAMILY VALUES IN RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION:
"WHAT SORT OF HOME AND FAMILY HAVE YOU THOUGHT
YOU WOULD LIKE TO HAVE?"
Categories
Non
college Men College Men
Per- Per-
Num- cent- Num- cent-
ber age ber age
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
I would like to have:
Children 30 60
3T 74
My own home;
a house of my own 24 48
17 34
Close harmonious
family relationships
and mutual interests
15 30 9
18
A home just like I've
grown up in 6 12
13
26
A better family than
the one I’ve grown
up in « • • « 1 2
Steady job and steady
income; not so poor
we have to be -
concerned with
necessities 8 l£
3
6
166
TABLE kQ--Continued
Categories
Non
college Men College Men
(1)
Num
ber
(2)
Per
cent
age
(3)
Num
ber
00
Per
cent
age
(5)
Democratic family
organization; informal • • • • 10 20a
Wife with mutual
interests
3
6 6 12
I haven’t thought
about it; I don't
know
3
6
3
6
Other
3
6 1 2
S t
Percentage difference is
confidence.
significant at the .01 level of
167
TABLE k9
PROJECTION OF FAMILY VALUES IN RESPONSE TO THE
QUESTION: "WHAT DO YOU THINK A FATHER
SHOULD BE LIKE?"
Non-
college Men College Men
Categories
Per- Per-
Num- cent- Num- cent-
ber age her age
(1)
(2) (3)
W (5)
The father should:
Understand the chil
dren; he a companion,
adviser, guide; strong,
masculine, stem, hut
tender and understand
ing 30 60 36 72
Be the man of the
house, retaining the
upper hand in family
matters; a
disciplinarian 12 2 k 6 12
Earn the respect of
the family through
example and leader
ship 5 10a
Help educate the
children; instill
certain principles 3 6 ^ 8
Be the breadwinner
and provider * » - 8 11 22
168
TABLE ^9— Continued
Categories
Kon-
college Men College Men
(1)
Num
ber
(2)
Per-
- cent-
age
(3)
Num
ber
w
Per
cent
age
(5)
Be a father just
like my father
3
6 2 k
Permissive toward
children; rather
informal • • • •
3
6
On equal par with
wife 2 k 6 12
Other 6 12
3
6
S L
Percentage difference is significant at the .05 level of
confidence.
169
TABUS 50
PROJECTION OF FAMILY VALUES IN RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION: "ANY PAR
TICULAR IDEA ABOUT HOW YOU ARE GOING TO TREAT YOUR CHILDREN?"
Non
college Men College Men
Categories . ________________ _________________
Per- Per-
Num- cent- Num- cent-
ber age ber age
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
I shall (as a father):
Treat my children with
loving care, kindness,
understanding; provide
for them; care for
them when sick 23 46 l4 28
Be firm but fair and
just; treat them,
depending on the age
and the situation;
mostly lenient and
permissive; use a
little psychology 19 38 34 68
Be very strict. I
have no use for
psychology. I'll be ^
pretty tough 10 20 2 4
Treat them just like I
was brought up; same
as my father
7
14 28
170
TABLE 50— Continued
Categories
Non
college Men College Men
( 1 )
Num
ber
(2)
Per-
• cent-
age
( 3 )
Num
ber
(*)
Per
cent
age
( 5 )
Raise them to be re
spectful of adults
5
1 0 2 i f
Instill the idea of
being responsible to
yourself, making own
decisions i f 8 I f 8
Lead them and earn their
respect; show what's right
by action
5
1 0 1 2
Have to learn; I don't
know 2 I f 1 2
Other
7
I l f 1 2
a
Percentage difference is significant beyond the .01 level
of confidence.
b
Significant at the .05 level of confidence.
171
TABLE 51
PROJECTION OP FAMILY VALUES IN RESPONSE TO THE
QUESTION: "HOW WOULD YOU FEEL ABOUT
A SON OF YOURS GOING INTO YOUR
KIND OF WORK?"
Mentions
-
Categories
Non
college Men College Men
(D
Num
ber
(2)
Per-
- cent-
age
(3)
Num
ber
Per
cent
age
(5)
Fine, but his decision 28 56 32 6h
I would like it
13
26 18 36
I would not like it 6
a
12 • • • •
I don't know because I
haven't yet found my
field
3
6 • ♦ • •
a
Percentage difference
confidence.
is significant at the .05 level of
172
Desired home atmosphere.— Table 48 discloses the
kind of home and family the subjects, non-college and
college, would like to have. The values which emerged
from the responses were similar from group to group
except for one distinguishing difference, namely: college
men significantly outnumbered non-college men in their
expressed desire for a democratic family organization
and an informal, permissive home atmosphere. The differ
ence was significant at the .01 level of confidence.
Father's role: projected characteristics.— The
subject's construct of father's role emerges from the
data of Tables 49, 50, and 51. The data of Table 49
describe the father in a general way whereas the responses
noted in Table 50 picture the father as a parent. The
last table of the series on father's role, Table 51,
reveals more particularly the attitude of non-college
and college men towards expected occupation as perceived
in continuation through own son. At the same time, the
data of this table are indicative of the father's
expectations for the son.
The non-college and college men were more
similar than dissimilar in their projection of what a
father should be like. For example, both groups
emphasized the importance of understanding the children
and in the role of father, relating to them as
173
"companion, adviser and guide." This and additional
characteristics of father in general are set forth in
Table 49.
The one distinguishing difference noted in this
table would seem to indicate a somewhat greater concern
on the part of the non-college men to attain the "respect
of the family through example and leadership." It was
the impression of the investigator concerning this
particular response, and throughout the discussion of
projected family life, that it was of greater moment to
non-college than to college men to achieve recognition
and prestige in the home, possibly because there was
less likelihood, for them, of achieving personal status
beyond the confines of the home. It should be pointed
out that the non-college men (N = 5) who openly
expressed this sentiment expected to earn the family*s
respect; they did not demand it.
Father*s treatment of children.— Table 50
discloses a significant difference between the non
college and college men respecting proposed methods for
bringing up the children. A sizable number of men In
both groups reported they would treat their children
"with loving care, kindness and understanding," but the
non-college men significantly with greater frequency
than the college men indicated a disregard for modem
174
psychological theories of child-rearing and upbringing.
Their remarks were indicative of pronounced feeling on
this subject as for example:
"... I don't think I'd be easygoing."
"I'm going to be very strict . . . more of a
boss. ..."
"I'd just tell them what to do and they'd do
it."
"I'd probably treat 'em pretty rough because
I've been treated pretty rough."
"If they do wrong, give them a whack on the
tail."
"I tell you, I'd never use no psychology,
that’s for sure."
"Keep the little brats in line."
The expressed difference between the two groups
respecting the positive psychological approach was
significant at the .01 level of confidence in favor of
the college men. In respect to the strictly negative,
non-psychological approach, the difference was signif
icant at the .05 level.
Attitude towards son's adoption of father's
expected occupation.— Table 51 discloses that a majority
of the non-college and college men would approve of
having a son carry on in the occupation of the father.
However, the approval was customarily qualified by the
statement, "It's fine with-me, but it would be his
175
decision."
Six non-college men as compared with no college
men were against having a son in the same occupation.
The percentage difference between the two groups was
significant at the .05 level of confidence. Several
commented as follows:
"I don't advise it. Fruit packing might go out
any time in the next few years. Been a lot of
machines making packing easier. That way you
get paid less. Too many laborers in country
now.
"Actually, nothing wrong with type of work I do
now except it's drudgery, that's what it is . . .
It'd be alright to get some pocket money . . .
[but] he should be looking for something else."
"Not the work I have. I don't think It's the
kind of Job for a fellow who has any intuition
about himself at all. . . . It's Just a waste of
. . . I don't know what you'd call it. It needs
to be done, but anyone can do it."
Summary of the Chapter
A discussion of findings obtained through the
present investigation was continued in Chapter V, the
contents keyed more particularly to those findings
growing out of the family background and values of the
two subsamples. Socio-economic status of family was
established by means of an Index of status characteristics
and subject's aspiration with reference to social class
placement was defined. Additional characteristics of
family were Identified and discussed; as was also the
176
subject's projection of characteristic values into his
future family life.
The comparison of family background and values
of the two subsamples revealed certain differences
between the non-college and college men, some suggestive
as clues to distinctive influences and others statis
tically significant. In reference to large areas, the
findings on family were reported as follows.
Socio-economic Status
1. The difference between the means of the two
subsamples for the index of status charac
teristics ratings was significant at the
.03 level of confidence. Overall, fathers
of college men rated significantly higher on
the index.
2. Significantly more fathers of college than
of non-college men placed in the Upper
Middle and Lower Upper social classes.
3. No fathers of college men came from the
socio-economic background of the Lower Lower
social class; yet, four fathers of non
college men placed at this extreme. Con
versely, no fathers of non-college men
placed at the opposite extreme in the Upper
social class although two fathers of college
men were so classified.
However, average placement by social class
on a ladder of projected attainment suggested
that the non-college and college men were
more alike than different In their aspiration
to attain.
Other Family Characteristics
In respect to family size, the difference
between the means for the two subsamples
was significant at the .01 level of confi
dence. On the average, there were three
children in a non-college family as compared
with two children to a college family.
Significant was the observed fact that more
non-college than college men came from
broken homes.
With few exceptions, the best friends of
the college men were attending college; the
best friends of a majority of the non-college
men were not. The difference between the
two groups was statistically significant.
College men were more prone than the non
college men to discuss problems and plans
with their parents, a difference significant
at the .01 level of confidence.
9. College men noted that their parents were
not always qualified to help them in areas
where they needed advice and counsel. The
non-college men made no mention of a parental
limitation in this respect. The difference
was significant.
10. A greater degree of understanding prevailed
between the co-llege sons and parents than
between the non-college sons and their
parents. The difference was not due to
chance.
11. Significantly more non-college than college
men had married since graduation from high
school and were financially responsible for
one or more dependents.
12. More college men than non-college men
continued to live with their parents, a
distinguishing difference.
13* Non-college men chose to marry at an earlier
age than did the college men. The differ
ence between the means of the two subsamples
exceeded the .01 level of confidence.
College men indicated as reason for a delayed
marriage the desire to complete their
schooling prior to marriage.
Projection of Own Family Values
14. College men significantly outnumbered non-
college men in their expressed desire for a
democratic family organization and an
informal, permissive home atmosphere.
15. Non-college men, in the projected role of
father, expressed the desire to earn the
respect of the family through example and
leadership. College men did not mention
this characteristic. The difference was
1
significant.
16. The non-college men significantly in greater
frequency than the college men indicated a
disregard and contempt for psychological
theories of child-rearing and upbringing.
College men favored the psychological
approach in accord with developmental age.
17. Six non-college as compared with no college
men looked with disfavor upon the possibility
of a son’s entry into their line of work.
The dissatisfaction with their work, thus
expressed, was significant.
CHAPTER VI
SELF AND SCHOOL IN RETROSPECT
Chapter VI brings to a conclusion a series of
three consecutive chapters devoted to the findings of
the study. Prom the standpoint of content, it marks
also, the termination of the interview.
Two leading questions were used to conclude the
investigation. Each was introduced in a conversational
manner, as was by now customary, and 3tated as an
open-end, free response question. The interviewee was
invited, first, to reflect upon his attitude toward
self in relation to school, as it,was and now is.
Secondly, he was afforded the opportunity to comment in
a face-to-face situation upon the assistance he had
received from the school and to suggest improvements.
It was the impression of the investigator that
a culmination to the interview was achieved through
these two questions. They are restated below:
1. You’ve been out of high school for more than
a year. Soon it will be two years. If you could go back
180
181
to the beginning of high school and start over again, is
there anything you would do different?
2. What would you like for the high school to
do that it didn't do in your case?
Change in Relation to School
Looking back.— Non-college and college men
indicated they would.do some things differently if they
could go back to the beginning of high school and start
over again. Regrets mentioned in response to the lead
question are noted in Table 52.
However, with but one exception, the obtained
differences between the two groups may be attributed to
sampling fluctuations. The noted exception of signifi
cance pertained to an expressed regret on the part of
the non-college men that they had not taken or had
dropped the college preparatory course. Their desire
to change this situation as compared with the college
men was significant at the .05 level of confidence.
Response to primers.— When asked specifically,
in follow-up to the lead, if they would change their
high school major provided they could start high school
again, the difference between the non-college and college
men became markedly pronounced. The results in response
to thi3 and two additional primers are shown in Table 53.
182
TABLE 52
WHAT THE HON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE MEN WOULD DO- DIFFERENT
- * (Response to Lead. Question)
Non-
college men College Men
Per- Per
Num- cent- Num cent
ber age ber age
(1) (2) (3)
(*0
Study harder; try to take
school seriously; get the
best grades possible
31
62 22 kk
Keep my academic course;
take a college preparatory
course; take more academic
subjects 11
a
22
3
6
Take more active interest
in school; mingle more
socially; take more
interest in athletics '8 16 6 12
No change; mostly the same
7
14 16 32
Other
7
l l j -
5
10
a
Percentage difference is significant at the .05 level of
confidence.
TABLE 53
WHAT THE NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE MEN WOULD DO DIFFERENT
(Response-to Primers)
Non
college Men College Men
Yes No Yes No
Per- Per- Per- Per-
Num • cent- Num- cent- Num- cent- Num ■ cent
ber age ber age ber age ber age
(1)
(2) (3) W (5) (6) (T) (8)
Change my high school major 2k 26 52 k 8 k6 92
Work for better marks ^3 86a 7 1^- 31 62 19 38
Plan for, college instead
of a jobb 3^ 68 16 32 ' ... ..................
TABLE 53--Continued
Non
college Men College Men
Yes No Yes No
Per- Per- Per- Per-
Num - cent- Num-- cent- . Num • cent- Num - cent-
ber age her age ber age ber age
(1) (2) (3) (5) (6) (7) (8)
Plan for a job instead of
college0 0 0 50 iooa
a
Percentage difference is significant beyond the .01 level of confidence.
^Asked only of the non-college men.
c
Asked only of the college men.
184
185
Respecting each, the obtained difference was significant
beyond the .01 level of confidence.
Subjects Evaluation of the
High School Program
Meaning of the category "satisfied.1 1 — Table 54
sums up responses to the concluding question of the
interview which was: "what would you like for the_high
school to do that it didn't do in your case?" The
categorized data disclose one significant difference
between the non-college and college men and that was in
respect to satisfaction with school. This difference was
significant at the .05 level of confidence with more non
college than college men expressing satisfaction with
what the high school had done for them.
It was the observation of the investigator,
however, that the satisfaction as expressed by the non
college men was a peculiar kind of satisfaction, more
particularly a dissatisfaction with self rather than
with school. Some typical responses are quoted to
illustrate this point:
"if I lost out on anything, it was myself to
blame."
"It wasn't the high school. It was all my
fault. Wasn't anything more they could do."
"It's Just up to the guy himself."
186
TABLE 5^
DESIRED IMPROVEMENTS IN THE HIGH SCHOOL PROGRAM
AS CITED BY THE NON-COLLEGE AND COLLEGE MEN
OF SELECTED ABILITY LEVEL
Non-
college Men College Men
Desired
Improvement
Per- Per-
Num- cent- Num- cent-
ber age ber age
(1)
(2) (3)
(*) (5)
Improved instruction,
stiffer curriculum,
stricter program
29
58 28 56
More and better
counseling
IT 3k 20 ko
Purpose and a goal k 8 • • • %
Help with decisions
3
6 • • ♦ •
Satisfied; no suggestions 12
C V J
6 12
a
Percentage difference is significant at the .01 level of
confidence.
187
"My high school did for me hut I didn't do for
it. I didn't get out of what they gave me. The
high school did a good Job. It's Just that I
didn't do the Job I should have done."
"I guess they did all they could. I Just didn't
do what I should have done. . . . It wasn't really
the school. I Just had too many other things I
was doin'. Just raessln' around."
"The opportunities were there. I Just didn't take
advantage of them."
"I don't believe the high 3chool did anything
wrong. . . . If I had worked harder* the high
school would have supported me...."
"Anything that could be wrong would be my fault for
not doing what I shoulda done. Opportunity was
there and I didn't follow through with It.
The non-college individual who responded "it's
Just up to the guy himself" asked for the improvement
"purpose and a goal" and was included in that category.
Placed also in the category "improved instruction" was
the respondent who stated "the opportunities were there.
I Just didn't take advantage of them."
Improved Instruction .— In regard to desired
improvements for the educational program, instruction
and curriculum received the greatest number of mentions
from the non-college and college men. Table 5^ shows no
appreciable difference, however, between the percentages
of the two groups reporting this need for improvement.
Broadly speaking, the two groups were agreed
also on their Interpretation of this category; that is,
188
both groups spoke for a " stiffer curriculum1 1 and a
stricter program.1 1 But as might be expected, certain
distinctions appeared In the comments to suggest that
the end objective of the college men was not that of
the non-college men; and furthermore, that the means
to attainment were different for the two groups.
For example, the college men wanted the high
school to offer advanced studies on a college level to
get them ready for college work. They asked for more
physics, chemistry, and advanced mathematics. These
courses, they said, were too easy; they should pose
"stiffer problems1 ' and require "more homework." "Extra
and higher education1 1 should be provided for those who
could take care of it; and special classes should be
provided for the college bound.
The non-college men on the other hand, expressed
their desire for improved instruction as a need for
"better teachers," "more time for study at school" and
"more time for the instructor instructing the pupil."
They wanted supervised study as a part of their daily
schedule to include the personal help and encouragement
of a teacher who was interested in them. They said also
that the school should "stress the importance of home
work1 1 and "impress on students the importance of
studying.1 1
189
The men of the non-college group recommended
discipline and administrative reorganization as important
means to the desired outcome. As one of them said:
I would like high school to be eight hours a day
and six days a week. In this eight hours a day
to provide study time and a well-rounded educa
tion and more personal help. . . . At high school
age, it should be on a mandatory basis. Rod is
necessary in many cases. High school is too
lenient. Too lenient with me. I wish someone
had cracked down on me. Someone should have.
More and better counseling.— For both non-college
and college men, more and better counseling meant the
opportunity to confer with a qualified counselor
regarding individual needs and self-development. Insofar
as the non-college men were concerned, it meant, also,
some attention to educational opportunities beyond high
school, especially to available classes, the nature of
course content, and the kinds of schools at the post-high
school level.
Sample comments from the non-college men in
respect to more and better counseling are quoted as
follows:
"Counseling was inadequate, especially in my
senior year. Very few counselors for the number
of people in our class. And to talk to a coun
selor it was pretty hard because they were
always busy and then, depending on the mood they
were in . . ."
"I didn’t see him [i.e., the counselor], till I
was in the twelfth grade. They could have
advised me sooner."
190
"Trained counselors are needed. Most of them
are teachers. They don't know what they are
doing. ..."
The college men offered their interpretation of
more and better counseling as noted in the following
comments:
"Lot of counselors too far away from situation
[i.e., college] to realize. College situation
changing fast now."
"Counseling in vocations is highly important.
Was not provided."
"Counseling I lacked the most. If honest with
ourselves, we know some teachers are not com
petent to give the counseling needed."
"Counseling service should be improved. Help
people out that are either going into jobs after
high school or to college. More emphasis
should be put on this. Should be almost on
individual basis for your certain type of need.
I was not called into counselor's office until
last semester of my eleventh year as far as
counseling work was done. If I had not known
what I wanted to do, It would have been too late
by this time to start."
"Peel when a student comes into high school he
should be talked to, to see what his plans are
for his future, and a record . . . kept on
him. One more time In tenth grade year, call
him in and check on him; make sure his grades
are going along well for his chosen vocation . . .
and see If . . . any change. During the
eleventh grade year . . . three or four times
during the year. . . . In senior year, . . .
seven or eight times. . . ."
Summary of the Chapter
The discussion of Chapter VI considered the
responses of the non-college and college men to the
191
concluding questions of the interview. Two related
questions encouraged the subject to reflect upon the
relationship between self and school as viewed in retro=-
spect.
Analysis of the data revealed several trends with
respect to differences between the distributions of the
responses of the two subsamples. In significantly
greater numbers, more non-college than college men:
1. Regretted that they had not taken the college
preparatory course in high school; or, that
they had dropped it at some point in the high
school career. (.05 level of confidence)
2. Would change their high school major. (.01)
3. Would work for better marks. (.01)
4. Would plan for college Instead of a job.
(.01)
5. Were satisfied with what the high school had
done for them. (.05 level of confidence)
In respect to the last-named difference of
significance, sample comments were quoted from the non
college men to support the observation of the Investi
gator that the satisfaction with school, as expressed by
’ A.
the non-college men, was substantially and at the same
time an acknowledgement -of dissatisfaction with self.
Overall, however, a majority of both groups,
non-college and college, expressed a somewhat pronounced
dissatisfaction with the high Bchool program.
Improvements were specified for curriculum, instruction,
counseling, and administrative organization. In the
area of discontent, no significant differences were
noted.
CHAPTER VII
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter offers in summation a review of the
investigation. A broad synthesis of findings leads to
conclusions and recommendations.
A Review of the Investigation
The problem.— It was the purpose of this study
to discover the personal and social variables, the
circumstances and conditions which appeared to be
operative in the decision of qualified high school
graduates not to attend college. The research was
designed as a comparative investigation to explore the
dimensions of the problem. An exploratory type of
research, the Inquiry did not attempt to establish causal
relationships:
The central problem of the study was stated in
the form of two contrasting questions.
1. What were, the factors related to the decision
of qualified high school graduates not to
193
194
attend college?
2. What were the factors related to the decision
of a comparable sample of qualified high
school graduates to attend college?
The sample.— One hundred male high school grad
uates who qualified for college work in terms of
specified criteria were subjects for the study. Half of
them were enrolled in college full time; the remainder,
though qualified, were non-college enrollees. Originally
these men were among the respondents to a follow-up
survey of a sampling of all high school graduates, men
and women, of a city school system.
The basis of selection for purposes of the study
was one, or both, of two criteria, namely, an IQ of 110
or higher or placement in the upper quartile of achieve
ment with reference to national norms on a battery of
achievement tests.
The procedure.— The data we^e obtained through
individual interviews, tape-recorded. Subsequently, the
responses of each subject were transcribed to an inter
view schedule for content analysis and coding.
Various devices amenable to statistical treatment
were built into the interview guide. These included a
set of work satisfactions on cards which were ranked by
195
the subject from least to most preferred; a number of
self-evaluative rating scales reproduced on cards; two
corresponding checklists of possible factors relating
to college or non-college decision; and a miniature
ladder to measure goal-striving and level of aspiration.
The concept of self-anchoring scaling was
explained as an important aspect of the interview pro
cedure.
Treatment of the data.— The statistical treatment
accorded the data involved the U3e of varied techniques,
each selected for its practical and particular merit in
relation to the data to be analyzed.
Analysis of differences between the non-college
and college men involved the use on varying occasions
of the chi-square test, the critical ratio, the pooled
critical ratio formula; and the application of the
customary measures of central tendency and variability,
such as the mean, median, the standard deviation and
the quartile deviation.
Additionally, an index of status characteristics
computed for each subject was translated into a social
class position through the use of a conversion table of
social class equivalents (cf. 41:127)* Selected data
were then examined in reference to the distribution by
social class placement of the two subsamples, non-college
196
and college.
A Synthesis of the Findings
It was previously suggested that a preference of
able high school graduates for non-college attendance
may be a function of the Individual's aptitude, Interests
and goal expectations; his family background and Intra-
family relationships; his school experiences and personal
adjustment; or possibly deeper psychological motives.
The findings were reported by such large areas
in reference to the concepts which gave purpose to the
study. Chapter IV discussed on the behalf of subjects
their goals and values, personal strivings and ambitions.
Chapter V considered the findings based on family back
ground and parent-son relationships. Chapter VI
concluded a series of three chapters on findings with a
review of the subject's attitude, In retrospect, towards
the school and its program.
A summary of the findings of each of these three
chapters is presented successively in the sections
which follow. Each section represents a synthesis of
specific findings reported in one of the aforementioned
chapters.
Findings related to life goals and values.— The
findings growing out of the subject's value system
197
derived from the following aspects of the investigation:
(l) father's occupation, (2) son's educational objec
tives, (3) subject's postulation of the best possible
life, (4) career expectation, (5) preferred work satis
factions, and (6) the decision to attend or not to
attend college. Findings covering these aspects of the
inquiry have been summarized below.
Father's Occupation and
Occupational Values
1. As reported by their sons, the fathers of
non-college men, in contrast with the fathers
of college men, were less satisfied with
their occupation, and in significantly
greater numbers, stressed security as a com
ponent of the "good Job." This group of
fathers outnumbered the college fathers
significantly in the skilled workers cate
gory.
Son's Educational Plans and
Objectives
2. In greater numbers, the fathers and mothers
of non-college men, in contrast to the
parents of college men, had terminated their
education at the junior high school level or
earlier. Additionally, the difference in
mean years of completed schooling for the
mothers of the two groups was highly signifi
cant, this difference, again, in the same
direction.
A large percentage of non-college sons did
not aspire to further education or did not
know what kind of additional education they
might undertake, if any.
The non-college men were less inclined than
the college men to regard higher education
as preparation for a career and their edu
cational aims were correspondingly lower.
In further contrast to the college men, they
did not look upon additional education as a
means to "more opportunity and choice" or as
"a chance to use ideas" and "cultivate a
pure interest."
With respect to education beyond the high
school level, the educational interests of
the non-college men were focused more partic
ularly upon specific courses offered by the
adult school or junior college.
Among the fathers of the non-college men,
only one father had completed college. In
contrast, eight fathers of college sons had
completed college. There was a similar
distinction in the same direction, likewise
significant-, between the mothers of non
college men and the mothers of college men.
The Best Possible Life and
Projected Attainment
In similar terms, non-college and college
men described the best possible life as
comprised of financial security, a family,
time for one's interests, work in one's
chosen field, a nice home, and a good edu
cation. But, to a greater extent, the
college men were looking for "peace,
happiness, and harmony"; "recognition and
social position"; and "making a social con
tribution. "
Concerning the opposite extreme of a
continuum, the two groups agreed, also, in
their picture of the worst possible life
which they defined as a condition of ongoing
uncertainty and insecurity accompanied by an
unsatisfactory work situation.
Again, the two groups, non-college and
college, did not differ significantly in
200
respect to advancement on a ladder of
attainment. All aspired to climb and no one
anticipated any regression in the years
ahead.
Career Expectation, Consultation
and Advice
10. The career expectations of both non-college
and college men exceeded substantially the
occupational level of their fathers; and
while a large segment of each of the two
subsamples expected to pursue a professional
career, the college men held to this expec
tation in significantly greater numbers.
11. The non-college sons of fathers in semi
skilled or skilled occupations expected to
move out of the father's occupational
classification. The college sons of fathers
in the clerical-sales occupations were
likewise disinclined to follow in the
father's footsteps.
12. It was found that some of the non-college
men, but no college men, did expect to work
at a skilled occupation as a life-time
pursuit.
13* Significantly, more of the non-college than
201
the college men reported no career expec
tation .
14. Within the same occupational grouping of
expected occupations, non-college and
college men were observed to differ in
respect to their characterization of the
best possible life. For example, in the
professional-semi-professional category,
non-coliege men mentioned less frequently
than college men, the components of "peace
and happiness," "recognition and social
position," and "making a social contribu
tion. " Again, within the managerial
grouping, non-college men gave significantly
less emphasis to travel and made no mention
of a desire to make a social contribution.
15. Parents of both groups, non-college and
college, as reported by their sons, were
apprised of the son's career plans and not
averse to them.
16. More often for college than for non-college
men, the teacher or counselor was the source
of career advice.
Preferred Work Satisfactions
17.
The non-college men prized most highly as a
202
desired work satisfaction the "opportunity
to he creative"; college men gave first
place to "nature of the work."
18. Both groups placed a low value on the two
work satisfactions "managing and directing"
and "large responsibilities" which they
ranked between 13 and 14 on a scale of
nineteen positions. In agreement, they cited
as least preferred satisfaction "it provides
a living." Next to this and not quite at
the bottom of the scale was the work satis
faction "familiar, easy work."
19. The "opportunity to learn new skills" was of
greater importance to the non-college than
to the college men.
The Decision to Attend or
Not to Attend College
20. In respect to the decision not to attend
college, more than half of the non-college
men affirmed that "success in life depends
on ability and effort" and declared this
belief was a factor in their decision.
Additionally, they cited as factors of about
the same importance these two: "I could get
a good job without a college education" and
203
"life can be ju3t as happy and satisfying
without a college education."
,21. Preponderantly, college men cited the
• v
following components as factors .in the
decision to attend college: family
encouragement, scholastic ability, a dis
satisfaction with present state of knowledge,
the presumably better pay accorded college
graduates, academic preparation to meet the
admission requirements, and financial help
from the family.
22. A chi-square comparison of the yes-no
responses made by the non-college and college
men to corresponding factors differentiated
between the yes-no responses for 12 out of
22 items at the .01 level of confidence.
Additional items were significant at the
.02 and .05 levels of confidence.
23. For the college men, the chi-square test
confirmed that the following factors were
definitely operative in the decision to
attend college: family encouragement,
scholastic ability, the presumably better
pay accorded college graduates, a high school
major which prepared for college, financial
204
help from the family, and the ability to
afford college.
24. For the non-college men, the yes-no
responses were made to corresponding items
stated negatively; and although the double
negative of the response may not be inter
preted as an affirmative, it does suggest
for the most part that
a. The families of non-college men did not
discourage them from attending college.
b. Non-college men believed they had the
ability to do college work.
c. In the opinion of the non-college men,
skilled laborers do not get paid as
much as most college graduates; or con
versely, college graduates do get jobs
with better pay.
d. The high school major did prepare the
non-college men for college; or at
least, it was not a factor in the
decision not to attend college.
e. The families of non-college men did not
need their financial assistance.
f. The non-college men could afford to
attend college.
205
g. High school subject marks were not too
low; or at least, they were not a
deterring factor.
h. Some non-college men may like to study;
at least, the dislike of study was not
a deterring factor.
1. In the opinion of the non-college men,
persons with a college education usually
make better leaders.
25. Significantly more non-college than college
men declared that the marks they received
in high school did not give an accurate
picture of their ability and that they could
have done better. The high school subject
marks reported by college men were signifi
cantly higher than those reported by non
college men. However, the two groups did
not differ appreciably in their average
self-estimate3 of ability to do college
work.
26. In significantly greater numbers, the non
college men said they had received informa
tion about college fees and expenses, and
about Junior colleges, while in high school.
27. In about equal numbers, teachers and
counselors shared the responsibility of
college advisement. However, it was noted
that about half of each group, non-college
and college, were not advised by teachers
or counselors that they had college ability.
28. In marked degree, the college men had
decided in junior high school or earlier to
attend college. The non-college men
delayed their decision until the senior
year of high school or until the summer
following high school graduation.
Findings related to family background and
values.— The findings growing out of family background
and values were keyed to: (l) the socio-economic status
of the family, (2) certain additional characteristics
of the family, and (3) the subject’s projection of
values for his own family. In summary, these findings
were as follows.
Socio-economic Status
1. The fathers of non-college men rated signifi
cantly lower on the index of status charac
teristics than the fathers of college men.
This difference between the two subsamples
was significant at the .03 level of
confidence. Significantly more fathers of
college men placed in the Lower Upper and
Upper Middle social classes than did the
i
fathers of non-college men.
Respecting the two extremes of social class,
that is, the Lower Lower and the Upper
social classes, it was noted that four
fathers of the non-college men were in the
Lower Lower social class as compared with
no fathers of college men. Conversely, no
fathers of non-college men placed in the
Upper social class as compared with two
fathers of college men.
However, average placement by social class
on a ladder of projected attainment
indicated that the non-college and college
men were more alike than different in their
aspiration to attain.
Other Family Characteristics
In significantly greater numbers, the non
college men came from broken homes and
larger families. On the average, there were
three children in a non-college family as
compared with two children to a college
family.
For the most part, the best friend of a
non-college man was, like himself, not
attending college.
Non-college men were less inclined than
college men to discuss problems and plans
with their parents; and there was apparently
a lesser degree of mutual understanding
between non-college sons and parents in
comparison with the understanding prevalent
between college sons and parents.
Significantly more non-college than college
men had married since graduation from high
school and were financially responsible for
one or more dependents. Fewer of them, in
comparison with the college group, were
living with their parents.
Non-college sons chose to marry at an
earlier age, on the average almost two years
sooner than the college men. The men of the
latter group specified the later age
because they desired in significant numbers
to complete their schooling prior to
marriage.
Projection of Own Family Values
The non-college men in greater frequency
209
than the college men registered disregard
for psychological theories of child-rearing
and upbringing. In contrast to the college
men, they were less interested in a
democratic family organization and less
inclined towards an informal, permissive
home atmosphere. In the projected role of
father, they saw themselves as earning the
respect of the family through example and
leadership.
10. Six non-college as compared with no college
men looked with disfavor upon the possi
bility of a son's entry into their line of
work. The dissatisfaction with their work,
thus expressed, was significant.
Findings related to self and school in retro
spect. — Two related questions presented at the close of
the interview encouraged the subject to reflect upon
the relationship between self and school. These
questions evoked the findings which follow.
1. In significantly greater numbers, more non
college than college men regretted that they
had not taken the college preparatory course
in high school; or, that they had dropped
it at some point in the high school career.
210
If it were possible for them to start over
again, they would change their high school
major, work for better marks, and plan for
college instead of a Job.
2. The non-college men were more satisfied with
what the high school had done for them than
were the college men. Sample comments were
quoted from the interviews to support the
observation of the investigator that the
satisfaction with school, as expressed by
the non-college men, was substantially a
dissatisfaction with self.
3. Overall, a majority of both groups expressed
dissatisfaction with the high school
program. Improvements were specified for
curriculum, instruction, counseling and
administrative organization.
Conclusions
The conclusions of the study were formulated in
reference to the problem which motivated the investi
gation. Restated, the purpose of the study was to
identify the factors that were crucial to the non
college attendance of able high school graduates.
Based on the findings, the conclusions are as follows:
1. Advanced education does not play a major
role in the family background of non-college
men. In comparison with the parents of the
college men, significantly more parents of
the non-college men, mothers and fathers,
had terminated their formal education at
the junior high school level or earlier.
Also, the difference in years of schooling
completed by the non-college and college
mothers was significant beyond the .01
level of confidence. Thus, there was a lack
of tradition for higher education within the
family group.
The amount of schooling completed by the
mothers appears to be an important contrib
uting factor in the son’s decision to attend
or not to attend college.
Lack of interest in a college education is
apparently due to a lack of understanding
concerning the purpose of education,
especially of higher education.
Non-college men expect to learn on the job.
They expect the opportunity to learn new
skills through work. For these men,
specific courses "related to my work"
suffice as a substitute for college.
Although not Interested in a college edu
cation for themselves, non-college men
regard college men as the source of
potential leaders. This being the case,
the non-college men do not see themselves
as leaders.
Both groups of young men, non-college and
college, desire the good things of life
and expect to attain them; but seemingly,
neither group is willing to assume "large
responsibilities and control over others"
or "managing and directing the activities
of others." The foremost goal and primary
value is financial security which means not
only freedom from want but explicitly,
material possessions and the enjoyment of
luxuries for self and family. A not
uncommon reply is cited as one subject’s
description of the best possible life:
Two children, a $25*000 home, tennis
court, bars and trampoline— the
things for physical enjoyment that I
enjoy. A pool might be nice. My
own sailboat. I plan to work five
days a week and spend a day or a day
and a half out on the water. A car
for my wife, a car for myself, plenty
of food in the house, clothes for
myself, clothes for the children. . . .
In general, this is what I’d like to
have.
7. For most non-college men, financial need is
not a factor in the decision to forego
college; and their families do not dis
courage them from college attendance. More
of a determinant than either of these two
factors are the cultural forces inherent in
the pattern of family interaction.
8. Social class status appears to be a factor
in shaping the decision not to attend
college. The fathers of non-college men
rated significantly lower than fathers of
the college men on an index of status charac
teristics.
9. Family size appears to be a factor in non
college decision. Sons from large families
are less likely to attend college.
10. Insecurity in the family life of capable
non-college men appears to be a prede
terminer of non-college attendance. A lack
of security was evidenced in part by the
emphasis of non-college fathers on security
as an essential component of a desirable
job; and reflected, also, in the job dis
satisfaction expressed by these fathers. In
addition, a comparatively large percentage
of the non-college group came from homes
disrupted by death or divorce. Thus, the
Instability and discontinuity of the family
group are critical factors in non-college
decision.
11. Early marriage and the intention to marry
at a comparatively early age are factors in
the decision not to attend college. The
difference between non-college and college
men In both respects was highly significant.
12. Poor marks received in high school con
tribute to the decision not to attend
college. These were acknowledged by the
non-college men but regarded as not
indicative of their ability; they believed
they could have done better.
13* Lack of planning, delayed decisions, and no
goal objectives are factors in the decision
of non-college men. These men seem less
able than college men to anticipate the
future and plan for it. Two years after,
they were ready to look at themselves
somewhat more realistically, but with regret,
they realized that It was too late.
14. Both non-college and college men say in
215
effect that the high school does not expect
or require students to perform at their best.
High school courses and requirements were
considered too easy.
15. Non-college men expect and are dependent
upon external pressures to get them to do
school work. The authoritarian point of
view appears to coincide with their up
bringing and their experience in family
living.
16. There is a tendency for teachers to advise
non-college and college men of their college
ability in somewhat greater frequency than
counselors. The teacher as well as the
counselor is a source of college advisement.
17. There is a tendency for teachers and coun
selors to extend career advice to college
men more frequently than to non-college men.
Recommendations
The conclusions which have been advanced suggest
a number of recommendations in regard to the educational
program, including the guidance function, of the
secondary school. Based on the findings and derived
from the conclusions, these recommendations are:
That guidance concerning post-high school
educational opportunities, varied and
diverse, begin in Junior high school, pref
erably at the eighth-grade level.
That the purposes of education be included
in the content of a guidance course required
of all high school pupils; likewise,
instruction on values, their development,
meaning and significance for the individual
and the nation.
That self-fulfillment and self-realization
be redefined as an objective of the guidance
program in terms of intellectual development
within a context of larger social objectives
That teachers exact superior performance
of themselves and encourage pupils in the
pursuit of excellence.
That the guidance function of the teacher
be fully utilized and that appropriate
materials and in-service training to this
end be provided.
That career counseling and educational
advisement be equally available to the non
college and the college bound.
That guidance workers and teachers use the
217
pupil's value system as a point of departure
in providing counsel and advice that is
acceptable and meaningful to the pupil.
8. That guidance workers consider with pupils,
especially the non-college bound, am
effective, personal use of the education and
guidance available in the armed services.
9. That this research design be undertaken with
a comparable sample of girl high school
graduates to ascertain the influences which
motivate capable young women in the upper
ability range towards or away from college.
10. That the interview protocols obtained in
the present study be examined for idio-
syncratical data; and that such data be
analyzed qualitatively, in conjunction with
cumulative record information, to trace the
life patterns of able high school graduates
who forego college attendance.
11. That the educational role of the adult
school, the junior college, and the military
in relation to the able high school graduate,
non-college bound, be evaluated.
12. That the effectiveness of educational
advisement and counseling for students
218
identified as able and non-college bound be
evaluated longitudinally from its inception
in Junior high school through senior high
school and into the first year thereafter.
13. That this research be replicated with a
sample drawn from an ethnic population.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
1. Background Factors Relating to College Plans and
College EnrollmentAmong Public High School
students. PrJiiceton: Educational Testing
Se'rvice', 1957.
2. Beezer, Robert H., and Hjelm, Howard P. Factors
Related to College Attendance. Cooperative
Research IYtanograph No. 8, Sffice of Educa
tion, U.S. Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare. Washington: Government Print
ing Office, 1961.
3. Berdie, Ralph P. After High School— What?
Minneapolis! UhTversi'ty of Minnesota Press,
1954.
4. Bingham, Walter Van Dyke, and Moore, Bruce V. How to
Interview. 4th ed. revised. New York:
Harper and Brothers, 1959.
5. Bray, Douglas Weston. Issues In the Study of Talent.
New York: Columbia Universl’ ty / T954.
6. Bridgman, Donald S. In the Search for Talent.
"Where the Loss of Talent Occurs and Why."
New York: College Entrance Examination
Board, i960.
7. . Duration of Formal Education for High-
ability Youth. A Study of Retention in the
Educational System. National Science
Foundation. Washington: Government Printing
Office, 1961.
8. Centers, Richard. The Psychology of Social Class.
Princeton. New Jersey: Princeton University
Press, 1949.
220
221
9. Cuber, John F., and Kenkel, William P. Social
Stratification In the United States. New
York: ApplVton-Century-Crof t s / '1954 •
10. Daughtry, Alex k. Report on the Post-Graduation
Activities of 1955 Kansas High School
Graduate's'. W e 'Emporia State hesearch
Studies/ Vol. No. 2. Emporia, Kansas:
Kansas State Teachers College, 1956.
11. Dictionary of Occupational Titles. Vol. I:
De fin it ions of Titles/ Prepared by Division
of Occupational Analysis, U.S. Employment
Service. Washington: Government Printing
Office, 194-9.
12. Educational Status, College Plans, and Occupational
Status' of Farm and Nonfarm Youth's: October
1959. Series Census— ERS (~P-27), No. 30.
Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department of
Commerce; and Economic Research Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Washington:
Bureau of the Census, August, 1961.
13. Garrett, Henry E. Statistics in Psychology and
Education. 5th edition, hew York:
Longmans, Green and Company, 1958.
14. Getzels, J. W. The High School in a New Area.
"Values in "School and' Society. " Francis S.
Chase and Harold A. Anderson (ed.). Chicago:
The University of Chicago Press, 1958.
15. Havinghurst, Robert J., McConnell, T. R., Kendrick,
S. A., and others. The Coming Crisis in the
Selection of Students for College Entrance.
Washington: American Educational Research
Association, i960.
16. Hillway, Tyrus. Introduction to Research. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin' Company / '1956.
17. Hollingshead, August B. Elmtown1s Youth. New York:
Wiley and Sons, 1^49.
18. Hollinshead, Byron S. Who Should Go to College? New
York: Columbia University Press, 1952.
19. Kahl, Joseph A. The American Class Structure.
New York: Rinehart and Company,' Inc'., 1957.
222
20. Kahn, Robert Louis, and Cannell, C. F. Dynamics of
Interviewing. New York: John Wiley and Sons,
ihc.VlW.
21. Little, J. Kenneth. A Statewide Inquiry Into
Decisions of Youth About Education Beyond
High School. Madison, Wisconsin: School of
Education,Ifciiversity of Wisconsin, 1958.
22. . _______. Explorations Into the College Plans and
Experiences of High School Graduates. "
Madison, Wi sconsin: School" of Education,
University of Wisconsin, 1959.
23. Maceoby> Eleanor E., and Maccoby, Nathan. Handbook
of Social Psychology. Vol. I: Theory and
Method. , f The Interview: A Tool of Social
Science." Gardner LLndzey (ed.). Reading,
Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing
Company* 1958.
24. Murphy, Gardner. Human Potentialities. New York:
Basic Books, Inc., 1958*
25. Nash, Philip G. Follow-up Study of June 1958 High
School Graduates. Research Report No. 226.
Evaluation and Research Section, Los Angeles
City School Districts, i960.
26. Passow, A. Harry, Goldberg, Miriam, Tannenbaum,
Abraham J., and French, Will. Planning for
Talented Youth. New York: Teachers College,
Columbia University, 1955.
27. The President's Committee on Education Beyond the
High School. Second Report to the President.
Washington: Government Printing Office,
1957.
28. The Pursuit of Excellence: Education and the Future
of America, Special Studies Report V,
Rockefeller Brothers Fund. New York:
Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1958.
29. Remmers, H. H. Introduction to Opinion and
Attitude Measurement. New York: Harper and
Brothers'/ 1954.
30. Roe, Anne. The Psychology of Occupations. New
York! Wiley/ 1956.
223
31. Rummel, J. Francis. Introduction to Research
Procedures' In Education. New Yorks Harper
and Brothers, 1958.
32. School Enrollment, and Education of Young Adults and
Their Fathers: October i960. Current 1
Population Report, Series P-20, No. 110.
Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department of
Commerce. Washington: Bureau of the Census,
July 1961.
33. The Search for Talent. New York: College Entrance
Examination Board, I960.
34. Sellitz, Claire, Jahoda, Marie, Deutsch, Morton, and
Cook, Stuart W. Research Methods in Social
Relations. Revised one-volume edition. New
York: Holt and Company, Inc., 1959.
35* Siegel, Sidney. Nonparametric Statistics for the
Behavioral Sciences. Mew York: McGraw-Hill
Book" Company," Inc.', 1956.
36. Stice, Glen, Mollenkopf, William G., and Torgerson,
Warren S. Background Factors and College-
Going Plans Among HIgti-Aptitude Public High
School Seniors". Princeton: Educational
Testing Service, 1956.
37. Stouffer, Samuel A. In the Search for Talent.
Responsibility for Talent from kindergarten
Through College." New York: College
Entrance Examination Board, i960.
38. Stroup, Francis, and Andrew, Dean C. Barriers to
College Attendance. The Report of a Study
of Factors Related to Educational Dis
continuance of High School Graduates.
Magnolia, Arkansas: Southern State College,
1959.
39. Super, Donald E. The Psychology of Careers. New
York: Harper and Brotners, 1957.
40. Super, Donald E., Crites, John 0., Hummel, Raymond C.,
Moser, Helen P., and others. Vocational
Development: A Framework for Research.
New York: Bureau of Publicatlons, teachers .
College, Columbia University, 1957.
224
41. Warner, W. Lloyd, Meeker, Marcia, and Eells,
Kenneth. Social Class In America: A
Manual of Procedure for the Measurement of
Social Status. Chicago: Science’ ResVarch
Associates, 1949.
42. Wolfle, Dael Lee. America's Resources of Specialized
Talent. New York: Harper and Brothers,
1954.
43. Wright, Wendell W., and Jung, Christian W. Why
Capable High School Students Do Not
Continue Their Schooling. iBufletYn of the
School of Education, Indiana University.
Vol. 35» No. 1 (January 1959). Bloomington,
Indiana: Division of Research and Field
Services, Indiana University, 1959.
Periodicals
44. Berdie, Ralph F. "The Counselor and His Manpower
Responsibilities," American Personnel and
Guidance Journal, 35: 4^5-463, i960„
45. Cantril, Hadley. "Experiments in the Wording of
Questions," Public Opinion Quarterly,
4:330-332, l34S:
46. , and Kilpatrick, F. P. "Self-anchoring
Scaling: A Measure of Individuals' Unique
Reality Worlds," Journal of Individual
Psychology, 16:155-193, I960.
47. Centers, Richard. "Motivational Aspects of
Occupational Stratification," Journal of
Social Psychology, 28:187-217, 1946. ~~
48. Dickinson, Carl. "Ratings of Job Factors by Those
Choosing Several Occupational Groups,"
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1:188-189,
49. Guetzkow, H. "Unitizing and Categorizing Problems
in Coding Qualitative Material," Journal of
Clinical Psychology, 6:47-58, 1950.
50. "Guidance and Conservation of Human Resources,"
Teachers College Record, 58:61-128, 1956.
Entire' Issue for November 1956.
225
51. Hall, Roy M. "Research Needed in Education," School
Life, 42:6-8, I960.
52. "The Interview in Social Research," American Journal
of Sociology, 62: 137-252, 1956/“Entire
issue for September 1956.
53. Johnson, George H. "An Instrument for the- Measure
ment of Job Satisfaction," Personnel
Psychology, 8:27-3&, 1955.
54. Kahl, Joseph A. "Educational and Occupational
Aspirations of 'Common Man' Boys," Harvard
Educational Review, 23:186-203, 1955/
55. Lyman, Elizabeth L. "Occupational Differences in
the Value Attached to Work," The American
Journal of Sociology, 6l: 138-144/ 1955.
56. Merton, Robert K., and Kendall, Patricia L. "The
Focused Interview," American Journal of
Sociology, 51:541-557/ 1946.
57. Rogers, Carl R. "The Non-directive Method as a
Technique for Social Research," American
Journal of Sociology, 50:279-283, 1945.
58. Steiner, Ivan D. "Self-perception and Goal-setting
Behavior," Journal of Personality,
25:344-355, 1957.
59. Thompson, Orville E. "High School Students' Values:
Emergent or Traditional," California Journal
of Educational Research, 12:132-144, 196I.
60. Whyte, William F. "On Asking Indirect Questions,"
Human Organization, 15:21-23, 1957.
Unpublished Materials
6l. Barber, Leroy E. "Why Some Able High School
Graduates Do Not Go to College." Un
published Doctor's dissertation, The
University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, 1950.
226
62. Cass, Dal Holder. "A Study of Upper Quarter High
School Graduates for 1956 from Three
Colorado Counties Who Did Not Enroll in
College." Unpublished Doctor's dissertation,
The University of Colorado, Bolder, Colorado,
1957.
63. Johnson, Leland W. "A Study of the Relationship of
Vocational Values to Choice of Occupation,
Socio-Economic Background and Traits of
Temperament." Unpublished Doctor's
dissertation, The University of Southern
California, Los Angeles, California, 195^*
64. Kastenbaum, Robert J. "A Preliminary Study of the
Dimensions of Future Time Perspective."
Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, The
University of Southern California, Los
Angeles, California, I960.
65. Lefever, D. Welty. "Tables for Determination of
the Difference Between Two Percentages."
Division of Research and Guidance, Los
Angeles County Superintendent of Schools
Office, 1961. Multilith.
66. Prince, Richard. "A Study of the Relationships
Between Individual Values and Administrative
Effectiveness in the School Situation."
Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, The
University of Chicago, December 1957.
67. Timothy, Ralph. "Relationships of Self-ratings and
External Judgments to Relatively Objective
Measurements." Unpublished Doctor's
dissertation, The University of Southern
California, Los Angeles, California, 1948.
68. Wahlquist, Gunnar. "An Investigation of Self-
understanding in Vocational Choice and the
Educational Implications." Unpublished
Doctor's dissertation, The University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, California,
1952.
APPENDIX A
228
TABLE 1
AGE OF INTERVIEWEES
Age in
a
Months
Range
(1)
M SD
(2) (3)
°£>iff
<*> (5)
CR
(6)
Non-college men 195-228 212 5.7 ♦81
•95 3.15
College men
197-217 209 3*6
.51
aAt time of administration of the Iowa Tests in spring of
1958.
b
Significant beyond the .01 level of confidence.
229
TABLE 2
IQ OF OTERVIEWEES
IQ
Range
(1)
M
(2)
SD
(3) (5)
CR
(6)
Non-college men
College men
93-136
92-132
114
117
8.80
7.96
1.25
1.13
1.7
1.76
230
TABLE 3
COMPOSITE SCORE ON THE IOWA TESTS
Composite Score
Per
cen
tile
Range M Rank SD °f)ifT CR
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
Non-college men 11-36 23.60 82 4.42 . .63
College men 20-36 27.14 93 2.94 .42
.76 4.7
. a
a
Significant beyond the .01 level of confidence.
APPENDIX B
232
No.
I_ N T E R V I_ E W SCHEDULE
(non-college form)
For use with a random sampling of non-college men
selected from the high school graduates, June 1958,
of a large city school district
Date of Interview:
mo.
Name of Interviewer
•da.
yr.
1. Full Name
Last First Middle Initial
Telephone
2. Home Address
City Zone
3- Age
years & months
4. Graduated from High School in June 1958
5. High School Major
* * * * * * *
233
Thank you for consenting to help out with this study of
young men, some in college, some not in college. The study
is being sponsored by the University of Southern California
in the hope of getting at some of the factors which
influence individuals to go or not to go to college. Such
information will help us check on the value of the
counseling, you and others have received in high school
prior to graduation.
Do you mind if I record your remarks on this tape recorder?
I can study them a little more thoroughly if I have them to
refer to.
I. POST-HIGH SCHOOL EMPLOYMENT
Lead 1: Let's talk for a while about what you've been
doing since you left high school. It's been almost two
years. We might start with the jobs you've worked at since
graduation.___________________________________________ _______
Primers:
a. Tell me about your first job.
b. How did you get your first job?
c. What other jobs have you held? (interviewer: Be sure
the items indicated below are covered for each job. Fill
in below after the interview. List first job in first
space. )
Job Title
Part
Time
Full
Time
Mos. on
Job
Approx.
Wklv. Wage
1.
2.
3.
4.
234
d. What is Important in changing a job? (interviewer:
Please check.) (l) Better pay (2) Company
(3) Location (4) Kind of work Other (Please
explain)______ __________________________________________
Be sure to get work values and attitudes.
Lead 2: Do you see any relation between your
father's?
job and your
Primers:
a. What has been your father's occupation for
lifetime?
most of your
b. What does your father think of his job?
c. What does he think is a good job?
d. What is his opinion of your job choice?
Be sure to get:
a. Subject's perception of father's attitude toward his
(the father's; job. Does the father accept his position in
life or is he oriented toward getting a h e a d ? _________
b. Parent's basic work values and attitudes.
II. POST-HIGH SCHOOL EDUCATION
Lead 1: Sometimes after a person gets on the job, he finds
that he needs to know certain facts or acquire certain
skills and he goes back to school for some kind of special
training. What's been your experience in this respect?
235
Primers:
a. Have you had any additional schooling since leaving high
school? Yes_____ No_____
b. If yes, what additional education have you had? (include
junior college, college, university, trade or business
school, art or music school, military service school, adult
school, on-the-job training and apprenticeship.)
(l) Name of school?______________________________________
i2) Major or course of study?________________________
(3) Units or hours per week?_________________________
(5) Dates: Prom___________________ to____________________
c. At the time you graduated from high school, were you
planning then to go to work? Yes No___________________
d. What sort of education do you want? Why?________________
e. Do you think you can handle it? Please explain.
f. What was the highest school grade completed by your
father?________ Your mother?________
Be sure to get:
a. Objective upon graduation from high school_________
b. Objective, now, two years later_____________________
c. Possible influence of intervening experiences,._____
d. Self-estimate and self-esteem
e. Attitude toward school and education________________
III. PLANS
Lead 1: Americans look ahead to the future and dream about
the good life. What's the best possible life that you can
imagine? Give a general picture of what you think it would
be like. How would you describe it? ___" _____ , _____ ;
Primers:
a. What would you like to get out of life?
236
t>. What would success be for you? More possessions?
An easier life?________ Money?______ ____________
Be sure to get philosophy of life, values and aspirations.
Lead 2: What is the worst possible life you could imagine?
Lead 3; Here is a ladder with steps leading to the top.
(Show ladder.) Up here is the "best possible life"; down
here is the "worst possible life." (Point to highest and
lowest rung.)
Where do you expect to be five years from now on the
ladder? (Subject to indicate rung on ladder. Interviewer
to write on schedule the number of the rung, counting
upwards from the lowest rung.) Rung No.______
Ten years after that, where do you think you'll be? Rung
No.______
Lead 4: What's going to be your destination? What do you
see as your future?__________________________________________
Primers:
a. What occupation do you plan to make your life work?
What job do you expect to have ten or twenty years from
now? ______________________________________________
b. While you were still in high school, what job did you
wish you might get into?____________
c. If you could have the job you would like to have most,
what would it be?____________________________________________ .
d. Suppose you could get the same pay, no matter what kind
of work you did. Of all the kinds of work you can think of
what would you like best?____________________________________
Lead 5: What problems do you see that might make it hard
for you to achieve your ambitions?__________________________
237
Primers:
a. What might you do about them? Will you have to give up
anything to achieve your ambitions? Yes No____
b. If yes, what will you have to give up?_________; ________
c. With whom do you discuss your occupational plans?
d. How do your parents feel about your occupational plans?
Be sure to get
a. Work values and attitudes. Does he believe in getting
ahead or just getting by?,___________________________________
b. Desire vs. expectation (e.g., wishes vs. perception of
ability).___________________________________________________
c. Alternatives. Reasonably planful vs. haphazard.
Optimistic vs. pessimistic. Role in a lifetime career.
Occupational goal, information about It, and reasons for
choice. If none, or indefinite plans, when does he expect
to plan?___________
Lead 6: A good many important things can happen to a
person in the course of his lifetime. I'm going to ask you
to list on this sheet of paper six important events that
will probably happen to a person In the course of his
lifetime. .
Over here on the right, will you give the age of the
person, as you estimate it, at the time of this event,
(interviewer: Give subject separate form on which to list
the important events.)
238
Age of Person
at Time of Event
Important Events_____________ (in years)
IV. JOB SATISFACTION
Lead 1: I suppose, like most people, when you think about
a Job you want, that you're interested in, you think, too,
of certain satisfactions the Job can give you. You're
interested in it, we'll say, because of these satisfactions
associated with the job. Now, in your case, what would be
a few of these satisfactions?
(1) (2).
(3) W
Lead 2: I've put on slips of paper some job satisfactions
commonly reported in employee surveys. I wonder if you
would look at the slips of paper— lay them out if you want
— and sort and shuffle till you get them arranged in the
order you prefer. What I am suggesting is that you rank
these job satisfactions to show your order of preference.
Give a rank of 1 to the most preferred satisfaction, a rank
of 2 to the next most preferred satisfaction, and so on.
When you have finished, number the slips of paper
accordingly.
Primers:
a. Which job satisfaction would be most important to you?
b. Which one would be the least important to you?
c. What would be the intervening satisfactions?
SERVICE TO OTHERS;
HELPING OTHER PEOPLE
NATURE OP THE
WORK ITSELF
DOING SOMETHING
EVERYBODY ELSE
CAN'T DO
OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A
NAME FOR YOURSELF, TO
BECOME FAMOUS
240
OPPORTUNITY TO
LEARN NEW SKILLS
"IT PROVIDES A LIVING"
FAMILIAR, EASY WORK HEALTHY, OUTDOOR WORK
241
LARGE RESPONSIBILITIES; MANAGING AND DIRECTING
CONTROL OVER OTHERS THE ACTIVITIES OP OTHERS
RECOGNITION AND PRESTIGE;
CHANCE TO BE SOMEBODY, TO
BE HIGHLY RESPECTED BY
YOUR FELLOW MEN
OPPORTUNITY TO BE CREATIVE,
TO SHOW WHAT I CAN DO, TO
EXPRESS YOUR PEELINGS,
IDEAS, TALENT OR SKILL
242
STEADY JOB; SECURITY AND INTERESTING, VARIED
REGULAR TAKE HOME PAY ACTIVITY; CHANGE IN THE
CONTENT AND PACE OF THE
WORK
OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE
MONEY; A VERY HIGHLY
PAID JOB
FREEDOM FROM SUPERVISION;
THE CHANCE TO WORK MORE
OR LESS ON YOUR OWN;
INDEPENDENCE
243
OPPORTUNITY TO GET AHEAD,
TO ADVANCE TO HIGHER
POSITIONS, TO BE PROMOTED
WORKING WITH PEOPLE YOU
LIKE; FRIENDLY FELLOW
WORKERS; CONGENIAL
ASSOCIATES
GOOD WORKING CONDITIONS: OTHER (SPECIFY)
GOOD HOURS AND PLEASANT _______________
SURROUNDINGS, EFFICIENT, _______________
UP-TO-DATE EQUIPMENT, _______________
FAIR TREATMENT, BENEFITS _______________
SUCH AS VACATION, HEALTH_______________________
INSURANCE, RETIREMENT _______________
PLAN, ETC. _______________
V. DECISION NOT TO ATTEND COLLEGE
Lead 1: When a person decides to- take one direction ‘
instead of, another, a good many factors help him make up
his mind. How did you come to decide not to go to college?
a. Which of the following reasons apply to you? Please
check (>/ ) each item yes or no. (interviewer: Give
attached list to the interviewee.)
b. How difficult was it for you to decide not to go to
college? Call out the number. (interviewer: Show card
containing a duplicate of the scale below and check on the
interview schedule the given reply.)
1. Very difficult 3- Not so difficult ■
2. Fairly difficult 4. Not at all difficult__________
c. What kind of marks did you get in high school?__________
d. Did your marks give a fair picture of your ability?
Yes No____
e. How did you compare with other students in your marks?
Look at these possible replies and call out the number of
the appropriate reply. (interviewer: Show card containing
a duplicate of the scale below and check on the interview
schedule the subject's reply.)
1. About average.........
2. Greatly above average.
3. Somewhat above average
4. Somewhat below average
5. Greatly below average.
f. Have you at any time considered going to college?
Yes No If yes, please explain:____________
g. When did you decide not to go to college?
245
' No.____
Which of the following reasons apply to you? Please check
( ) each item yes or no.
Yes No
1. I would rather start earning money quickly
and learn on the job........................... ...___
2. Skilled laborers get paid as much as most
college graduates.............................. .......
3. Learning on a job is more practical than most
school learning .................................
4. Going to college costs more than it is worth... ______
5. Going to college would be a waste of time
for me........................... .............. .... ..
6. College isn't worth the effort; it's too
much work..............................................
7. Persons who do not have a college education
usually make better leaders...........................
8. Success in life depends on ability and effort.. ______
9. I could get a good job without a college
education ...........................................
10. My high school subject marks were too low ......
11. I don't like to study.................................
12. I felt that I did not have the scholastic
ability to do college work............................
13. My high school major did not prepare me for
college entrance. I could not meet the
admission requirements............... *..... . _______
14. My family needed my financial assistance.......... ..
15. My family discouraged me......... ....................
16. I planned to get married............. ................
17. Lack of money prevented me from going to
college. I couldn't afford it.......... .............
18. Life can be just as happy and satisfying
without a college education........ .................
19. Other (Please explain.)________________________________
Now that you have finished the check list, please encircle
three checks (v/ ) in the yes column to show the three most
important reasons. Rank these reasons by writing 1, 2, or
3 within the circle.
246
Lead 2: What information did you get about college while
you were in high school? (interviewer: Place check on
schedule, yes or no, for each item.)__________________
Primers: Did you learn about Yes No
a. Course offerings (i.e., educational choices;
courses of study open to the high school
g r a d u a t e ..........................................
b. Entrance requirements........................... ........
c. Scholastic standards.............................. —
d. Pees and other expenses........ .........................
e. Scholarships, loans, part-time work,
cooperative housing, etc. as means of
partial self-support.....................................
f. Social life in college.......................... ........
g. The junior colleges of the Los Angeles
City Schools..................................... .......
h. None............................................. ........
i. Other (Please explain)________________________ __________
Lead 3: While you were in high school, did you learn that
you had college ability? Yes No____________________
Primers:
a. Did your father and mother discuss with you the
possibility of attending college? Yes No What did
they have to say about your not going to college?______
b. How much did they influence your plan? Not at all____
Some______ Very much______________________________________
c. Did teachers talk with you about your ability to do
college work? Yes. No___
d. Did counselors talk with you about your ability to do
college work? Yes No___
e. What kind of advice did they give you?_________________
f. Were your parents ever advised by a school person that
you had college ability? Yes No_______________________
g. What would you say of your ability to do college work?
Look at these possible replies and call out the number of
247
the statement that applies to you. (interviewer: Show
card with following statements and check interview schedule
to accord with reply.)
1. Learn somewhat less rapidly and with
more difficulty than most students......
2. Learn very slowly and with great effort..
3. Learn very rapidly and with little effort
4. Learn about as rapidly and with about the
same difficulty as do most students.....
5. Learn somewhat more rapidly and with less
difficulty than do most students........
Be sure to get:
a. Self-concept with respect to (l) general ability and
(2) strengths and weaknesses.___________________________
b. Family's educational expectations.___________________
VI. FAMILY BACKGROUND
A* Family in General
Lead 1: We have talked about your job and school. Another
subject to consider, because it often has a lot to do with
deciding to go, or not to go, to college, Is the family.
Obviously, much of what you learn about post-high school
education is learned from the family.
Tell me something about the various members of your family,
who they are, what they are like, what they do.____________
Primers:
a. How many are in your family? _______ ______
b. Are you the youngest? Oldest? -Only child?
c. If neither of these, where do you stand in order of
birth?___________ ; ______ ; ______ ; ______" ______________________
d. Have any of your brothers or sisters gone to college?
Yes No____
e. If yes, how many?_________________________________
f. Think for a moment about your best friend. There is no
need to say his or her name, but try to identify this
erson. (pause) Did your best friend go to college?
es No
248
g. Where was your father born?_________Your mother?________
Be sure to get
a. Identification with or rejection of father and mother as
role models.______________ ■ _____
b. Identification or rivalry with siblings.
c. Perception of role of father, mother, siblings, others
in home_______________________________________________________
d. Organization of family for work; perception of his
responsibilities.____________________________________________
e. Attitudes toward family social status and family way of
life.______________________________ ____________________ _
B. Plans - Relationships
Lead 1: People generally have things that bother them from
time to time. Do you ever talk these things over with your
p a r e n t s ? ___________
Primers:
a. Do you talk over your plans for the future with your
folks ? ____________________________________________________
b. Do you tell your parents your troubles?__________________
c. Do you like to tell your-parents when something good
happens to you?___________________, ______________ ___________
d. What sort of things do you wish you could get more help
on from your parents?_________________________ ; _____________
Lead 2: Do you think your folks understand young people?
Primers:
a. Do you and your parents generally see things the same
way or differently?________________________ '
b. If differently, how do you explain t h i s ? _________
Be sure to get
a. Perception of parental roles._______ ___________________
b. Attitudes toward family way of life (values, standards,
up-to-dateness)____________________________________________
c. Attitudes toward parental discipline, delegation of
responsibility, fairness.__________________________________
249
Lead 3: Have you taken on any family responsibilities
since high school graduation?_____________________ _________
Primers;
a. If married, how many dependents do you have?___________
b. Are you living with your parents? Yes No____
Lead 4: If not married, how old would you like to be when
you get married? Why then?__________________________
c* Projection of Family Values
Lead 1; What sort of home and family have you thought you
would like to have?________________________________ ________
Primers:
a. What do you think a father should be like?_____________
b. Any particular idea about how you are going to treat
your children?__________________________________
c. How would you feel about a son of yours going into your
kind of work?________________________________________________
VII. CONCLUSION
Lead 1: You've been out of high school for more than a
year. Soon it will be two years. If you could go back to
the beginning of high school and start over again, is there
anything you would do different?___________________________ _
Primers; Would you
a. Change your high school major? Yes No___
b. Work for better marks? Yes No___
c. Plan for college instead of a Job? Yes No
Be sure to get regrets, if any, and why.
Lead 2; What would you like for the high school to do that
it didn't do in your case?
Interviewer: I want to thank you for working with me on
this. Do you mind if I look over this
outline to see if I have everything?
APPENDIX C
252
No.
I N T E R V I E W S C H E D U L E
(college form)
For use with a random sampling of college men
selected from the high school graduates, June 1958,
of a large city school district
Date of Interview:
mo. da.
yr.
Name of Interviewer:
1. Full Name
Last First Middle Initial
Telephone
2. Home Address
City Zone
3 - Age
years & months
4. Graduated from High School in June 1958
5. High School Major
* * * * * * *
253
Thank you for consenting to help out with this study of
young men, some in college,■some not in college. The study
is being sponsored by the University of Southern California
in the hope of getting at some of the factors which
influence individuals to go or not to go to college. Such
information will help us check on the value Of the
counseling you and others have received in high school
prior to graduation.
Do you mind if I record your remarks on this tape recorder?
I can study them more thoroughly if I have them to refer
to.
I. POST-HIGH SCHOOL EDUCATION
Lead 1: Let's talk for a while about what you've been
doing since you left high school. Most of this time,
you've been going to college. Suppose we begin by talking
about your work in college.__________________________________
Primers:
a. What is your college m a j o r ? __________
b. How did you happen to select this major?
c. What sort of education do you want? Why?
d. How are you doing in your college work? What kind of
marks do you get?___________________________________________
e. Do your marks give a fair picture of your ability?
Yes No
f. How do you compare with other students in your marks?
Look at these, possible replies and call out the number of
the appropriate reply. (interviewer: Show card containing
a duplicate of the scale below and check on the interview
schedule the subject's reply.)
1. About average............
2. Greatly above average....
3. Somewhat above average...
4. Somewhat below average...
5. Greatly below average....
g. Are you a full time student? Yes No____
h. Up to this point, but not including the present
semester, how many semesters have you attended college?
semesters.
i. How many units do you carry each semester as a rule?
units.
j. At the time you graduated from high school, were you
planning then to go to college? Yes No_____________
k. What was the highest school grade completed by your
father? Your mother? ___ _________________________
Be sure to get
a. Objective upon graduation from high school
b. Objective in relation to major_____________
c. Self-estimate and self-esteem______________
d. His feelings about his m a r k s _________
e. Attitude toward school and education
II. DECISION TO ATTEND COLLEGE
Lead 1: When a person decides to take one direction
instead of another, a good many factors help him make up
his mind. How did you come to decide to go to college?
a. Which of the following reasons apply to you? Please
check ( ) each item yes or no. (interviewer: Give
attached list to the interviewee.)
b. How difficult was it for you to make the decision to go
to college? Call out the number. (interviewer: Show card
containing a duplicate of the scale below and check on the
interview schedule the given reply.)
255
No.____
Which of the following reasons apply to you? Please
check ( y ) each item yes or no.
Yes No
1. College graduates get jobs with better pay.. ________
2. College graduates usually have the leader
ship positions.......................................
3. The country needs more people who have
highly developed skills and knowledge...... ........
4. I am greatly dissatisfied to stop at my
present level of knowledge................... .
5. Going to college enables you to study more
lines of work before deciding on a career... _______
6. Going to college has just been accepted;
I have never thought of anything else........ ;
7. You can't get a good job without a
college education....................................
8. Mfcr high school subject marks were high .......
9. I like to study.............................. ........
10. I felt that I had the scholastic ability
to do college work....... ...........................
11. Ny high school major prepared me for
college entrance and I could meet the
admission requirements...................... ........
12. Nty family encouraged me to go............... ........
13. % family was able to assist me
financially. .................. ................
14. I could afford college ........................
15. Without a college education I would be
at a social disadvantage in life.............__......
16. A college education helps you live a
happier, more satisfying life...... ........ ...
17. Other (Please explain)________________________________
Now that you have finished the check list, please encircle
three checks ( ) in the yes column to show the three
most important reasons. Rank these reasons by writing 1,
2, or 3 within the circle.
1. Very difficult 3. Not so difficult____
2. Fairly difficult______ 4. Not at all difficult___
c. What kind of marks did you get when you were in high
school? ______________________________________________
d. Did your high school marks give a fair picture of
your ability? Yes No ' _________ :
e. How did you compare with other high school students
in your marks? Look at these possible replies and call
out the number of the appropriate reply. (Interviewer:
Show card containing a duplicate of the scale below and
check on the interview schedule the subject's reply.)
1. About average........
2. Greatly above average.
3. Somewhat above average
4. Somewhat below average
5. Greatly below average.
f. When did you decide to go to college?_______________
Lead 2: What information did you get about college while
you were in high school? (Interviewer: Please place
check on schedule, yes or no, for each item.)
Primers: Did you learn about Yes No
a. Course' offerings (i.e., educational choices;
courses of study open to the high school
graduate)......... *........ __
b. Entrance requirements. .................... —
c. Scholastic standards.................... 2]
d. Fees and other expenses................ . _
e. Scholarships, loans, part-time work,
cooperative housing, etc., as means of partial
self-support.................. _
f. Social life in college...................
257
Yes No
g. The junior colleges of the Los Angeles
City Schools........................................
h. None ............................. •. .
i. Other (Please explain)________________________________ 1
Lead 3: While you were in high school, did you learn that
you had college ability? Yes No
Primers:
a. Did your father and mother discuss with you the
possibility of attending college? Yes No What did
they have to say about your going to college?
b. How much did they influence your plan? Not at all
Some_______ Very much_______ ________ _____
c. Did teachers talk with you about your ability to do
college work? Yes No___
d. Did counselors? Yes No___
e. What kind of advice did they give you? ________________
f. Were your parents ever advised by a school person that
you had college ability? Yes No_________________________
g. What would you say of your ability to do college work?
Look at these possible replies and call out the number of
the statement that applies to you. (interviewer: Show
card with following statements and check interview schedule
to accord with reply.)
1. Learn somewhat less rapidly and with more
difficulty than most students................
2. Learn very slowly and with great effort.....
3. Learn very rapidly and with little effort....
4. Learn about as rapidly and with about the
same difficulty as do most students..........
5. Learn somewhat more rapidly and with less
difficulty than do most students.............
Be sure to get:
a. Self-concept with respect to (l) general ability
(2) strengths and weaknesses.
( )
( )
b. Family's educational expectations.
258
III. POST-HIGH SCHOOL EMPLOYMENT
Lead 1: Have you been helping with your college expenses
in any way?_____________________________________________________
Primers:
a. Have you held any kind of a job since you graduated from
high school? ________________________________________________
b. How did you get your first job?
c. What other jobs have you held? (interviewer: Be sure
the items below are covered for each job. Pill in below
after the interview. List first job in first space.)
Job Title
Part
Time
Pull
Time
Mos. on
Job
Approx..
Wk. Wage
1 .
2.
3 .
4 .
d. Approximately how much do you contribute to your college
expenses on an annual basis $________________________________
e. Approximately how much does your family contribute?
$ ________________________________________________________
f. Did you have a scholarship? Yes No___
1. If yes, how long will it (or did it) last?__________
semesters
2. What is (or was) the cash value of the scholarship?
$ _ i ________
3. If you maintain satisfactory grades, is the
scholarship renewable? Yes No
259
Be sure to get:
a. Subject's perception of his responsibilities
b. Attitude toward family
c. Work values and attitudes
IV. PLANS
Lead 1: Americans look ahead to the future and dream about
the good life. What's the best possible life that you can
imagine? Give a general picture of what you think it would
be like. How would you describe it?
Primers:
a. What would you like to get out of life?______________
b. What would success be for you?________________________
More possessions?______ An easier life?______ Money?___
Be sure- to get subject's philosophy of life, values and
aspirations ._______________________________________________
Lead 2: What would be the worst possible life you could
imagine ?____________________________________________ ________
Lead 3: Here is a ladder with steps leading to the top.
('Show ladder. ) Up here is the "best possible life"; down
here is the "worst possible life." (Point to the highest
and the lowest rung.)
Where do you expect to be five years from now on the
ladder? (Subject to indicate rung on ladder. Interviewer
to write on schedule the number of the rung, counting
upward from the lowest rung.) Rung No.____
Ten years after that, where do you think you'll be? Rung
No.
260
Lead 4: What's going to he your destination? What do you
see as your future? . _____________
Primers:
a. What o c c u p a tio n do you p la n to make y o u r life work?
What Job do you expect to have ten or twenty years from
now?
b. While you were still in high school, what job did you
wish you might get into?__________________________ ___________
c. If you could have the job you would like to have most,
what would it be?_____________________________________________
d. Suppose you could get the same pay, no matter what kind
of work you did. Of all the kinds of work you can think
of, what would you like best?__
e. With whom do you discuss your occupational plans?_____
f. How do your parents feel about your occupational plans?
Be sure to get
a. Work values and attitudes. Does he believe in getting
ahead or -just getting by?_____________________________________
b. Desire vs. expectation (e.g., wishes vs. perception of
ability)____________________
c. Alternatives_________________________________________________
d. Reasonably planful vs. haphazard._________ Optimistic vs.
pessimistic. Role in a lifetime career.
Occupational goal, Information, and reasons for choice. If
none, or indefinite plans, when does he expect to plan?____
Lead 5 ’ Do you see any relation between your job and your
father's?, _____ _____
Primers :
a. What has been your father's occupation for most of your
lifetime ?________________________• ___________________________
b. What does your father think of his job?
c. .What is his opinion of your job choice?
d. What does he think is a- good job?______
261
Be sure to get
a. Subject's perception of father's attitude -toward his
(the father's) job. Does the father accept his position in
life -or is. he .oriented toward getting ahead?_____
b. Parent's basic work values and attitudes.
Lead 6: What problems do you ’ see that might make it hard
for you to achieve your ambitions? ' _____
Primers:
a. What might you do about them? Will you have to give up
anything to achieve your ambitions? Yes No
b. If yes, v;hat will you have to give up? ........ ......
Lead 7: A good many important things can happen to a
person in the course of his lifetime. I’m going to ask you
to list on this sheet of paper six important events that
will probably happen to a person as he goes through•life.
(interviewer: Give subject separate form on 'which to list
the important events.) Over here on the right, will you
give the age of the person, as you estimate it, at the time
of this event?
Age of Person-
at Time of Event
Important Events (in years)
262
V. JOB SATISFACTION
Lead 1: I suppose, like most people, when you think about
a Job you want, that you're interested in, you think, too,
of certain satisfactions the Job can give you. You're
interested in it, we'll say, because of these satisfactions
associated with the Job. Now, in your case, what would be
a few of these satisfactions?
(1)_______________________(3)________________________________________
(2) (4)_________________________
Lead 2: I've put on slips of paper some Job satisfactions
commonly reported in employee surveys. I wonder if you
would look at the slips of paper— lay them out if you want
--and sort and shuffle till you get them arranged in the
order you prefer. What I am suggesting is that you rank
these Job satisfactions to show your order of preference.
Give a rank of 1 to the most preferred satisfaction, a rank
of 2 to the next most preferred satisfaction, and so on.
When you have finished, number the slips of paper
accordingly.'
Primers:
a. Which Job satisfaction would be most important to you?
b. Which one would be the least important to you?
c. What would be the intervening satisfaction?
VI. FAMILY BACKGROUND
A. Family in General -
Lead 1: We have talked about your Job and school. Another
subject to consider, because it often has a lot to do with
deciding to go, or not to go, to college, is the family.
Obviously, much of what you learn about post-high school
education is learned from the family.
263
Tell me something about the various members of your family,
who they are, what they are like, what they do._____________
Primers:
a. How many are in your family?_________* ____________ ________
b. Are you the youngest? Oldest? ’ Only child?
c. If neither of these, where do you stand in order of
birth?.__________________________________________________________
d. Have any of your brothers or sisters gone to college?
Yes No____
e. If yes, how many?______________________________
f. Think for a moment about your best friend. ‘ There is no
need to say his or her name, but try to identify this
person. (pause). Did your best friend go to college?
Yes No____
g. Where was your father born?________ Your mother?________
Be sure to get
a. Identification with or rejection of father and mother as
role models
b. Identification or rivalry with siblings
c. Perception of role of father, mother, siblings, others
in home.
d. Organization of family for work; perception of his
responsibilities._______________________________________
e. Attitudes toward family social status and family way of
life. ______________________
B. Plans - Relationships
Lead 1: People generally have things that bother them from
time to time. Do you ever talk these things over with your
parents ?_________________________________________________________
Primers:
a. Do you talk over your plans for the future with your
folks?
b. Do you tell your parents your troubles?
264
c. Do you like to tell your parents when something good
happens to you? _____________________ ________
d. What sort of things do you wish you could get more help
on from your parents?_____________________________ __________
Lead 2: Do you think your folks understand young people?
Primers:
a. Do you and your parents generally see things the same
way or differently?_________________________________________
b. If differently, how do you explain this?______________
Be sure to get
a. Perception, of parental roles_____________________ ____ _
b. Attitudes toward family way of life (values, standards,
up-to-dateness )__________________. ___________________________
c. Attitudes toward discipline, delegation of responsi-
bility, fairness ______________________________ _________
Lead 3• Have you taken on any family responsibilities
since high school graduation?__________________________
Primers :
a. If married, how many dependents do you have?____________
b. Are you living with-your parents? Yes No___
Lead 4: If not married, how old would you like to be when
you get married? Why then?_______________________
C. Projection of Family Values
Lead 1: What sort of home and family have you thought you
would like to have?
Primers:
a. What do you think a father should be like?
b. Any particular idea about how you are going to treat
your children?
c. How would you feel about a son of yours going into your
kind of work?
VII. CONCLUSION
Lead 1: You've been out of high school for more than a
year. Soon it will be two years. If you could go back to
the beginning of high school and start over again, is there
anything you would do different? ___________ '
Primers: Would you
a. Change your high school major? Yes No _
b. Work for better marks? Yes_ No___
c. Plan for a job instead of college? Yes No
Be sure to get regrets, If any, and why.
Lead 2: What would you like for the high school to do that
it didn't do in your case?____________________________________
Interviewer: I want to thank you for working with me on
this. Do you mind if I look over this
outline to see if I have everything?

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

'Cost' And 'Utility' In The Prediction Of The Successful Junior College Student

PDF

An Empirical Comparison Of The School And College Ability Tests And The American Council On Education Psychological Examination

PDF

The Validity Of The Graduate Record Examinations As Used With English-Speaking Foreign Students

PDF

The Stability Of The Self-Concept In Junior College Students

PDF

A Study Of The Effectiveness Of Teaching Methods Of Study To Selected High School Freshmen

PDF

Programed And Teacher Oriented Instruction In A Computer Programming Course

PDF

An Analysis Of The Role Of The School Psychologist In The State Of California

PDF

The Relationship Of Creative Thinking Abilities To School Achievement

PDF

Selection Factors Relating To Success In A Counselor Education Program

PDF

English And Native Language Test Score Relationships To College Grade Point Average For Japanese Students

PDF

Counselor Rigidity - Dogmatism - Authoritarianism As Variables In Counseling Effectiveness

PDF

Positional Response Set In The Multiple Choice Examination

PDF

An Investigation Of The Relationship Between Counselor Role-Function And Counselee Perception Of Help Received

PDF

Prediction Of Success In Training Among Electronics Technicians

PDF

The Rehabilitation Of School Dropouts Through An Intensive Summer School Program

PDF

An Attitude Survey Of High School Dropouts By Means Of The Semantic Differential Process

PDF

An Evaluation Of A Special Class For Children With A Mild Neurological Impairment

PDF

Nonverbal Communication In Counseling: An Exploratory Study

PDF

Upperclassmen As Academic Advisers To Freshmen In An Undergraduate College: An Experiment

PDF

The Prediction Of General And Differential Achievement In Two Samples Of Junior College Students

Asset Metadata

Creator Ellis, Betty Walters (author)

Core Title To Attend Or Not To Attend College: Some Factors In The Decision Of Qualified High School Graduates

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Guidance

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

Tag education, educational psychology,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Lefever, David Welty (committee chair), Calvert, Leonard (committee member), Carnes, Earl F. (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-263377

Unique identifier UC11358782

Identifier 6206050.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-263377 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 6206050.pdf

Dmrecord 263377

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Ellis, Betty Walters

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