University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Programs Initiated By Institutions Of Higher Learning For Gifted High School Students Of California

(USC Thesis Other)

Programs Initiated By Institutions Of Higher Learning For Gifted High School Students Of California

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Copyright by Theodore Grant Twitchell 1964 PROGRAMS INITIATED BY INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING FOR GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS OF CALIFORNIA 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 by Theodore Grant Twitchell January 1964 This dissertation, written under the direction of the Chairman of the candidate's Guidance Com m ittee and a p prov ed 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 D octor of Education. Date TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF T A B L E S ...................................... vii LIST OF FIGURES...................................... xii Chapter I. BACKGROUND OF THE PROBLEM................. 1 Introduction The Problem Importance of the Problem Definitions of Terms Organization of the Dissertation II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE.................... 21 General Literature Historical Considerations Advanced Placement in California Chapter Summary III. SOURCES AND TREATMENT OF D A T A .............. 49 Sources of Data General Procedures Development of the Instruments Collecting the Data Treatment of the Data Chapter Summary IV. FINDINGS: PREVALENCE OF ADVANCED PLACEMENT PROGRAMS IN CALIFORNIA.................... 65 Advanced Courses to Gifted High School Students Enrollments Year When Program Was Initiated Credits Allowed Chapter Summary ii Chapter Page V. FINDINGS: CHARACTERISTICS OF COLLEGE PROGRAMS OFFERED FOR GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS .......................... 79 General Information Questionnaire Findings Chapter Summary VI. FINDINGS: REACTIONS OF STUDENTS TO ADVANCED PLACEMENT PROGRAMS ............. 168 The Nature of the Group General Findings of the Student Check Sheet Chapter Summary VII. FINDINGS: COMPARISON OF SUBJECT MARKS . . . 221 Description of the Sample Statistical Procedures Comparison of Subject Marks for the Total Group Analysis of Subject Marks for the Top 2 Per Cent of Boys and Girls Together Analysis of Subject Marks for the Top 5 Per Cent of Boys and Girls Together Analysis of Subject Marks for the Top 10 Per Cent of Boys and Girls Together Analysis of Subject Marks for the Boys of the Total Group Analysis of Subject Marks for the Girls of the Total Group Analysis of Subject Marks for the Boys in the Top 2 Per Cent of the Group Analysis of Subject Marks for the Boys in the Top 5 Per Cent of the Group Analysis of Subject Marks for the Boys in the Top 10 Per Cent of the Group Analysis of Subject Marks for the Girls in the Top 2 Per Cent of the Group iii Chapter Page Analysis of Subject Marks for the Girls in the Top 5 Per Cent of the Group Analysis of Subject Marks for the Girls in the Top 10 Per Cent of the Group Comparison of Subject Marks of Students in the Top 2 Per Cent with Students in the Top 5 Per Cent Comparison of Subject Marks of Students in the Top 2 Per Cent with Students in the Top 10 Per Cent Comparison of Subject Marks of Students in the Top 5 Per Cent with Students in the Top 10 Per Cent Comparison of Subject Marks of All Boys with Marks for All Girls Comparison of Subject Marks of Boys in the Top 2 Per Cent Group with Girls in the Top 2 Per Cent Group Comparison of Subject Marks of Boys in the 5 Per Cent Group with Girls in the 5 Per Cent Group Comparison of Subject Marks of Boys with Marks of Girls for the Top 10 Per Cent of Students Chapter Summary VIII. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . 273 Design of the Study Summary of Findings Conclusions Recommendations Suggestions for Further Research BIBLIOGRAPHY . ......................................305 APPENDICES........................................... 325 APPENDIX A. Letter of Transmittal for Postcard Questionnaire ........................ 327 APPENDIX B. Postcard Questionnaire .................. 329 Page APPENDIX C. Letter of Transmittal for Questionnaire Submitted to Colleges ............. 331 APPENDIX D. Questionnaire Submitted to Colleges . 333 APPENDIX E. Follow-up Letter to Colleges ......... 342 APPENDIX F. Letter Requesting Participation of School Districts .................... 344 APPENDIX G. Letter Indicating Institutional Status of the Study........................ 346 APPENDIX H. Letter of Transmittal for Student Check S h e e t ........................ 348 APPENDIX I. Student Check Sheet .................. 350 APPENDIX J. Information Sheet for Obtaining Names, Addresses, and Subject Marks of Students............................. 356 APPENDIX K. El Camino College: Advanced Placement Program and Suggested College Procedures........................... 358 APPENDIX L. Chico State College: Procedure for Admission of High School Seniors . . 362 APPENDIX M, University of Redlands: Special Student Program.................... 36 7 APPENDIX N. University of California at Berkeley: Gifted Student Program ............. 370 APPENDIX 0. University of California at Davis: High-Potential High School Student Program............................. 375 APPENDIX P. University of California at Los Angeles: Gifted Student and Honors Programs . 380 APPENDIX Q. University of Southern California: Resident Honors Program for High School Seniors ...................... 395 APPENDIX R. California State Department of Education: Attendance in College Classes by High School Students . . 39 7 v Page APPENDIX S. California Education Code, Title V: Provisions Affecting Administration of Programs for Mentally Gifted Minors.............................. 398 APPENDIX T. Provisions of the California Education Code Affecting Programs for Mentally Gifted Minors ...................... 405 APPENDIX U. Los Angeles County: Directory of Persons Responsible for Programs for the Gifted...................... 411 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Maximum Number of College Units............. 81 2. Number of College Courses Allowed ........... 83 3. Scheduling of Classes........................ 85 4. Type of Educational Program................. 87 5. Criteria for Selecting Gifted High School Students..................................... 89 6. College Official in Charge of Program .... 98 7. College Courses Offered to Gifted High School Students..................................... 99 8. Twenty Subjects Offered Most Frequently by California Colleges in Advanced Placement Programs for High School Students........... 101 9. College Courses Having Largest Enrollments . 102 10. Grade Level Required for Admission of Gifted High School Students to College Program . . . 104 11. Instructors of Classes for Gifted........... 106 12. Relative Importance of Selected Problems . . 108 13. Problems Which Were Considered Most Important in the Administration of the Program .... 110 14. Philosophical Structure of Programs ........ 112 15. Implementation of General Program Objectives 114 16. Characteristics of Current Program ........ 117 17. Criteria for Selecting Teachers ............. 119 vii Table Page 18. Time of Year When Gifted Students Are Admitted 121 19. Primary Purpose of Programs ................... 123 20. Class Placement of Gifted High School Students 125 21. Enrollment Trends, by Sex of Students .... 128 22. Persons Responsible for Counseling Gifted High School Students ............................... 129 23. Rank-Order Listing of Importance of Selected Program Objectives ........................... 132 24. Location of Classes........................... 134 25. Student Evaluation of Programs .............. 136 26. Withdrawal of High School Students from College Programs ............................. 137 27. Grade Level at Which Sequence of College Courses Is B e g u n ........................... . 139 28. Influence of State Appropriations on Programs 141 29. Tuition and Financial Arrangements .......... 144 30. Articulation Between the High School and the College........................................ 146 31. Measuring Achievement in Advanced Placement Programs...................................... 149 32. Problems Related to Advanced Placement Programs...................................... 152 33. College Evaluation of Advanced Placement Programs for Gifted High School Students . . 156 34. Number of Courses Taken by Students in Advanced Placement Programs .................. 171 35. Ability of Students to Take the Kinds of Courses They Wanted........................... 172 36. Number of Courses Desired by Students .... 174 viii Table Page 37. Opinions Regarding Enrollment of Greater Numbers of Superior Students ............... 176 38. Type of Campus on Which Students Attend Classes ..... ............................ 177 39. Analysis of Responses of Students Who Attended Classes at More Than One Institution 178 40. Student Plans for Enrollment at the Same College after High School Graduation .... 178 41. College Enrollment of Participating High School Graduates ............................ 180 42. College Plans of Students ................... 181 43. Participation in College-Level Co-Curricular Activities........................... 182 44. Social Contacts with High School Students . . 183 45. Reactions to Instructors............ 184 46. Placement of Gifted High School Students . . 185 47. Rapport with College Students ............... 186 48. Adjustment to Full-Time College Work .... 187 49. Chance for Expression of Individuality in College-Level Courses ........................ 188 50. Individual Attention Given by Teachers . . . 190 51. Freedom in College-Level Classes .......... 191 52. Adequacy of Time for Independent Study . . . 192 53. Comparison of College and High School Courses 19 3 54. Opinions Regarding Regimentation in College Classes................................ 194 55. Opportunities for Mixing with Pupils In College-Level Classes ........................ 195 56. Repetition of High School Subject Matter . . 196 ix Table Page 57. Adequacy of Counseling of Students ......... 197 58. Instructors of College-Level Courses .... 198 59. Utilization of High School Instructors . . . 199 60. Attitude of Regular High School Students Toward Students Enrolled in Program ........ 200 61. Transportation as a Problem................. 201 62. Comparison of Achievement Between High School and College Courses......................... 202 63. College Credit for College-Level Courses . . 203 64. High School Credit for College Courses . . , 204 65. Issuance of High School and College Credit . 205 66. Completion of Requirements for High School Diploma Before Entering Program ............. 206 67. Problems Encountered by Students ........... 208 68. Most Enjoyable Experiences of Students . . . 211 69. Suggestions for Improving Programs ......... 212 70. Summary of Grades for Girls Who Meet the Criteria for the Mentally Gifted Minors Program in California ....................... 225 71. Summary of Grades for Boys Who Meet the Criteria for the Mentally Gifted Minors Program in California ....................... 226 72. Summary of Grades for Girls Who Were Selected from the Top 5 Per Cent of Their Senior Classes...................................... 227 73. Summary of Grades for Boys Who Were Selected from the Top 5 Per Cent of Their Senior Classes...................................... 229 74. Summary of Grades for Girls Who Usually Scored Above the Ninetieth Percentile on the SCAT or Similar T e s t ....................... 231 x Table Page 75o Summary of Grades for Boys Who Usually Scored Above the Ninetieth Percentile on the SCAT or Similar T e s t ................................ 232 76. Summary of Total Group of Gifted Students Who Attended Colleges Part Time Before High School Graduation ........................... 233 77. Comparison of Subject Marks of Students in the Top 2 Per Cent with Students in the Top 5 Per C e n t .............................. 251 78. Comparison of Subject Marks of Students in the Top 2 Per Cent with Students in the Top 10 Per Cent.............................. 254 79. Comparison of Subject Marks of Students in the Top 5 Per Cent with Students in the Top 10 Per Cent.............................. 256 80. Comparison of Subject Marks of All Boys with Marks for All G i r l s ................... 258 81. Comparison of Subject Marks of Boys in the Top 2 Per Cent Group with Girls in the Top 2 Per Cent G r o u p ............................ 260 82. Comparison of Subject Marks of Boys in the 5 Per Cent Group with Girls in the 5 Per Cent G r o u p .................................. 261 83. Comparison of Subject Marks of Boys with Marks of Girls for the Top 10 Per Cent of Students.................................. 264 84. Summary of Comparisons for Hypothesis 1 . . . 265 85. Summary of Comparisons for Hypothesis 2 . . . 266 86. Summary of Comparisons for Hypothesis 3 . . . 267 87. Significance of Comparisons for Six Hypotheses.................................. 268 xi LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Eighty-seven California Institutions of Higher Education that Offered Advanced Placement Programs to Gifted High School Students................................... 67 2. Forty-four California Institutions of Higher Education that Do Not Offer Advanced Placement Programs to Gifted High School Students....................... 71 xii CHAPTER I BACKGROUND OF THE PROBLEM Introduction Cardinal Newman once stated: "There are three great subjects on which human reason employs itself: God, nature, and man" (31:225). Citizens of the United States reason that the per- fectability of man is not a myth. This belief pervades the educational system of this nation and is a reflection of the conviction that self-understanding and self- development lead to a more productive and meaningful life. Whitehead (40) expressed his views concerning the essential purpose of education in The Aims of Education as follows: (1) An educated individual should acquire the art of using knowledge. (2) Education should be concerned with the imparting of "an intimate sense for the power of ideas, for the beauty of ideas, and for the structure of ideas, together with a particular body of knowledge which has peculiar reference to the life of the being possessing it." (3) Education requires the continual rhythmic repetition of the cycle of romance, precision, and 1 2 generalization. (4) Details must be abandoned in favor of principles. (5) "Education is the guidance of the indi vidual toward the comprehension of the art of life"; and by the art of life he meant "the most complete achievement of varied activity expressing the potentialities of that living creature in the face of its actual environment." (6) A knowledge of the masterpieces of thought, of imagi native literature, and of art is necessary for an educa tion. (7) "Education should turn out the pupil with something he knows well and something he can do well." (8) Education must be alive and possess the habitual vision of greatness. Whitehead has stated with simplicity and eloquence that the purpose of education is to open the mind and the heart. Whitehead's lively insight sees around and beyond the discipline of the "Three R’s"; in fact, to approach education from the point of view of the "Three R's" would seem akin to trying to plan nuclear strategy in terms of a crossing of the Alps with elephants. Many critics of education have complained that (1) the "Three R's" are no longer being taught in schools; (2) the schools are propa gating mediocrity by using antiquated methodologies and inadequate resources in the training of students; (3) only the average student receives an adequate education; (4) the gifted and the exceptional students are being wholly neg lected; (5) programs for gifted high school students are 3 undemocratic; and (6) programs for exceptional students are a waste of the taxpayers' money (233). The pursuit of excellence at every level of educa tion is necessary that men may live to the "height of their time" (32). This does not imply that uniformity of proce dure must prevail except in terms of striving for excel lence through diversity, diligent effort, and superior achievement. For whatever excellence education achieves will depend upon how well the individual differences of students are met. With the advent of Sputnik I in 1957, the people of the United States were rudely shocked into a realization of the importance of the quality of education that students were receiving. The United States Congress responded to the "missile lag" by passing the National Defense Education Act in 1958. Funds were furnished to programs involving large numbers of the more superior students. Recognizing the need for improved instruction for the superior student, school districts throughout the nation established procedures that were designed to lead ultimately to this goal. In order to strengthen instruc tion for the rapid learner, districts began intensive planning in the following areas: (1) administrative proce dures, (2) orientation of the faculties, (3) identification of the superior student, (4) guidance of the superior stu dent, (5) content of offerings and methodology of approach, 4 and (6) evaluation (233). Administrative procedures included the development of a master schedule, making individual programs for stu dents, grouping students on the basis of ability and interest, assigning students to classes, establishing homework policies, providing for extracurricular opportu nities to enrich students1 programs, and maintaining a permanent record and transcript for each student. Professor Harold G. Shane of Indiana University compiled a list of thirty-six plans for grouping students. His list was an expansion of one which had appeared origi nally in the Phi Delta Kappan magazine (233). The follow ing plans, many of which are being used in the schools of California, comprised the list: (1) ungraded groups, (2) primary-intermediate grouping, (3) grade-level group ing, (4) heterogeneous grouping, (5) homogeneous grouping, (6) XYZ grouping, (7) intra-subject-field grouping, (8) departmental grouping, (9) vestibule grouping, (10) Hosic's -ooperative group plan, (11) Winnetka Plan grouping, (12) Dalton Plan grouping, (13) multiple-track grouping, (14) platoon grouping, (15) social maturity grouping, (16) developmental grouping, (17) organismic age grouping, (18) social maturity-teacher personality grouping, (19) ungraded primary groups, (20) ungraded intermediate plan, (21) split grade or "hyphenated" groups, (22) intra-class grouping, (23) inter-classroom grouping, (24) inter-grade 5 ability grouping, (25) grouping within the classroom through teacher-pupil planning, (26) self-selection group ing, (27) extracurricular activity grouping, (28) special grouping for the gifted, (29) "Opportunity Room" grouping for the slow-learning or mentally handicapped students, (30) "Self-Realization Room" grouping for the gifted, (31) ungraded four- and five-year-old kindergarten grouping, (32) the Woodring proposal, (33) the Trump proposal, (34) the Newton Plan, (35) the Rutgers Plan, and (36) grouping through team teaching (233). On April 22, 1963, the United States Commissioner of Education signed a contract allocating $250,000, to be spent over a three-and-one-half-year period, to demonstrate programs for gifted children. The following California communities will benefit directly from this allocation: Los Angeles, Pasadena, Lompoc, Davis, and certain districts in the San Francisco area (233) . What is the purpose of demonstrating programs for the gifted? Personnel from districts surrounding those in this program will have a chance to observe programs for the gifted in action; guidelines for creativity will be estab lished; guidelines for counseling and guidance will be studied; programs of in-service education will be imple mented; and audio-visual materials will be developed. An informal survey by the California State Depart ment of Education reported in April 1963 indicates that 6 school districts have organized several types of programs for gifted minors. The programs were classified as follows: 1. Regular classes. 2. Courses by mail or special tutoring. 3. Advanced classes--acceleration. 4. High school pupils attending college classes. 5. Special counseling or instruction outside of regular classes. 6. Special classes organized for gifted pupils. 7. Other programs approved by State Superintend ent (220:21). Approximately 50,000 students were involved in programs for gifted minors during the 1962-1963 fiscal year in this state (228:5). Extensive research has been done on many areas of programs for gifted minors; however, studies investigating programs of high school pupils attending college-level classes have been few in number. These programs need to be placed in perspective. The Problem Purpose of the Study It was the purpose of this study to examine pro grams for gifted high school students who attend 7 institutions of higher learning part time in California. These programs were investigated with respect to the following areas: (1) prevalence and types of programs, (2) objectives of the curriculum, (3) curricular offerings, (4) criteria for selecting students and teachers, (5) enrollment trends, (6) personal and social adjustment of participating students, (7) reactions of students to instruction, (8) continuing registration of students, and (9) the relationship of college subject marks to high school subject marks for students registered in various types of advanced placement programs. Delimitation Summer session programs offered by California institutions of higher learning for gifted high school students were not included in this investigation. Only those part-time programs offered during the regular school year were studied. Hypotheses This study was designed to be descriptive rather than experimental; however, certain hypotheses were tested in relation to the comparison of high school subject marks of students with their college subject marks. The hypotheses were as follows: 1. There is no difference between the mean of marks for all high school subjects and the mean of marks 8 for all high school subjects except physical education. 2. There is no difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks. 3. There is no difference between the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical educa tion and the mean of marks for college subjects. In comparing subgroups, three additional hypotheses were posed: 4. There is no difference between the mean of all high school subject marks for one group and the mean of all high school subject marks for another group. 5. There is no difference between the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical educa tion for one group and the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education for another group. 6. There is no difference between the mean of college subject marks for one group and the mean of college subject marks for another group. The groups compared were the following: (1) the total group, (2) the total group of boys with the total group of girls, (3) the top 2 per cent group with the top 5 per cent group, (4) the top 2 per cent group with the top 10 per cent group, (5) the top 5 per cent with the top 10 per cent group, (6) the top 2 per cent of boys with the 9 top 2 per cent of girls, (7) the top 5 per cent of boys with the top 5 per cent of girls, and (8) the top 10 per cent of girls with the top 10 per cent of boys. In addi tion, each group of boys and girls was compared as a group. The standard deviation was determined for each group as well as for the entire group. Differences between means were also noted. Specific Questions Questions relating to the purposes and the hypoth eses of the study required special consideration. The following questions were to be answered by this investiga tion : 1. What are the general objectives of the program of advanced placement for gifted high school students who attend institutions of higher learning part time before high school gradua tion ? 2. What are the curricular offerings of these programs ? 3. How are students selected to participate in these programs? 4. On what basis are teachers selected to partici pate in these programs? 5. Have more boys than girls participated in these programs ? 10 6. Has enrollment in these programs tended to increase during the past several years? 7. Do students consider these programs worthwhile? 8. Are students' high school marks lower than their college marks? 9. Do gifted high school students make a satis factory social adjustment to high school and college classes while they are enrolled in advanced placement programs? 10. Do students find the quality of instruction satisfactory in these programs? 11. Are there differences of opinion between boys and girls regarding the merits of these pro grams ? Importance of the Problem Developing the full potential of gifted students is important for the continuing growth and development of this nation. The future of the civilization of the West may depend upon how well gifted young people are educated. Conant, in The American High School Today, suggested a practical approach to the problem: For the highly gifted pupils some type of special arrangement should be made. These pupils of high ability, who constitute on a national basis about 3 per cent of the student population, may well be too few in number in some schools to warrant giving them instruction in a special class. In this case, a special guidance officer should be 11 assigned Co Che group as a CuCor and should keep in close Couch wich Chese sCudenCs ChroughouC Cheir four years of senior high school work. The CuCor should see Co ic thaC these sCudenCs are challenged noC only by course work buC by Che developtnenC of Cheir special inCeresCs as well. The idenCifica- Cion of Che highly gifCed might well scare in Che sevenCh or eighch grade or earlier (6:62). Further concern is evidenced on Che naCional level by Che facC ChaC during Che 1963 session of Congress greaC inCeresC was expressed in Che educaCion of Ceachers for Che gifCed. A provision for Che educaCion of chese insCrucCors was included in Che omnibus EducaCion Bill submiCCed Co Congress. IniCial Efforts in California The sCaCe of California iniCiaCed a sCudy of Che gifCed in Che schools of California during 1957. In January 1961, Che resulCs were presenCed Co Che sCaCe legislaCure (224). Since ChaC time appropriations for gifted programs have been made by the legislaCure. How ever, not all programs for the gifted or the academically talented are covered by Chese appropriations. Manifold programs of an experimental nature have been implemented throughout this state; e.g., Petaluma has a humanities type of program; San Diego has a program for the highly gifted in which the median IQ is 164; Fresno has a program dealing with the underachieving gifted stu dent; Santa Monica has an extensive program for gifted students; Fullerton conducts an extensive program in 12 Western Civilization in the high schools of the district; Newport Beach has an interesting and varied program; San Juan has initiated a counseling type of program for seventh and eighth grades; and Pasadena has a program of accelera tion (233). Los Angeles has a number of plans for grouping gifted students. Of the 416 schools in the Los Angeles City School District, 350 maintain some type of program for gifted students. These plans are variously of the follow ing types: 1. Enrichment in the regular classroom. (There were 5,000 pupils enrolled in this program during the spring of 1963.) 2. Acceleration. (Students included in the College Entrance Examination Board [CEEB] Advanced Place ment Program and those attending colleges part time before high school graduation are included in this group.) 3. Cluster grouping. (Where there are only two or three gifted students in a school, students from several schools are brought together.) 4. Part-time grouping. a. Every child has an opportunity to be part of a club group. b. Achievement group (the Joplin Plan). c. Before- and after-school grouping. d. Remedial and reading improvement grouping. 13 e. Committees for the gifted. (Students meet each Treek with the principal and with their advisors.) f. Separate classes. 5. A few students from the Los Angeles City School District spend their senior year in residence at the Uni versity of Southern California. These students receive full credit at the university and are permitted to take certain courses which enable them to complete requirements for graduation from their respective high schools. This program is reported to be meeting with success (233). Present Trends Which types of organization lead most directly to the optimum development of the potentialities of gifted students? It has been suggested that perhaps the answer is not inextricably interwoven with the type of organization. Ruth Martinson (233)> in an address prepared for a confer ence sponsored by the Los Angeles Teachers Association, indicated that the following factors may be important in planning the education of the gifteds 1. There may be a significant increase in grouping based upon broader criteria. 2. Repositioning of courses In accordance with pupils* abilities is to be expected. Greater flexibility 14 throughout the school program may be a concomitant of this trend toward repositioning of courses. 3. There will be a more effective recognition of intra-individual differences among pupils. 4. There is a marked trend toward an increase in the number of advanced placement programs. 5. Back-up courses for advanced placement programs will need to be developed. 6. School districts may need to establish a curriculum materials center. 7. Nothing can replace creative teaching in edu cating the gifted. 8. Teaching must be for process and evaluation rather than for product. Bish stated that the United States Government recognizes the value of programs for gifted students. He cited the following as important features of educational thought and planning on the national level: (1) advanced placement programs, (2) the Continental Classroom, (3) the Airborne Classroom, (4) the National Science Foundation's work in science and mathematics, (3) National Defense Education Act Institutes involving both students and teachers, and (6) foundations for English, social studies, and mathematics. 15 Need for the Study Fostering and conserving the creative talents of its citizens is one of the most important problems a demo cratic nation must face. Any plan which promises to elevate human thought and character deserves to be studied thoroughly. Therefore, any study which contributes to the development of such a plan will serve a useful purpose. This study was considered to be important because it promised to provide needed information about one plan for assisting gifted students. A letter from the California State Department of Education indicated that a study of this type would be both timely and unique, inasmuch as the State of California does not contemplate making such a study in the immediate future. Many school districts are now considering more effective plans for meeting the needs of their gifted stu- dents. It is hoped that the findings of this study may assist educators in determining the advisability of initiating such a program in their communities. A search of the literature indicated that no formal state-wide studies have been completed that pertain to programs of advanced placement for California's gifted high school students who attend Institutions of higher learning part time before high school graduation. Definitions of Terms 16 For purposes of clarity and consistency, the fol lowing terms are defined as they are used in this study. Gifted student. In a talk before the Council of Administrators of Special Education in I960, Kincaid stated: There does seem to be some trend at the present time toward consideration of the academically gifted in terms of three broad areas as they relate to academic ability. a. First are those of 110-115 IQ and up who might be termed the most capable or the academically talented group. These are pupils who generally should consider college goals. b. Secondly are the academically or intellec tually gifted, those of about 130 intelligence quotient and higher, the upper 2 to 2X of the popu lation. These pupils ordinarily could plan on professional goals which go beyond the four-year basic college course. c. Finally, there are the highly gifted of about 160 intelligence quotient and above. These pupils constitute one among 10,000 pupils and require a highly individualized program (233). Not all districts having programs covered by this investigation were willing to accept this interpretation of the academically or intellectually gifted. Several districts insisted that the top 5 per cent of the students should be included and that the IQ might fall below 130 a few points if the students were thoroughly screened by their counselors. In two localities the screening of students was done by the colleges involved. Some of the 17 students met the criteria given by Kincaid; others did not. The marginal students included in this study usually scored above the ninetieth percentile on the School and College Aptitude Test (SCAT). Many of the students included in the 5 per cent and 10 per cent groups met the criteria estab lished by Kincaid, while a few did not. Because a large majority of the students included in this study did meet the criteria outlined by Kincaid, all students were classi fied as gifted. When grades were compared, the different ability groups were analyzed separately. Superior student. Throughout this study the term ’’superior student" is used interchangeably with "gifted student." College-level class. A college-level class may be offered at the college or at the high school, depending upon the arrangements made by the school district. The teacher of the class may belong to the high school staff or to the college staff. The content of the college-level course is more advanced and demanding than is the content of the regular high school course. Concepts and ideas are regarded as more important than facts. Program. In this study the word "program" is interpreted to mean the offering of a course or courses for gifted high school students. Although most colleges 18 and universities in the sample have organized programs for high school students, a number of institutions offer only a few such courses. Advanced placement. The term advanced placement refers to college-level courses taken by gifted high school students while still in high school. The courses may be offered at the high school or at the college. This is not to be confused with the advanced placement program of the College Entrance Examination Board. Concurrent. As used in the questionnaire, the term concurrent was intended to signify the thought of "being joined together," or as "forming a single entity." In this context, it was intended to refer to the simul taneous granting of high school and college credit for successful completion of an advanced placement course. However, the term was not defined in the questionnaire, and therefore there was some possibility of misunderstand ing of the exact meaning of the question in which it was used. CEEB. CEEB is an abbreviation commonly used to refer to the College Entrance Examination Board. ITED. The letters ITED refer to Individual Tests of Educational Development. 19 SAT. SAT is used as an abbreviation for Scholastic Aptitude Test. SCAT. SCAT is an abbreviation for School and College Aptitude Test. Organization of the Dissertation The first chapter presents an overview of the problem. Specific questions are raised, the importance of the problem discussed, the need for the study is deline ated, and the terms important to the study are defined. The second chapter presents a review of the litera ture dealing specifically with programs initiated by institutions of higher learning for gifted high school students of California who attend institutions of higher learning part time during the regular school year. The third chapter explains the procedures used in carrying out the survey phases of the study. The fourth chapter presents the results of the first survey conducted by means of a postcard question naire . The fifth chapter gives the findings of the second survey conducted by means of a questionnaire entitled "Programs Initiated by Institutions of Higher Learning for Gifted High School Students of California," submitted to selected California colleges and universities. 20 The sixth chapter presents the reactions of stu dents who have been included in college programs for gifted high school students. Reactions were obtained by means of a Student Check Sheet devised for this purpose. The seventh chapter presents the results of a com parison of students' high school subject marks with their college subject marks. The eighth chapter contains a summary of the study and its findings, together with conclusions and recommenda tions . CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE General Literature A large body of general literature about the edu cation of gifted young people in the United States has appeared during recent years, particularly since World War II. Gowan's annotated bibliography (18), the Encyclo pedia of Educational Research (20), the annotated bibliog raphy prepared by Ohio State University (55), the Education Index (238), and publications of the United States Office of Education (227) indicate the wide range of subjects explored and the massive amount of research that has been undertaken so far. A comprehensive review of the literature concerning the gifted is beyond the scope of this investigation. Only a brief overview of the general literature is given in orientation to the more specific purposes of this investi gation- -i.e. , an examination of programs for gifted high school students who have attended institutions of higher learning in California part time before high school graduation. 21 22 An over-all evaluation of research studies that have appeared in the literature, and that pertain to the education of the gifted, reveals that much careful research remains still to be done. Newland's "Critique of Research on the Gifted" (160:398) calls for improvement in the area of nomenclature, a careful description of the validity and reliability of devices employed to carry out research, a careful consideration of sound psychological theory and educational practice, a precisely written report to facili tate replication of a study, more truly longitudinal research, and experimental manipulation of variables iden tified by descriptive research. Historical Considerations The growth of interest in the gifted in recent years has been so pronounced that hardly a day goes by without the appearance of some item of impor tance on the subject in a newspaper, magazine, or book to serve as constant reminders of the gifted, who are referred to as neglected students. Inter est in developing the full potential of the gifted has become more intensified with the advancement made in missile development and the exploration of outer space. The development of the gifted to their highest capacities would not only help meet the ever-increasing demand for trained leadership in our world which is becoming more and more com plex, but it would, at the same time, reduce the frustration experienced by many of the superior high school students for whom the present educa tional programs fail to provide an adequate challenge (52:26). Nicklin's statement that "nothing is so unequal as the completely equal treatment of youngsters with unequal 23 ability" (236) and Dudley's belief that "the basic phi losophy of the Advanced Placement Program is simply that all students are not created equal" (98:1) agree substan tially with the position of Thomas Braden, President of the California State Board of Education. Braden stated that schools have tended to confuse democracy with equality (233). The basic idea running through all these statements is that students are not equal with respect to ability. How recent is this concern over the education of the gifted? The answer is that it is only within the past few years that vital concern has been expressed at the national level. The statements given above were made between December 1958 and June 1963. In 1950, the Educa tional Policies Commission issued a broad statement in very general terms: To find ways and means of conserving the superior abilities of gifted Americans--and of developing those abilities and facilitating their use for the benefit of humanity--should be a major objective of social and educational policy in this country. To the extent that this goal is achieved, the well-being of our society and the happiness of all our people will be enhanced. The United States, now more than ever before in our history, needs to have its ablest citizens either in positions of large immediate social influence (such as public administration, business and labor leadership, journalism, teaching) or in work of great potential future benefit (such as research in the natural and social sciences, phi losophy and criticism, and the creative arts) ( 12: 2) . At scattered locations at various times since 1930, 24 colleges and universities have exhibited interest in pro grams of advanced placement. Youngert reports that the University of Buffalo provided for gifted high school students as early as 1932. These students received college credit for work completed in the high school beyond the graduation requirements. Between 1932 and 1946, 81 per cent of the 1,496 students taking the college examinations received credit for their high school advanced placement courses at the University of Buffalo (216:360). A questionnaire received from Citrus College, Azusa, California, indicates that gifted high school stu dents have attended college classes at that institution as early as 1945. Shertzer maintains that the first formal program of advanced placement for gifted high school students was that sponsored by the Fund for the Advancement of Education (Ford Foundation) in 1951. "The Early Admissions Program" enrolled 420 boys and girls who were juniors or seniors in high school. Ford scholarships were provided to these students to attend any of the eleven colleges participating in the program (35:30). Kough reports that the Ford Foundation contributed all or a significant portion of the support for the follow ing programs for gifted high school students: (1) the National Merit Scholarship Program; (2) the Portland (Oregon) Gifted Child Project; (3) the Quincy (Illinois) 25 Youth Development Commission; and (4) the Early Admissions to College Program (25:52). Rough also reports that the Carnegie Corporation has provided substantial support for the National Merit Scholarship Program and has undertaken in total the Study on the Education of Academically Talented Students con ducted by James B. Conant, and the North Central Associa tion Superior and Talented Student Project. The Jo Berg Foundation, too, provides consultants to aid school dis tricts in establishing special programs (25:52). Fliegler (107:327) describes the incipient stages of the College Entrance Examination Board Advanced Place ment Program, a program formally initiated in 1952 with eighteen high schools and twelve colleges participating. Its purpose was to provide college-level courses at the high school level for gifted high school students. Upon completion of these courses, gifted high school students became eligible to take examinations which would give them advanced standing at a college or university (107:327). Cornog (91:380) and Keller (145:6) also described the philosophy and the history of the College Entrance Examina tion Board Advance Placement Program in some detail. In 1955, 57.4 per cent of the gifted Merit Certif icate winners suggested that the following special provi sions be stressed in the education of gifted high school students: (1) college prep courses, (2) correspondence 26 courses, (3) accelerated courses, (4) special courses, (5) honors courses, (6) advanced courses, and (7) college- level courses (52:26). During the 1950's a pronounced acceleration of opportunities for gifted high school students occurred throughout the nation. An article by Bowman pointed to the general opportunities for gifted children in California (76:195), as did a 1957 study of programs initiated by the California State Department of Education (224). Summers (194:38) described a plan to offer college-level chemistry to gifted students in 1957 (194:38). A science honors pro gram bringing selected young students from schools around New York City to the Columbia University campus on Satur days was implemented in 1956 "to demonstrate how far and how fast science education can take pupils at this level and to explore new teaching techniques" (86:422). In 1958, Fumiss traced developments in the relationship of the superior student to the university and the high schools of Ohio (115:169). The initiation of the College Entrance Examination Board program at Rock Island, Illinois, was described by Austin (56:346) in 1958. Witty compiled data about educational programs for the gifted in April of 1959 (87:165). Horowitz explained how an advanced placement pro gram was implemented at Brooklyn College in February 1958. 27 In February, 1958, eighteen high school students each enrolled in a course at Brooklyn College upon the invitation of the college authorities. The stu dents, all in attendance at Midwood High School which is adjacent to the Brooklyn campus, had been carefully screened by the high school on such cri teria as superior grades and special ability in a subject area. They were adjudged able to pursue a college course along with their regular high school program. At the end of the semester, nine of these students had satisfactorily completed the course in which they were enrolled, five with grades of "A," four with grades of "B." Six completed their work in the category of "auditor." This is the story of the experiment (136:72). Horowitz declared that all of the students felt that they had gained by participating in the program, "one making the point that she expected to be better adjusted to full-time college life in the fall." No student indicated that he had been overtaxed by meeting the requirements of both the high school and the college programs. The Miami University of Ohio program was described by Baxter and Jones. Some of the principal findings were as follows: 1. High school students, enrolled in college courses under the Study Program, achieved an over all level of academic performance significantly higher than that commonly achieved by college freshmen and sophomores at Miami University of Ohio. 2. University Study Program families were found to be comparable in most respects to non- University Study Program families. 3. Students' reasons for enrolling in the study program tended to focus on the desire to receive a foretaste of college, to earn college credits, and to accelerate college graduation. Time, money, and transportation were cited most often as reasons for not enrolling. 28 4. Students participating in the Study Program performed as well in high school courses as did their comparable controls not electing such work. In addition, no decrease occurred in either the extent of out-of-school employment, the degree of participation in extracurricular activities or the number of honors and awards received in the senior year of high school (64:342). Rough outlined programs for gifted high school stu dents in thirty-four cities of the United States in Practical Programs for the Gifted (25:32). The summer session program at Trinity College (203:115), the state wide approach of Wisconsin for discovering and guiding superior high school students (182:271), the University of Rhode Island program (82:7), and the procedures utilized by the University of Pittsburg (177:26) need not be elaborated upon here, nor the summer programs sponsored by the National Science Foundation (228:12). Bish stated that there were thirteen different projects in mathematics involving both gifted students and teachers going forward on the national level during 1963 (233) . In 1963, Vroman, Director of Admissions at the University of Michigan, reported the results of a survey of the College Entrance Examination Board-sponsored Advanced Placement Program. The eighty colleges and universities and forty secondary schools participating in this survey indicated a need for improvement in the following five areas: (1) lack of uniformity in the policies and practices of the colleges and universities 29 participating; (2) reluctance among the colleges to grant advanced placement credit and/or placement; (3) inefficient handling by colleges of advanced placement examination reports; (4) lack of publicity about the program in participating secondary schools; (5) lack of communications and assistance between participating secondary schools and colleges (44:26). The bulletin, "Advanced Standing, New Dimensions in Higher Education--Number 8," by the United States Office of Education, and "The Superior Student," the newsletter of the Inter-University Committee on the Superior Student, contain considerable numbers of references about the growth of many different types of programs for the gifted high school students of this nation. New York State has been a leader in pioneering programs for gifted high school students. Among the fifty- six practices for the gifted secondary students of New York State in 1958 (222) was the type of advanced placement being considered in this study. Advanced Placement in California Legal Provisions Between 1959 and the present date (1963), several laws were enacted by the California State Legislature governing advanced placement of gifted high school stu dents. Laws contained in the Education Code (226) cover such matters as: 1. The admission of not more than 5 per cent of 30 twelfth grade students of a district to the junior college as part-time students on the recommendation of principals of the high schools. 2. The issuance of junior college credit for part- time high school students. 3. The discretionary powers and provisions for the governing boards of school districts permitting high school students to attend junior colleges part time. 4. Minimum day requirements for high school students. 5. Requirements of high school instruction affect ing the attendance of high school students at junior colleges. 6. Allowances and apportionments from the State School Fund for junior colleges having such programs. No more than one-third unit of average daily attendance shall be given to the junior college for any student. 7. The average daily attendance provisions for the school district permitting twelfth grade students to attend college classes part time. 8. The definitions of "mentally gifted minor," "program," and "participating pupil." 9. The determination of the intellectual ability of gifted minors. 10. Contractual agreements with other school dis tricts to grant programs for gifted high school students. 31 11. Agreements with the county superintendent for the provision of services. 12. Reimbursement of excess expense incurred by the school district in providing such programs. 13. The apportionment for each student for one year. 14. Beginning date for apportionments in the State of California. 15. Advance apportionments and the State General Fund. 16. Disbursement of apportionments to the counties of California. 17. Crediting apportionments to the general fund of the school district by the treasurer of a county. 18. The responsibilities of the State controller for apportionments for these programs. 19. Rules and regulations to be adopted by the State Board of Education. 20. Responsibilities of the Superintendent of Public Instruction in regard to apportionments. 21. Establishing a supervision and consultant service to assist and advise school districts in the implementation of such programs. The provisions of the Education Code related to programs for mentally gifted minors are given in Appen dix T. Title V provisions are found in Appendix S. 32 Provisions for California State Universities In Appendix 0 is contained an outline of the pro gram offered on the University of California campus at Davis. The November 1961 edition of "California Notes," the monthly newsletter of the University at Berkeley, contained an article stating that a gifted high school student would receive university credit for college-level courses taken during high school if the following condi tions were met: 1. The course was taken after completion of the eleventh grade. 2. The course is reported on a valid transcript issued by the college or junior college that conducted the course. 3. A grade of C or better is assigned for the course. 4. Credit for the course was not used by the high school to meet graduation requirements. 5. The course is not needed to meet subject or scholastic requirements for admission to the University. 6. The applicant is eligible for admission to the University upon graduation from high school (201:3). A fuller report of the Berkeley campus program is contained in Appendix N. A report of the program on the Los Angeles campus is presented in Appendix P. 33 Acceleration Advanced placement is a form of accelerating a student's education. While an intensive analysis of the pros and cons of acceleration is beyond the scope of this investigation, it is well to review briefly the views of leading educational writers. Fliegler wrote of the advantages of advanced placement, as follows; Basically, advanced placement allows an indi vidual to attain advanced standing in college by pursuing college courses while in high school. The positive ramifications of this approach have been evident in the up-grading of teaching skills, better articulation between high school and col lege, greater opportunity of enriching activities for the student, financial saving for the student, and new concepts in curriculum development. The latter is probably the most important single effect (107:327). Fliegler admits that there are negative aspects to advanced placement programs such as the possible rigidity of the curriculum through the standardization of examinations, the addition of courses, and the lengthening of the school day or school year. Furthermore, he believes that the standardization of examinations may foster a kind of national curriculum which may lessen the value of these programs. Bereday's excellent summary of reasons why society opposes educating the gifted merits mention here (67s352). Applbaura states that "more and more the concept that education for all youth must be identical is being 34 abandoned." Although he believes that most principals and students are not In favor of the type of acceleration that permits gifted high school students to complete high school in less than the usual amount of time, a "compari son of current practices with the recommended practices shows that students and principals alike want more of what is already being done for the gifted" (52:42). Shannon summarized research evidence and concluded that the acceleration process does not prove harmful to the social and intellectual adjustment of the gifted child (186:70). In 1956, Stedman surveyed twenty colleges to ascertain the types of academic programs, identification procedures, and student personnel services selected by those institutions to improve education for the gifted. Acceleration of various types was being used (36). Programs in California As early as 1953, Cortage made a report of pro grams of education for intellectually gifted children in public schools of California (92). Trimble made a similar study in 1955 (198:3). The California State Advisory Council on Educa tional Research surveyed the education of gifted children in California in 1955. School systems receiving particu lar attention in the investigation were Fresno, Long 35 Beach, Los Angeles, Modesto, Oakland, Palo Alto, Riverside, San Diego, San Francisco, San Gabriel, Vallejo city school districts, among others (81). In 1957, a study of programs for gifted high school students initiated by the California State Depart ment of Education was undertaken (224). Programs of the following types were found to be in operation in the of California: 1. Enrichment in the regular classroom. 2. Ungraded curriculum groups. 3. Acceleration--first grade. 4. Cluster grouping. 5. Saturday classes--Stanislaus County. 6 . Special classes for fifth and sixth graders. 7. Junior high acceleration. 8. Special classes--eighth grade. 9. Community sponsor program. 10. Independent study-eleventh grade. 11. Special classes--eleventh grade. 12. Honors classes. 13. Acceleration to junior college and university Pre-school visits, small group meetings, and indi vidual counseling were methods used by college and university personnel to acclimate gifted high school students to the college and university environment. 36 In 1958, Medsker stated that thirty-one of fifty- one junior colleges in the State of California admitted gifted high school students part time before high school graduation. By 1961, at least forty-nine of sixty-two junior colleges had initiated programs of this type (27:69). Enrollment of gifted high school students in these programs was less than one thousand students during 1961 (234:4). On the other hand, El Camino College reported that "it is reasonable to assume the number is now in the thousands. Reports on hand from such colleges as Valley, Harbor, Orange Coast, and Bakersfield indicate marked increases recently" (237:9). Jones questioned whether the schools were serving the gifted students properly by allowing them to register for college-level classes before high school graduation. His conclusion was that neither the students' high school nor college grades were affected by attending such classes (141:415). Rifugiato concurred with this viewpoint in relation to students' attitudes, stating that students do find these courses worthwhile and stimulating (177:26). In an attempt to ascertain what constitutes a good program for superior students, Havighurst wrote that, in general, the development of a wide variety of talents could be developed by providing a systematic program using suit able methods of teaching, curriculum materials, and 37 administrative procedures. Selected Programs in California California has been a leader among the states in studying and providing for the needs of gifted young people. The work of Terman (37) at Stanford undoubtedly laid the groundwork for an increased awareness and under standing of the needs of the gifted, and pointed the way for the development of actual programs by the schools. Mention should be made of some of the more outstanding programs provided through the cooperation of school sys tems and colleges. Bakersfield College. Bakersfield College has cooperated with the local high schools of the community since the 1958-1959 school year and has offered courses for gifted high school students. Of this joint program, Chaffee wrote in 1960: Bakersfield secondary schools have engaged for the past two years in a program for the gifted in which twenty-five students are carefully selected at the end of the eighth grade. Provision is made for these students to complete the usual four-year course in three years. The three facets of this program consist of (1) a pre-ninth-grade summer school class, (2) the programming of students in special classes in the basic subjects, and (3) graduation in three years, facilitated by enroll ment in a minimum of two sunaaer school classes. Enriched courses for the accelerated group are worked out by teacher committees (83:110). 38 El Camino College. The El Camino College advanced placement program was started in 1937 and has expanded steadily since that date. On June 6, 1962, a formal evalu ation of the program offered by the college was completed by H. Lee Swanson. Some of the findings of this evaluation were as follows: Most of the students felt that this program provided a good orientation to college life, and added to the background of their field. Problems were comparatively few with some mentioning trans portation and scheduling as the biggest problem. Nearly all of the parents were enthusiastically in favor. Nearly all of the students would rather not be known as a high school student by either the instructor or classmates. Of those reporting about half have transferred to other institutions and seem to be doing well, although a few indicated that their advanced placement credit had not been accepted. Many of tne students indicated that they felt the program should be expanded. The great majority of the instructors (46 of 48) are very favorable to the program, and say, "send me more." Most of them would like to know who the students are so they can do a more effec tive job of teaching, or help with problems. However, most felt the other students needn't know. Although most of the instructors expressed no opinion about the best time for classes for these students, those that did thought during the day was the best. They noted no particular problems, and indicated that the program should be expanded. They were nearly unanimous in their opinion that these students should be enrolled in regular classes and not segregated (237:14). Other findings included the following: 1. Although men students outnumbered women stu dents two to one, the relative academic success of the sexes was approximately the same. 2. Some of the high schools permitted only a few 39 students to participate. 3. The most popular course was mathematics. 4. Grades remain approximately the same, whether classes were offered during the day or at night. 5. The students' study time, overload problems, and high school activity conflicts must be considered in the counseling process. 6. Enrollment is greater during the spring semes ter than during the fall. 7. More than half of the students in El Camino*s program have continued their education at other institutions of higher learning and are doing outstanding work. No follow-up records are available for the remaining students. 8. Scheduling remains a problem. The recommendations of the college for further study included the following: 1. The reasons why some institutions of higher learning in California will not accept credit for advanced placement courses should be determined. 2. Scheduling, assignment of students and teach ers, and class size should be analyzed. 3. The question of publicity for this program 40 must be considered. 4. A data retrievable program in this area might be desirable. 5. How to approach high schools that do not participate in the program is a problem. 6. What provisions the college should make for regularly enrolled gifted students should be determined. 7. Follow-up studies should be designed carefully, 8. Perhaps the name of this program should be changed from advanced placement to something which would not conflict with the name used by the College Entrance Examination Board program (237:40). Fullerton. Fullerton Junior College offers an extensive program in conjunction with the local high schools of Fullerton and adjacent communities. Long Beach. The criteria for the selection of high school students to participate in the advanced place ment program of Long Beach are given in Chapter V of this study. Chaffee (83:112) and Nason (235:23) have written about the Long Beach plans. Long Beach City College has offered courses for gifted high school students since the 1957-1958 school year. Sometimes city college instructors 41 go to the high schools to teach specific courses. This allows gifted high school students to attend some of the regular classes at the college during the day. Long Beach State College has also made provisions for gifted high school students (233) but now confines the program entirely to summer courses. Los Angeles. A brief description of the programs offered by the Los Angeles schools was given in Chapter I. Many gifted high school students attend college classes part time during the school year. Some of these students attend classes at the University of California at Los Angeles, and others attend summer classes at the Univer sity of Southern California. Most students in this particular program, however, attend the junior colleges of the city. In addition to this program, the College Entrance Examination Board Advanced Placement Program is being used in a number of high schools in the district (233) . Modesto. In 1949, a program of independent study was started in Modesto for high school juniors and seniors. During their eleventh-grade year, twenty-five gifted high school students are selected to participate in a two-hour English-social-studies honor course, which continues through the twelfth grade. In addition, a number of gifted high school students in Modesto attend junior college classes part time (83:110). 42 Oakland. The public schools of Oakland permit gifted high school students to attend college-level classes part time at the city college. In addition, Chaffee reports that the school district has seventh-grade rapid progress groups of thirty students each, working together for three periods of the regular school day in the fields of English, social studies, science, and arithmetic. Many of the students are able to complete the three-year junior high school curriculum in two years. These students have the same teachers for two years (83:110). Palo Alto. In his book, Practical Programs for the Gifted, Kough outlined the advanced placement programs offered by Chula Vista, Grossmont, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, San Diego, and Palo Alto. Stanford cooperates with the Palo Alto School District in offering several types of advanced placement courses for gifted high school youngsters. However, the summer program is much larger than the program during the regular school year (25:52). Upon the recommendation of the high school princi pal, Stanford allows gifted students who have completed the junior year of high school to register for certain summer session courses which will not interfere with the senior year program. This eliminates courses in languages, 43 mathematics, English, and history, and concentrates essen tially on the introductory courses in the social science areas. A very few students who have completed the accel erated mathematics courses in the high school enroll for advanced mathematics or science courses in the university during the regular school year. A second type of program offered by Stanford is the College Entrance Examination Board Advanced Placement Program. This involves far greater numbers of students, and enables them to take departmental tests for achieve ment. On the basis of superior performance, they may be placed entirely out of the freshman class in terms of both units toward graduation and prerequisites for sophomore standing. Pasadena. Plowman (233) stated at a recent con ference that Pasadena has instituted a program of accel eration for gifted high school students. Most students in this program attend the regular high school program during the twelfth grade. In addition, they may attend one or more college classes each semester at Pasadena City Col lege. The class selected by students most frequently has been calculus. Pasadena also offers honors classes for gifted high school students. Petaluma. Manning and Olsen report: 44 Petaluma senior high school students are chosen to participate in the program of that district on the basis of the following criteria: past academic performance, ability test results, teachers' recommendations, achievement test results, and demonstrated ability to work Independently. The selection committee, consisting of the high school principal, counselors, the instructor of the pro gram for the talented, and the district director of pupil personnel services considers each student in terms of these criteria. The Petaluma Plan includes a list of selected readings in the basic sources of the cultural herit age of western civilization. Academically talented students read on such topics as freedom, beauty, democracy, the nature of learning, war and peace, freedom of speech, justice, language, nature of art, and progress (152:510). Redlands. In Appendix M is reproduced a statement of the philosophy of the program governing the gifted high school students who attend the University of Redlands. Some students at Redlands High School also attend classes offered at San Bernardino Valley College, located only a few miles distant. Riverside. The director of research of the River side City Schools reports that in the spring of 1963, this school system initiated the College Entrance Examination Board Advanced Placement Program with a calculus class attended by seventeen students. In addition, a few gifted high school students are permitted to attend the local junior college part time during the school year. San Diego. San Diego schools are conducting 45 a significant advanced placement program. Chaffee describes the program as follows: In San Diego schools, a special committee appointed by the superintendent was responsible for the offering of honors courses for twelfth-grade students in the fields of English, social studies, chemistry, physics, and mathematics. This program was started in September 1955. Its purpose was to provide more challenging instruction for the most capable twelve per cent enrolled in San Diego high schools. It also made possible advanced credit on entrance into certain colleges and universities for the most capable seniors graduating in the spring of 1956. All seven San Diego high schools participated in the program (83:110). More than one hundred gifted high school students usually enroll part time at the San Diego city colleges each semester. San Francisco. In 1960, San Francisco schools were reported to be offering the following courses to superior students in the high school setting: (1) advanced physics, mathematical analysis, electronics, Russian, and Mandarin Chinese (83:110). In addition, the San Francisco schools and San Francisco State College were running a cooperative television course in the field of biology. Other classes for gifted high school students were also being offered by the city college. Victorville. Victor Valley College now offers a few courses for gifted high school students of Victorville and the surrounding area. 46 Other cities. Gifted high school students attended college classes part time in the following commu nities during the fall of 1962: Alta Loraa, Aptos, Areata, Azusa, Belmont, Berkeley, Chico, Chula Vista, Claremont, Coalinga, Compton, Costa Mesa, Davis, El Camino, Fresno, Fullerton, Glendale, Hollister, Imperial, Kentfield, Los Altos Hills, Modesto, Monterey, Napa, Newport Beach, Norwalk, Oceanside, Porterville, Reedley, Rocklin, Sacra mento, Salinas, San Jose, San Leandro, San Marcos, San Mateo, Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Santa Maria, Santa Monica, Santa Rosa, Shasta, Spring Valley, Shasta, Stock ton, Taft, Upland, Vallejo, Van Nuys, Visalia, Whittier, and Wilmington. National Science Foundation Grants During December 1962, a release of the National Science Foundation stated, "About 6,500 superior secondary- school students throughout the country will get special training in science and mathematics next summer in an effort to accelerate their educational development" (228:16). During the summer of 1963, programs were offered for gifted high school students at the following institu tions of higher learning in California: College of the Holy Names, Oakland; Committee for Advance Science Train ing, Los Angeles; Humboldt State College, Areata; Loyola 47 University, Los Angeles; San Diego State College, San Diego; San Jose State College, San Jose; San Fernando Valley State College, Northridge; University of California, Berkeley; University of California, Davis; University of California, Los Angeles; and the University of California Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla. In California, 471 students from the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth grades were enrolled in the following courses: microbiology, biomedical sciences, oceanography, mathematics, chemistry, physics, geology, multiple sciences (research), comparative biology, and anthropology. In addition to those already mentioned, two Cali fornia institutions of higher learning were granted special funds from the National Science Foundation, Chapman Col lege and San Diego State College received grants for cooperative college-school science programs. The Chapman College program will involve eight eleventh grade students and four instructors for the period beginning in September 1963 and ending in June 1964 (228:17). A partial list of school districts that now pro vide special programs for gifted high school students has been completed by Dr. Plowman of the California State Department of Education and is available upon request (229). 48 Chapter Summary A statement about the general literature on gifted students, a brief historical background of advanced place ment in the United States, and a consideration of advanced placement in California constitute the major content of this chapter. Legal provisions, provisions for the uni versity, acceleration, general programs, and selected programs were viewed in relation to advanced placement programs currently in operation in California. Many of the advanced placement programs offered by institutions of higher learning in California during the regular school year are still in incipient stages, so that few evaluations have been made of these programs. It is still too early for formal literature on these pro grams to have appeared. It is anticipated that within the next three years, a large number of such evaluative studies will have been consummated as advanced placement programs pass from the experimental stage into the realm of established procedure. CHAPTER III SOURCES AND TREATMENT OF DATA This chapter explains the procedures followed in investigating programs initiated by institutions of higher learning for gifted high school students of California. The following matters are considered: (1) sources of data, (2) general procedures, (3) development of instruments for obtaining the data, (4) data-gathering procedures, and (5) treatment of the data. Sources of Data College Officials Since this study was concerned with programs initiated by the colleges for gifted high school students of California, a primary source of data was the college official assigned to work with these programs. Two different questionnaires were devised to elicit the desired information. Copies of these instruments, together with related forms, are exhibited in Appendices A, B, C, D and E. 49 50 Cumulative Records One phase of the study required information about students from their high school records. The names, addresses, and subject marks of high school students enrolled in college-level programs for the gifted were needed. The data-gathering instrument used for this pur pose is shown in Appendix J. Data from the cumulative records of some of the colleges were also required. These were obtained from college records. Gifted Students A student check sheet was developed to ascertain the opinions of gifted high school students about the pro grams in which they participated. The forms used for this phase of the study are displayed in Appendices H and I. General Procedures Initial Procedure Following a review of selected literature concern ing programs for mentally gifted minors, data were collected that pertained specifically to the organizational structure of such programs. This phase of the investiga tion led to a consideration of the College Entrance Examination Board Advanced Placement Program and individual programs implemented by local school districts. 51 A determination was made that a study of programs initiated by institutions of higher learning for gifted high school students of California who attend institutions of higher learning part time before high school graduation would be both timely and of benefit to education. Whether research studies of programs for the gifted secondary student who attends college classes part time had been initiated in California was an important consideration. During November and December 1961, visits to several libraries yielded no published research devoted specifically to this type of program. A letter from the California State Department of Education indicated that no such study had been made by the State of California by the end of 1961 and that none was contemplated for the immedi ate future. Conferences were held with teachers who were known to have knowledge of specific programs for gifted high school students. Following these conferences, information from the California Teachers Association was sought. These discussions led to correspondence with Fresno State College and San Diego City Schools in which general information was sought about programs being offered in those communities. From this correspondence and other information available, the decision was made to approach this study at the college level. Development of the Instruments 52 A number of instruments were devised to obtain information and viewpoints during the several phases of the investigation. A separate section is devoted to each data-gathering device. Postcard Questionnaire During December 1962, a postcard questionnaire was developed and forwarded to 146 colleges and universities, both public and private, in the State of California to discover whether these institutions of higher learning offered classes for gifted high school students on a part- time basis. The following questions were asked (see Appen dix B) : 1. Do you admit gifted high school students part time to college classes? 2. How many gifted high school students are currently enrolled part time in your college classes ? 3. During which year was your program of admit ting gifted high school students part time to college classes begun? 4. Which type of credit do you allow these students ? 53 The Principal Instrument Conferences with teachers about specific programs for the gifted, discussions of the proposed project with the doctoral committee, and exhaustive search of the per tinent literature all contributed to the preparation of the principal instrument, a questionnaire to be submitted to the college personnel most closely associated with advanced placement programs as defined for this study. During the last two weeks of December 1962, a question naire containing thirty-one questions was prepared. After certain revisions were made, the doctoral committee on January 11, 1963, approved the questionnaire to be sub mitted to the colleges which were offering classes for gifted high school students (see Appendix D). Purpose of the questionnaire submitted to the colleges. The purpose of this questionnaire was to obtain the college viewpoint with respect to programs for gifted high school students. Preparation of the questionnaire. The contents of questionnaire items were based upon a review of the liter ature, selected conferences with teachers, suggestions of the doctoral committee, and replies to correspondence. The questionnaire submitted to institutions of higher learning was bound in booklet form, with a title page, a page of instructions, and six pages of questions. 54 Respondents were invited to fill in their names and addresses at the bottom of the title page if they wished to receive a summary of the results of the study. Student Check Sheet Conferences with local school officials, recommen dations of the doctoral committee, and a review of the literature led to the development of a student check sheet (see Appendix I), designed to elicit the reactions of students who had participated in advanced placement pro grams in California. Purpose of the student check sheet. The purpose of the student check sheet was to obtain the opinions of gifted high school students concerning various phases of the programs in which they were enrolled. Preparation of the student check sheet. The nature of the sample, the Cleveland Major Works Study, and Nason's "Patterns of Circumstances Related to Educational Achievement of High School Pupils of Superior Ability" were determining factors in designing the content and format of the instrument. The student check list, containing a title page, a page of instructions, and thirty-seven questions, was completed by May 1963 (see Appendix I). Collecting the Data 55 Postcard Inquiry Developing the mailing list of California colleges. A letter was forwarded to the California State Department of Education on November 27, 1962, requesting the October 1962 issue of the Directory of California Public Junior Colleges. In addition to the Directory of California Public Junior Colleges, Irwin's American Colleges and Universi ties, and The Master Plan were publications used to compile the mailing list, comprising 146 institutions of higher learning. Administering the postcard survey. Envelopes were addressed to all 146 colleges and universities of Cali fornia. Each envelope contained a letter of transmittal (Appendix A) and the postcard questionnaire (Appendix B) which could be easily completed and mailed. By the end of January, most of the postcards had been returned. From the information provided it was pos sible to determine the colleges to which the principal instrument should be addressed. The Principal Instrument The results of the postcard questionnaire showed that approximately eighty institutions offered courses or 56 programs for gifted high school students. Subsequently, seven additional postcards were received, yielding a final total of eighty-seven institutions which qualified as recipients of the principal instruments. These were even tually forwarded to deans of instruction at all qualified institutions of higher learning. Letter of transmittal. A letter of transmittal for the principal instrument was approved at the same time as the final draft of the questionnaire. A copy of the letter is displayed in Appendix C. The exact date when the letter and the instrument should be forwarded to the col leges was a matter of judgment. Pilot study. On January 24, 1963, the letter of transmittal was mimeographed and prepared for an initial mailing of five questionnaires to colleges randomly selected. The responses from the initial five question naires were gratifying, and no problems were foreseen. Distribution and returns. By February 3, 1963, most of the questionnaires had been mailed to the colleges and universities. The remaining questionnaires were for warded before the end of March. Approximately 73 per cent of the questionnaires were returned by March 29, 1963. A follow-up letter, for warded to nineteen colleges on March 29, 1963, elicited 57 six more questionnaires, making a total of sixty-eight questionnaires. The percentage of returns at this point was 78 per cent. (The follow-up letter is displayed in Appendix E.) In addition to the sixty-eight questionnaires received from the eighty-seven colleges to which they were sent, letters were received from three additional institu tions saying that only summer programs were offered for gifted high school students or that the program given there had just been initiated. The percentage of returns based upon eighty-four institutions was 81 per cent. Tabulating procedure. A special notebook was kept for tabulating the answers of these questionnaires. As the questionnaires were received, the answers to the ques tions were recorded. The final tabulation of answers for this questionnaire was completed during May 1963. The Student Check List Procedures. Plans were made to visit twenty cities during the week of April 8 through 12, 1963, to obtain the names, addresses, and marks of students attend ing college-level courses part time during their senior year in high school. The schedule for the first day called for visits to Glendale, Pasadena, Azusa, Glendora, Claremont, Upland, and San Bernardino. It seemed 58 advisable, at the outset, to obtain a letter of introduc tion from the Chairman of the Committee on Graduate Studies so as to assure district personnel of the academic status of the investigation (see Appendix G). Since several school districts had had only a few students registered in advanced placement programs during the last two years, a total sample was obtained from only six of the high schools. When large numbers of students were enrolled in the programs of school districts, stu dents' names were collected in alphabetical order. In all, twenty cities were visited during the week of April 8, 1963; additional visits continued to some cities in southern California during the ensuing month. Without exception, school district personnel were gracious and cooperative, and few difficulties were encountered in obtaining top-level cooperation from the school districts contacted. During the visits, the data were collected from the school districts in the following manner: 1. An appointment with the district's director of research was sought (see Appendix F). Frequently, the superintendent of schools was asked to pass on the request. 2. A packet of materials was prepared for each of the twenty school districts. Included within the packet were dittoed sheets for the names, addresses, and marks of 59 fifteen students (Appendix J) , the letter of introduction signed by the Graduate Committee Chairman (Appendix G) , a stamped return envelope for the materials, and the letter of transmittal (Appendix F). 3. Trips were made to twenty school districts and to three junior colleges to obtain the desired informa tion . 4. Follow-up visits and long distance telephone calls were made to several districts where incomplete information had been obtained earlier. 5. These visits yielded the names of 141 students who qualified for inclusion in the sample. The sample. One hundred forty-one students com prised the sample of students. Each one was given an envelope which contained a letter of transmittal, a student check sheet, and a stamped return envelope. The director of research of one school district handed nineteen envelopes to the instructors of classes for the gifted, and the instructors passed out the envelopes to the stu dents. No follow-up was possible with this group of students. Although the sample selected for inclusion in this phase of the study was originally planned to encompass students enrolled in the advanced placement program for the 1961-1962 school year, the doctoral committee had 60 indicated that some latitude might be necessary in order to obtain an adequate sample. Restricting the sample to the 1961-1962 school year did prove too limiting, and the scope was broadened to include students enrolled during the years from January 1960 to June 1963. Letter of transmittal. The letter of transmittal to accompany the check sheet mailed to the students was submitted to the chairman of the doctoral committee during April of 1963 (see Appendix H). The letter was mimeo graphed and forwarded to all students in the sample. Follow-up procedures. A total of twelve students included on the mailing list had moved without leaving forwarding addresses. Of the 160 questionnaires forwarded to high school students in programs for the gifted, 148 questionnaires reached their proper destination. Since nineteen of these questionnaires had been given to students through school district channels, no follow-up was possible with this group. By June 30, 1963, 112 questionnaires had been received from the students, a return of 70 per cent. Within this total were fifteen questionnaires received from the district that had distributed the materials to students. This meant that only thirty-two questionnaires were outstanding. With such a good response, no follow-up was deemed necessary. 61 Obtaining subject marks. Only twenty-two sets of subject marks were forwarded by mall to the investigator. Ninety sets of subject marks were gathered directly from the cumulative records of school districts and from two junior colleges. Several school districts would not grant permission to copy this information from the school records. Treatment of the Data In many instances the data collected for this study were of a personal nature. Therefore, the anonymity of all students and professional educators who participated in the study was guarded. The Principal Instrument Only the eighty-seven institutions that answered the postcard inquiry affirmatively were asked to respond to the principal instrument. As questionnaires were returned from the schools, they were alphabetized accord ing to the name of the institution. This provided a simple method of checking against the alphabetized list compiled from the postcard questionnaires. As these returns were received, the answers to the questions were recorded and tabulated. The means of the responses to questions 11 and 21 were computed. The mode was also determined for question 11. The answers to the other questions were simply tallied. 62 Student Check List As the student check lists were received, answers to questions were recorded similarly. Answers to questions 35, 36 and 37 were categorized and reduced to simplified wording for presentation. Marks of Students A sample of 112 sets of subject marks of gifted high school students was collected from eleven cities of southern California. Only marks given for subjects taken during the senior year of high school were used in this study. Both high school grades and college-level grades were obtained for a comparison of the difference between the means. For purposes of comparative analysis, students were divided into three categories: (1) those who met the legal criteria established by the state for the gifted minor programs, i.e., an IQ of at least 130 (ordinarily the top 2 per cent of the population), (2) those selected by their districts from the top 5 per cent of their high school classes, and (3) those who usually scored at the ninetieth percentile or above on the Scholastic Aptitude Test, the School and College Aptitude Test, or a similar instrument. It must be kept in mind that some of the stu dents in groups 2 and 3 were within the top 2 per cent or top 5 per cent of the student population. However, the 63 school districts did not differentiate. These three major groups of students were further categorized into subgroups according to sex. Then the means of their high school and college grades were computed by using the customary scale of one through four for grade points, a grade of A being assigned four points and a grade of D receiving one point. The data were then programmed for the International Business Machine 1401 computer by the staff of the School of Business Administration of the University of Southern California. The purpose of the programming was to deter mine whether significant differences existed between the means of subject marks of boys and girls, as well as between the means of subgroups. The mean, standard devia tion, and t ratio were computed and used to evaluate the entire group and each subgroup. The null hypothesis was used in testing for significance. Chapter Summary In this chapter an explanation of the sources and treatment of data was given. The sources of data Included the observations of college officials in charge of programs for gifted high school students, the cumulative records of the high schools and colleges, the opinions and reactions of gifted high school students, and pertinent factual information. 64 After certain general procedures had been men tioned, a description was given of the survey instruments devised for the study. They were the following: (1) a postcard questionnaire, (2) the principal instrument, a questionnaire directed to the colleges, and (3) a student check sheet. A comparison of subject marks was made by using the means of high school subject marks and college marks. Procedures for handling the data were presented. They were as follows: (1) alphabetizing the mailing list, (2) tallying the responses to the postcard questionnaire, (3) organizing a second mailing list from the returns to the postcard questionnaire, (4) tallying the answers to the major instrument, (5) organizing the mailing list for the student check list, (6) tallying the responses to the stu dent check sheet, and (7) presenting statistical techniques for comparing high school and college subject marks. CHAPTER IV FINDINGS: PREVALENCE OF ADVANCED PLACEMENT PROGRAMS IN CALIFORNIA The preceding chapters indicated the purpose of this investigation--a study of advanced placement courses offered to gifted high school students by nearby colleges and universities. Some orientation to the problem was provided by a survey of related literature (Chapter II) and by an explanation of procedures used in conducting the survey aspects of the investigation (Chapter III). The results of the postcard inquiry directed to 146 institu tions of higher learning are reported in this chapter. Findings relative to the numbers of institutions that offer programs of advanced placement for gifted high school students, the numbers of students enrolled in these programs during the fall of 1962, the number of institu tions of higher learning initiating such programs in a given year, and the number of institutions granting different types of credit to gifted students are presented here. The colleges and universities of the State of California serve fifty-eight counties and more than 65 66 17 million people. Although more than 146 institutions of higher learning have been accredited in the state, only those institutions listed in Irwin's American Colleges and Universities, the Directory of California Public Junior Colleges, and The Master Plan were included in this study. Of the 146 institutions to which the postcard questionnaire was forwarded, 132 institutions responded by completing and returning the instrument. The percentage of returns exceeded 90 per cent. Sixty-eight public junior colleges, fourteen state colleges, the seven branches of the University of Cali fornia, state technical schools, and public and private colleges and universities were included in this study. Advanced Courses to Gifted High School Students Deans of instruction in the institutions of higher education in California were asked to answer the question: "Do you admit gifted high school students part time to college classes?" Colleges that Offer Such Courses Eighty-seven colleges, or 60 per cent of the 146 colleges, answered affirmatively. The colleges and univer sities that have classes or programs for gifted high school students are listed in Figure 1. 67 FIGURE 1 EIGHTY-SEVEN CALIFORNIA INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION THAT OFFERED ADVANCED PLACEMENT PROGRAMS TO GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS Allan Hancock College American River Junior College Bakersfield College Cabrillo College Cerritos College Chabot College Chaffey College Chico State College Chouinard Art Institute Citrus College City College of San Francisco Coalinga College College of Marin College of Notre Dame College of San Mateo College of the Desert College of the Sequoias College of the Siskiyous Compton College East Los Angeles College El Camino College Foothill College Fresno City College Fresno State College Fullerton Junior College Glendale College Grossmont College Hartnell College Harvey Mudd College Highland College Humboldt State College Humphreys College Immaculate Heart College Imperial Valley College Long Beach City College Los Angeles City College Los Angeles Harbor College Los Angeles Pierce College Los Angeles State College Los Angeles Valley College Loyola University of Los Angeles Marymount College Modesto Junior College Monterey Peninsula College Mt. San Antonio College Napa Junior College Oakland City College— Merritt Campus Oceanside-Carlsbad College Orange Coast College Palomar College Palo Verde College Pomona College Porterville College Reedley College Riverside City College Sacramento City College Sacramento State College San Benito College San Bernardino Valley College San Diego City College San Francisco State College San Jose City College San Jose State College Santa Ana College Santa Barbara City College Santa Monica City College Santa Rosa Junior College Shasta College Sierra College Stanford University Southwestern College Stockton College Taft College University of California University of California at Davis 68 FIGURE 1 (continued) EIGHTY-SEVEN CALIFORNIA INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION THAT OFFERED ADVANCED PLACEMENT PROGRAMS TO GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS University of California at Los Angeles University of California at Santa Barbara University of Redlands University of Santa Clara University of the Pacific University of San Francisco Upland College Vallejo Junior College Ventura College Victor Valley College Westmont College Whittier College 69 Additional findings were as follows: 1. The program of the College of the Desert is just getting started. It has been approved by the several boards, but no students were admitted as of December 28, 1962. 2. Highland College in Pasadena indicated that no specific program has been implemented, but each student is judged on his merit. 3. Humphreys College has a program for gifted high school students, but it is conducted only during the summer. 4. Los Angeles State College offers summer pro grams for gifted high school students. 5. Palo Verde College in Blythe initiated its program during the spring of 1963. 6. Pomona College has no regular program. There are a few admissions to certain courses on an ad hoc basis, according to the Dean of the Faculty. 7. Ventura College will reinstate the policy of admitting gifted high school students to college classes during the fall of 1963. 8. Yuba College offers courses for gifted high school students during the summer. 9. LaVerne College is currently working with two high school districts with the hope of beginning advanced placement by the fall of 1963. 10. The Otis Art Institute of Los Angeles County 70 has special classes to which seniors in high school are admissible, but not for college credit. 11. The University of Southern California offers full-time college work to students who have completed their junior year in high school. These students receive full college credit. Special summer programs are also offered. 12. Oakland City College--Laney Campus indicates that special classes for gifted high school students in the high school are contemplated; however, they are not in operation at this time. Colleges that Do Not Offer Such Courses The forty-four colleges and universities that do not offer part-time programs to gifted high school students on their campuses, according to their responses, are exhibited in Figure 2. Enrollments College respondents were asked, "How many gifted high school students are currently enrolled part time in your college classes?" Only two of the eighty-seven colleges and universi ties failed to answer this question. Responses indicated that during the fall semester of 1962, approximately 1,415 gifted high school students were enrolled part time in college-level classes. 71 FIGURE 2 FORTY-FOUR CALIFORNIA INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION THAT DO NOT OFFER ADVANCED PLACEMENT PROGRAMS TO GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS Barstow Junior College Biola College California Institute of Technology California Maritime Academy California State Polytechnic College California Western University Claremont Men's College Claremont University Golden Gate College Columbia College Contra Costa College Dominican College of San Rafael Emerson College Lassen College La Sierra College La Verne College Lorna Linda University Los Angeles Metropolitan College of Business Los Angeles Pacific College Los Angeles Trade- Technical College Mills College Oakland City College-- Laney Campus Occidental College Otis Art Institute of Los Angeles County* Pacific Oaks Friends School Pacific Union College Pasadena College St. Mary's College San Diego College for Women San Diego State College San Fernando Valley State College San Francisco College for Women San Luis Rey College Scripps College Sonoma State College Stanislaus State College St. John's College The Art Center School University of California at La Jolla University of California at Riverside University of California at San Francisco University of San Diego University of Southern California Yuba College *Los Angeles County Art Institute was crossed out by the respondent, and Otis was written underneath. 72 Fourteen of the institutions that offered advanced placement programs reported that no gifted high school students were registered during the fall semester of 1962- 1963. At the other extreme were nine institutions that stated that each had enrolled more than fifty gifted high school students during that semester. Registration of gifted high school students ranged from 0 to 150 students. (The latter figure was reported by San Diego City College.) The mean of all gifted high school students attending institutions of higher learning was seventeen; the median was six. Additional findings concerning course enrollments were as follows: 1. Bakersfield College had only thirteen students enrolled in these courses during the fall of 1962; however, approximately forty students were expected to enroll during the spring of 1963. The spring enrollment is always much larger than the fall enrollment. 2. Chabot College had no students enrolled in these courses during the fall of 1962. Two students were expected to enroll during the spring of 1963. 3. Chico State College had only two gifted high school students registered for credit during the fall of 1962; however, five gifted high school students were auditing courses. 4. Citrus College estimated its fall enrollment 73 of gifted high school students as approximately seventy. 5. At El Camino College twenty-five boys and eight girls were registered in the program during the fall of 1962. 6. Humphreys College had sixteen gifted high school students enrolled in courses during the summer of 1962. 7. Immaculate Heart College instructors were con ducting classes for seven gifted high school students on one high school campus and eleven gifted students in a special class at Mount St. Mary1s--Downtown Campus during the fall of 1962. 8. Imperial Valley College estimated the enroll ment of gifted high school students to be fifteen. 9. Los Angeles State College had thirty-two gifted high school students enrolled during the summer of 1962. 10. Loyola University of Los Angeles had attracted seventy-five high school students to a non-credit "new math" course offered during the fall of 1962. 11. San Bernardino Valley College indicated that there is a larger enrollment during the spring than during the fall. 12. San Diego City Colleges gave an approximate figure of 150 students enrolled in special classes for gifted high school students. 13. Although Santa Monica City College had only 74 three gifted high school students enrolled during the fall of 1962, the respondent stated that the enrollment is usually fifteen each semester. 14. Stanford University has a more extensive pro gram during the summer than during the regular school year. 15. Stockton College usually has gifted high school students on campus during the spring semester. Year When Program Was Initiated The question was asked: "During which year was your program of admitting gifted high school students part time to college classes begun?" Eighty-three respondents answered the questions posed; four did not indicate the year. The responses are summarized as follows: Number of programs Year star Around 1945" 1 1955-1956 2 1956-1957 1 1957-1958 12 1958-1959 18 1959-1960 20 1960-1961 14 1961-1962 7 1962-1963 8 75 The Impact of Sputnik I, launched in October 1957, upon the curriculums of high schools and colleges is observable in the great increase in programs for the gifted that occurred immediately after that event. The data reveal a marked increase in the number of advanced place ment programs since 1957. Credits Allowed Respondents were asked to indicate: "Which type of credit do you allow these students?" The responses are summarized as follows: Number of Type of credit responses College credit only 68 High school credit only 1 High school and college credit concurrently 4 No response 2 Supplementary findings were as follows: 1. Bakersfield College stated that in two instances students used a college course for high school graduation. In these cases no college credit was awarded. 2. At Chico State College only high school credit is given to auditors when a grade is given. 3. The College of Marin will allox* either college credit or high school credit, but not both. 76 4. The College of the Sequoias will give either college credit or high school credit. The student may decide. 5. Compton College makes individual arrangements with the high schools in issuing credit for courses for gifted high school students. 6. Only high school seniors may receive college credit at Fresno City College; however, high school credit is given to students, depending upon circumstances. 7. Fresno State College will give college credit or high school credit to these students, but not both. 8. Humphreys College did not indicate any type of credit. The respondent stated that the members of the faculty "merely like the students to learn." 9. Los Angeles City College has established a policy which permits either college credit or high school credit. 10. Los Angeles Pierce College follows the same procedure as Los Angeles City College. 11. Orange Coast College does not give students both high school and college credit. The college allows them to use their courses for high school credit, but all students are accelerating their formal education. 12. The University of California at Santa Barbara gives high school credit or college credit, but not both. 77 Chapter Summary A summary of the findings reported in this chapter follows: 1. Of the 146 institutions to which postcard questionnaires were sent, 132 responded. Returns were received from sixty-six junior colleges, eleven state colleges, eighteen universities, two schools of technology, one maritime academy, two art schools, and thirty-two private colleges. 2. Eighty-seven of 132 institutions offered pro grams for gifted high school students. However, three institutions provided this type of program only during the summer or did not conduct a regular program at the time the inquiry was received. Therefore, the three institu tions were eliminated from the study, leaving eighty-four institutions, or 64 per cent of the original list of 132 institutions• 3. During the fall semester of 1962, approximately 1,415 gifted high school students were enrolled part time in college-level classes; several respondents indicated that enrollment in these programs is much greater during the spring semester. The mean of all gifted high school students attending institutions of higher learning was seventeen; the median was six. 4. Gifted high school students were admitted part 78 time to college-level classes in one institution as early as 1945. However, a full decade passed before the next two institutions gave implementation to this type of program. 5. Sixty-eight institutions give only college credit to students who attend their programs. One insti tution grants only high school credit to gifted students, while four institutions grant high school and college credit concurrently. Ten institutions grant either high school credit or college credit, but not both. One insti tution did not indicate that any type of credit is given, while another makes individual arrangements with the high school in issuing credit for courses for gifted high school students. It is conjectured that the latter institution probably grants either high school credit or college credit to gifted high school students. CHAPTER V FINDINGS: CHARACTERISTICS OF COLLEGE PROGRAMS OFFERED FOR GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS General Information This is the second of four chapters in which are presented the results of the survey phases of the investi gation. In this, the second phase, an extensively struc tured survey instrument was used to ascertain information about existing programs which California institutions of higher education are offering to gifted high school stu dents (see Appendix D). In response to eighty-seven questionnaires for warded to the colleges and universities of the State of California, sixty-eight were returned properly completed. Two respondents returned questionnaires without completing them because their colleges offered only summer programs for gifted high school students. A third Institution did not conduct a regular program at the time the inquiry was received. Therefore, eighty-four colleges and universities remained in the sample, a 78 per cent return of mailed questionnaires. 79 80 Three respondents commented about the instrument: "excellent," "vague," and "not entirely applicable" (the last comment being made by a respondent in a private uni versity that offered a program that tended to differ from other programs). Fifty-two of the responding institutions were public junior colleges; eight were universities, both public and private; four were state colleges; and four private colleges. Question by question, the findings are presented following the statement of the question. Questionnaire Findings Maximum Number of College Units College representatives were asked to indicate: "What is the maximum number of college units a student in your program may take before his high school graduation?" Twenty possible answers were listed, and the respondent was asked to encircle the proper response, or to indicate any "other" more appropriate answer. Responses are summarized in Table 1. It will be observed that the total number of institutions reporting is listed as sixty-nine because it was remarked by one of the colleges that it offered only summer programs for the gifted. 1. Sixteen colleges permit gifted high school 81 TABLE 1 MAXIMUM NUMBER OF COLLEGE UNITS Maximum number of units allowed Type of institution responding Junior college State college State univer sity Private college Private univer sity Total 3 1 0 0 1 0 2 5 3 0 0 1 0 4 6 13 1 0 1 1 16 8 1 0 0 0 1 2 9 2 0 0 0 0 2 10 7 0 0 1 0 8 11 1 0 0 0 0 1 12 6 3 0 0 0 9 14 2 0 0 0 0 2 15 2 0 0 0 0 2 16 1 0 2 0 0 3 20-1/2 0 0 1 0 0 1 No maximum 11 1 0 0 3 15 No response 2 0 0 0 0 2 Total 52 5 3 4 5 69 82 students to take only six units before high school gradua tion . 2. Forty-two institutions of higher learning allow gifted high school students to take from five to twelve units of college work before high school graduation. 3. Fifteen institutions have not established a maximum number of units for their programs. Number of College Courses Allowed Respondents were asked to answer the question: "How many college courses may a gifted high school student take during a semester?" by checking the structured responses of "one," "two," "three," or "other." A summary of responses to this question is given in Table 2. 1. Twenty-two institutions of higher learning allow gifted high school students to take only one college- level course during a semester. 2. Thirty-three institutions permit gifted high school students to take as many as two college-level courses each semester. 3. One college has set five hours per week as the maximum. This maximum was interpreted to be equivalent to two courses. 4. One respondent stated that gifted high school students may take four, or even more, college-level classes per semester. However, he does indicate that taking four 83 TABLE 2 NUMBER OF COLLEGE COURSES ALLOWED Maximum number of courses allowed Type of institution responding Junior State college college State univer sity Private college Private univer sity Total 1 16 1 0 2 3 22 2 25 3 2 2 1 33 3 2 0 0 0 0 2 4 1 0 0 0 0 1 8 units (usually 3 courses) 0 0 1 0 0 1 "No limits" 2 0 0 0 0 2 No response 2 0 0 0 1 3 "No policy" 4 0 0 0 0 4 Total 52 4 3 4 5 68 84 classes Is rather unusual. 5. In summary, fifty-five institutions of higher learning in the State of California allow gifted high school students to enroll in one or two courses each semester. Scheduling of Classes The question was asked: "Which of the following statements apply to your program for gifted high school students?" Five possible responses were listed so that answers could be indicated by a check mark: 1. Courses are offered during the regular school day. 2. Courses are offered during the regular summer sessions. 3. Courses are offered during a period before the regular school day begins. 4. Courses are offered for gifted high school students on Saturdays. A summary of the responses to this question is given in Table 3. It will be noted that there was some overlapping of responses because respondents occasionally checked more than one answer. 1. Sixty-three institutions of higher learning offer courses for gifted high school students during the regular school day. 85 TABLE 3 SCHEDULING OF CLASSES Type of Institution responding Schedule State Private of Junior State univer- Private univer- classes college college Regular school day 48 4 Regular summer sessions 18 3 Before the regular school day begins 0 0 Extended day program 15 2 Saturdays 0 0 No response 1 0 sity college sity Total 3 3 5 63 1 2 3 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Total 82 9 4 5 8 108 86 2. Twenty-seven institutions offer programs for gifted high school students during the regular summer sessions. 3. Seventeen colleges and universities offer courses for gifted high school students as part of the extended day program. 4. No institutions in this study offer classes before the regular school day begins or on Saturdays. Type of Education Program Three answers were structured under the question: "Gifted high school students in your program usually enroll in which type of education program? Answer categories were: (1) terminal, (2) transfer, or (3) general educa tion . The data, analyzed in terms of the type of institu tion responding, are reported in Table 4. It may be observed that: 1. Gifted high school students in five junior colleges usually enroll in terminal courses. 2. In fifty-one colleges gifted high school stu dents usually select transfer courses; however, forty-six of these responses came from the junior colleges of the state. 3. In seventeen institutions of higher learning, gifted high school students usually enroll in general 87 TABLE 4 TYPE OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM Type of institution responding State Private Type of Junior State univer- Private univer- program college college sity college sity Total Terminal courses 5 0 0 0 0 5 Transfer courses 46 1 1 1 2 51 General education 7 4 1 1 4 17 Art (basic drawing) 0 0 0 1 0 1 College courses ad libitum 0 0 1 0 0 1 Liberal arts courses 0 1 0 0 0 1 No response 3 0 0 1 0 4 Total 61 6 3 4 6 80 education courses. 4. One respondent said that the selection of the course varies with the student. 5. Another respondent indicated that students may select liberal arts courses, not necessarily general educa tion. Perhaps a definition of terms would have been useful here. 6. Gifted high school students select college courses ad libitum, according to a respondent from the university level. 7. Four respondents did not answer the question. Criteria for Selecting Gifted Students It was desired to learn, "Which of the following are part of your criteria for the selection of gifted high school students for college classes?" Structured responses were: (1) college placement tests, (2) CEEB Advanced Placement Tests, (3) high school achievement marks, (4) Stanford-Binet score of 130 or above, (3) recommendation of the high school principal, (6) a student's social adjustment in relation to his high school classes, and (7) recommendation of high school and college counselors. A summarization of the responses to this question appears in Table 5, together with supplemental answers furnished in the space marked "other." The data reveal: 1. Eighteen colleges use college placement tests TABLE 5 89 CRITERIA FOR SELECTING GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS Type of institution responding Criteria for----------- selecting State Private gifted Junior State univer- Private univer- students college college sity college sity Total College placement tests 12 18 CEEB Advanced Placement Tests 0 0 0 High school achievement marks 31 44 Stanford- Binet score of 130 or above 0 0 0 0 Recommenda tion of high school principal Social adjustment of student to high school classes 33 0 0 47 Recommenda tion of high school and college counselors 30 38 Scholastic Aptitude Test Portfolio of Art Work 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 1 90 CRITERIA FOR TABLE 5 SELECTING ( (continued) GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS Criteria f n r Type of institution responding selecting gifted Junior State students college college State univer sity Private college Private univer sity Total Test series designed by University Counseling Center 0 0 1 0 0 1 College Admissions Committee 0 1 0 0 0 1 Recommenda tion of high school counselors 2 0 0 0 0 2 Rank in class (top 10 per cent) based on academic courses 0 0 0 0 1 1 Conference with divi sion head and instructor 1 0 0 0 0 1 Wechsler score of 125 or more 1 0 0 0 0 1 Maturity and purposiveness of student 0 0 0 0 1 1 Total 114 15 9 11 17 166 as part of the criteria for the selection of gifted high school students. 2. TWo institutions use CEEB Advanced Placement Tests for this purpose. 3. Forty-four colleges and universities use high school achievement marks as part of the criteria. 4. Only one university uses the Stanford-Binet score of 130 or above as a criterion. 5. Forty-seven colleges and universities accept the recommendation of the high school principal as one of the criteria. 6. Four institutions of higher learning consider a student's social adjustment in relation to his high school classes as a criterion. 7. Thirty-eight institutions regard the recommen dation of high school and college counselors as one of the criteria. In addition to these responses, several institu tions indicated that "other" criteria were used in select ing gifted high school students for their programs. Among these the following criteria of admission were mentioned by more than one respondent: "a scholastic aptitude test," and "recommendation of high school counselors." Criteria Used in Specific Programs 92 The Long Beach Unified School District has been a leader in providing programs for gifted high school stu dents* On April 27, 1962, the Assistant Superintendent of Instruction for the district issued a bulletin concerning criteria and procedures for identification and enrollment of high school students who were eligible to take college credit courses prior to graduation from high school. The substance of that bulletin was as follows: The criteria for identification of high school seniors eligible to take college credit courses during the summer between the junior and senior years and during the senior year are as follows: 1. All seniors who have been identified as VSP's or gifted are eligible, regardless of their achievement record, unless disqualified under No. 3 below. 2. Other seniors may be chosen on the basis of their rank on the Cooperative Reading Compre hension Test in the 11A survey, providing a. They fall above the 81st percentile (converted score of 150 or higher) on that test (placing them in the top quartile of our 11th grade pupil population), and b. They have earned 70 semester periods of "A" or "B" credit in their sopho more and junior years (including required and elective courses except for Physical Education). 1) Second semester juniors with 50 semester periods of such credit may be programmed for a college course during the fall semester of the senior year. If they do not reach 70 semester periods of credit at the end of the junior 93 year, their programs must be changed, eliminating the college course, 2) Second semester juniors with only 43 semester periods of such credit may not be pre-programmed for a college course during the fall semester. If they do reach 70 semester periods of credit at the end of the junior year, their programs may be changed to include a college course. 3. No senior will be eligible if a. He has earned less than 100 semester periods of credit at the beginning of the fall semester of the senior year, or b. He has earned less than 123 semester periods of credit at the beginning of the spring semester of the senior year, or c. Taking the course would mean dropping a high school subject normally taken by a college preparatory student (i.e., English 4). The following procedures have been established by the district in connection with the operation of such classes during the regular school year: 1. Enrollment in these classes is on a volun tary basis and with the knowledge and consent of parents. 2. These classes will be offered during both semesters of the senior year, making it possible for a qualified senior to take a course either semester or both semesters. 3. No student may take more than one such course in one semester. 4. Any course so offered must be one of the regular courses of the Liberal Arts Division of the Long Beach City College and must be taught by one of the regular members of that faculty or by a high school teacher who has been approved by the 94 College for teaching the course in the evening college program. 5. These classes will be held on the high school campus whenever there are enough qualified students to justify a section. Otherwise arrange ments may be made for qualified students to enroll in regular classes on the Liberal Arts campus. 6. The credits from these courses may not be used toward the high school diploma and will not appear on the high school record. Therefore, the grades and credits earned in these courses will not affect high school grade point averages nor will they be used in any computations at the high school level, with the exception that the California Scholarship Federation has indicated that such grades may be used in computing eligibility for membership in that organization. 7. Enrollment in this course will appear on the City College records and the College will issue transcripts as needed. 8. A minimum of 20 students will be required for the establishing of such a course. Quality of students is more important than quantity. Those students who have completed the 11th grade and thereby achieved senior standing and who meet the criteria listed above will be eligible to enroll in the daytime summer school of the Liberal Arts Division of the Long Beach City College for a maximum of six semester hours of credit. They may enroll in any of the courses offered for which they meet the prerequisites, if any. This program makes it possible for some students to take college work during the summer who are not able to fit college courses into their programs during the 12th grade. The Liberal Arts Division will send mate rials to senior high school personnel very shortly outlining the arrangements for the enrollment of such students and information concerning available courses. At the University of Redlands, gifted high school students for ’’The University-High School Special Student Program” are selected in the following manner: 95 Candidates in this program will be specially chosen by a Redlands High School committee of staff members who are familiar with the student's work and capacities. The committee will recommend can didates who, they believe, are not only mature and capable of bending themselves to new situations, but who have demonstrated high intelligence, have definite aptitudes for learning, are sincerely interested in pursuing higher learning, have a sense of responsibility for educating themselves, and are already reasonably motivated toward intel lectual goals. The University of California at Davis has outlined specific procedures for selecting gifted high school stu dents to participate in programs offered by the university, as follows: 1. For each student that the high school prin cipal wishes to recommend, a separate letter of recommendation should be submitted along with an official transcript of the student's record. In the letter of recommendation, the following specific items should be covered: a. The student's academic ability. b. The student's maturity; i.e., the high school principal's estimate of the student s ability to carry this extra program and to compete successfully in an academic environment composed of older students. c. A statement to the effect that the high school principal has discussed this program with the student's parents and that they approve of their son's (daughter's; participation in the pro gram, if selected. 2. The high school principal's recommendation and accompanying student transcript should be mailed to the Admissions Officer, University of California, Davis. After the receipt of the letter of recommendation, each student will be Interviewed by the Admissions Officer at the University. The 96 importance of the principal's letter of recommenda tion, and the significance of the several special items on which his comments are needed, cannot be overstressed. 3. In general each participant will be required to be a high school senior, meet the commonly ac cepted standards of a gifted or high-potential student (such as an IQ of 130 or better, upper five per cent of the high school graduating senior class, or a grade point average of 3.7 or better in the [a] or [f] requirements completed) and obtain supe rior scores in such college aptitude tests as may be required. 4. The services of the University Counseling Center may be utilized in addition to the testing for academic ability. 5. The final decision regarding admission rests in the hands of the admission officer of the Davis Campus who acts for the University's Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools. Other Criteria In the appendix to a study by El Camino College of the program conducted by that institution, the following qualifications were given for the academically talented student who will enter the program from East High School: a. An IQ of 125 or more. b. A total grade point average of 3.0 (no C's in academic subjects). c. Class rank in the upper 5 per cent of student's class. d. A reading grade placement 2 years above grade level. e. An ITED (Individual Test of Educational 97 Development) score in the 90th percentile, f. A DAT (Differential Aptitude Test) score in the 90th percentile. College Official in Charge of Program Respondents were asked: "What is the title of the college administrator in immediate charge of your program?" The following possible answers were listed: (1) Dean of Instruction, (2) Dean of the College, (3) Dean of Academic Affairs, (4) Dean of Student Services, (5) Dean of Admis sions, or (6) other. A summarization of the responses to this question is given in Table 6. It will be observed that the three titles most commonly associated with administrators in immediate charge of programs for gifted high school students were: (1) Dean of Admissions, (2) Dean of Instruction, and (3) Dean of Student Services. College Courses in Which High School Students Enrolled for Credit Respondents were asked to indicate, "In which of the following courses have gifted high school students in your program enrolled for credit?" Thirty-five possible subjects were listed so that the respondent could answer with a check (* ' ) . The number of institutions at which students have enrolled in particular courses are summarized in Table 7. 98 TABLE 6 COLLEGE OFFICIAL IN CHARGE OF PROGRAM Number of Title of administrator in immediate charge institutions of programs for gifted high school students reporting 1. Dean of Instruction 17 2. Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences 2 3. Dean of Academic Affairs 0 4. Dean of Student Services 8 5. Dean of Admissions 18 6. Counselor 2 7. President of the College 1 8. Registrar 1 9. Dean of Student Personnel 2 10. Director of the Evening College 1 11. Vice President of the College 1 12. Director of Counseling and Guidance 1 13. Dean of Students 3 14. Assistant Director of Student Personnel, Counseling and Placement 1 15. Dean of the College 2 16. Coordinator of the Able-Student Program 1 17. Chairman 1 18. Associate Dean, College of Letters and Science, Gifted Student and Honors Program 1 19. Dean of Student Personnel Services 1 20. Dean of Special Education Services 1 21. No person in charge 1 22. No response 2 Total 68 99 TABLE 7 COLLEGE COURSES OFFERED TO GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS Number Number of of Subjects colleges Subjects colleges Algebra 10 American History 29 American Literature 9 Anatomy 1 Anthropology 6 Art 2 Astronomy 2 Biology 13 Business 8 Calculus 49 Chemistry 25 Chinese 1 Classics 1 Drama 5 Economics 4 Education 1 Electronics 1 Engineering 9 English 17 English Composition 28 English Literature 10 European History 20 Fine Arts 16 French 29 Geography 9 Geology 5 Geometry 6 German 27 Government 1 Humanities 1 Japanese 1 Latin 3 Literature 9 (introductory) Math 4 Microbiology 1 Music 24 Oriental Languages 1 Philosophy 36 Physical Education 1 Physics 15 Political Science 8 Psychology 25 Reading 1 Russian 5 Slavic Languages 1 Sociology 28 Spanish 26 Speech 12 Trigonometry 2 World History 10 100 According to the tabulation of responses as rearranged in rank order of frequency of response from institutions of higher learning in the State of California (as displayed in Table 8), the greatest number of colleges and universities offered credit courses for gifted high school students in the following twelve subject areas: calculus, philosophy, American history, French, English composition, sociology, German, Spanish, chemistry, psy chology, music, and European history. College Courses Having Largest Enrollments The question was asked: "In which of the follow ing courses for gifted high school students has the great est number of students enrolled since the inception of your program?" Again, thirty-five possible subjects were listed and the respondent was asked to check his answer. The sum mary of responses appears in Table 9. Four subjects were checked much more frequently than were others. Colleges and universities reported that the following courses attracted the greatest numbers of gifted high school students: calculus, psychology, English composition, and philosophy. American history, European history, French, and sociology were listed next in order. 101 TABLE 8 TWENTY SUBJECTS OFFERED MOST FREQUENTLY BY CALIFORNIA COLLEGES IN ADVANCED PLACEMENT PROGRAMS FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS Number of Subjects colleges Calculus 49 Philosophy 36 American History 29 French 29 English Composition 28 Sociology 28 German 27 Spanish 26 Chemistry 25 Psychology 25 Music 24 European History 20 English 17 Fine Arts 16 Physics 15 Biology 13 Speech 12 Algebra 10 English Literature 10 World History 10 102 TABLE 9 COLLEGE COURSES HAVING LARGEST ENROLLMENTS Number of Subjects colleges Algebra 1 American History 7 Biology 4 Business 1 Calculus 24 Chemistry 3 Engineering 2 English 8 English Composition 10 English Literature 2 European History 7 Fine Arts 3 French 7 Geometry 2 German 3 Government 1 Literature 3 (introductory) Math 5 Music 3 Philosophy 10 Physics 2 Political Science 2 Psychology 19 Russian 1 Sociology 7 Spanish 3 Speech 3 World History 1 103 General Level for Admission of Gifted High School Students The question was asked: "At which grade level are gifted high school students first permitted to take courses in your program?" Respondents were given three answer categories: "tenth," "eleventh," and "twelfth." A summary of responses to this question is given in Table 10. The data indicate: 1. Two institutions did not respond to the question. 2. Fifty-four colleges and universities follow the Education Code explicitly and permit only twelfth-grade students to enroll in college-level courses for gifted high school students. 3. Eight institutions allow eleventh-grade stu dents to attend college-level classes part time. 4. TWo institutions accept tenth graders on a part-time basis. 5. One institution permits ninth graders to attend college part time. Instructors of Classes for Gifted The following structured question was asked: "Instruction in classes for gifted high school students in your program is given almost entirely by: 104 TABLE 10 GRADE LEVEL REQUIRED FOR ADMISSION OF GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS TO COLLEGE PROGRAM Grade level at which students are Number of permitted to register institutions 1. Ninth grade 1 2. Tenth grade 2 3. Eleventh grade 8 4. Twelfth grade 54 5. No response 2 Total 67 105 1. Regular college instructors. 2. High school instructors hired by the college to teach the designated courses. 3. Either of the above, depending upon the nature of the course." Responses to this question are sunsuarized in Table 11. It will be observed that: 1. Three institutions of higher learning failed to reply to this question. 2. All but two of the respondent schools (sixty- three universities and colleges) use regular college instructors to teach these classes. The students are treated as regular college students in regular college classes in many institutions. Evaluation of Listed Problems In connection with the question, "Using numbers 1 through 5, please indicate the relative importance to your program of the problems listed below from most important to least important," the following ten possible answers were listed: 1. Selection of students for the program. 2. Selection of teachers for the program. 3. Formulation of a philosophy for the program. 4. Formulation of general objectives for the program. 106 TABLE 11 INSTRUCTORS OF CLASSES FOR GIFTED Instruction provided for classes of gifted Number of high school students institutions 1. Regular college instructors 63 2. High school instructors hired by the college to teach the designated courses 1 3. Either of the above, depending upon the nature of the course 1 4. No reply 3 Total 68 107 5. Financial support for the program. 6. Articulation of courses, credits and time between the high school and the college. 7. Evaluation of the program. 8. Follow-up with students who have participated in the program. 9. Supervision of the program. 10. Achievement of gifted high school students in these courses. The mean was computed for each item as the impor tance of each listed problem was ranked. The data for this question are summarized in Table 12. The mode would have placed the problem of the "selection of students" in first position of importance and the "articulation of courses, credits, and time between the high school and college" next. However, all other items would have maintained the same relative posi tions . Other findings were as follows: 1. One respondent indicated that most of the listed problems were important to the administration of the program. 2. Three respondents said that no problems were apparent in their programs. 3. Three institutions failed to respond to the question. 108 TABLE 12 RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF SELECTED PROBLEMS Ranking of problems by colleges and universities Sum Frequencies Mean 1. Articulation of courses, credit, and time between the high school and college 66 34 1.94 2. Selection of students for the program 87 43 2.02 3. Formulation of a philosophy for the program 50 18 2.78 4. Selection of teachers for the program 65 22 2.95 5. Formulation of general objectives for the program 55 17 3.24 6. Financial support for the program 13 4 3.25 7. Achievement of gifted high school students in these programs 99 30 3.30 8. Evaluation of the program 113 33 3.42 9. Supervision of the program 54 15 3.60 10. Follow-up with students who have participated in the program 116 31 3.74 109 4. "Scheduling classes for gifted high school stu dents" was ranked as the second most important problem by one college. 5. Another respondent listed "transportation of youngsters" as an important problem. 6. Only six problems received more than twenty responses. If the table had included only those six, the results would have been as shown in Table 13. Philosophical Structure of Programs In structuring the question, "Check those items that describe the philosophy governing your program," six possible answers were listed: 1. The philosophy of this program is separate from the general philosophy of the college. 2. The philosophy for this program does not differ from the philosophy formulated for the entire college. 3. The philosophy was formulated solely by college personnel. 4. Lay advisory groups were utilized in formulat ing the philosophy for this program. 5. The philosophy of your advanced placement program for gifted high school students was a cooperative undertaking by college and high school personnel. 110 TABLE 13 PROBLEMS WHICH WERE CONSIDERED MOST IMPORTANT IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE PROGRAM Importance of problems as ranked by colleges and universities Sum Frequencies Mean 1. Articulation of courses, credit, and time between the high school and college 66 34 1.94 2. Selection of students for the program 87 43 2.02 3. Selection of teachers for the program 65 22 2.95 4. Achievement of gifted high school students in these programs 99 30 3.30 5. Evaluation of the program 113 33 3.42 6. Follow-up with students who have participated in the program 116 31 3.74 Ill 6. The philosophy is in written form. Responses to this question appear in summary form in Table 14. It may be seen that considerable unanimity of viewpoint existed among college personnel who conducted these programs: 1. One respondent indicated that the college assisted in the planning and organization of the entire program. 2. None of the institutions indicated that the philosophy for this program was separate from the general philosophy of the college. 3. The philosophy of this program does not differ from the philosophy formulated for the entire college at forty-seven institutions. 4. At six colleges the philosophy for the programs for gifted high school students was formulated solely by college personnel. 5. Lay advisory groups were not utilized in formu lating the philosophy for this program. 6. Forty-six respondents indicated that the philosophy of their advanced placement program for gifted high school students was planned cooperatively by college and high school personnel. 7. Only ten respondents indicated that their philosophy for this program was put into written form, and was issued separately from the statement of general 112 TABLE 14 PHILOSOPHICAL STRUCTURE OF PROGRAMS Description of philosophy of programs Number of for gifted high school students institutions 1. The philosophy is separate from the general philosophy of the college 0 2. The philosophy does not differ from the philosophy formulated for the entire college 47 3. The philosophy was formulated solely by college personnel 6 4. Lay advisory groups were utilized in formulating the philosophy 0 5. The philosophy was a cooperative undertaking by college and high school personnel 46 6. The philosophy is in written form 10 philosophy of the college 113 Implementation of General Objectives In implementation of the question, "Check those statements that relate to the general objectives of your program," five possible answers were provided: 1. There is a written statement of the general objectives. 2. Lay advisory groups were utilized in formulat ing the general objectives for your program. 3. Gifted high school students were given the opportunity to participate in formulating the general objectives of your program. 4. The formulation of general objectives for your program was a cooperative undertaking by college and high school personnel. 5. The general objectives governing your program were formulated solely by college personnel. Responses to this question are summarized in Table 15. The data reveal: 1. Sixteen institutions have a written statement of general objectives for the program. 2. Lay advisory groups were not utilized by any institution of higher learning in formulating the general objectives for the program. 3. One college gave gifted high school students 114 TABLE 15 IMPLEMENTATION OF GENERAL PROGRAM OBJECTIVES Objectives of programs Number of for gifted high school students institutions 1. There is a written statement of the general objectives 16 2. Lay advisory groups were utilized in formulating the general objectives 0 3. Gifted high school students were given the opportunity to participate in formulating the general objectives 1 4. The formulation of general objectives was a cooperative undertaking by college and high school personnel 50 5. The general objectives were formulated solely by college personnel 11 6. No response 4 115 an opportunity to participate in formulating the general objectives of the program. 4. Respondents from fifty colleges and universi ties stated that the formulation of general objectives was a cooperative undertaking by college and high school personnel. 5. In eleven respondent schools, the general objectives governing programs for gifted high school stu dents were formulated solely by college personnel. 6. Respondents of four colleges did not answer the question. Description of Current Program Respondents were asked to "Check the statements that describe the program that is in operation at your institution." Six possible answers were listed in the questionnaire: 1. Gifted high school students in your program usually continue their education at your college after they have graduated from high school. 2. After graduating from high school, gifted high school students from your program usually matriculate towards a degree objective at your college. 3. Most high schools in your area participate with 116 you in offering a program for gifted high school students. 4. Some high schools have withdrawn their participation in your program. 5. Regular college students are given first choice in registering for college classes desired by gifted high school students. 6. Gifted high school students in your program may participate in the co-curricular activities of the college. A summarization of the responses to this question is given in Table 16. 1. Respondents from fifteen colleges stated that gifted high school students in their programs usually con tinue their education at the college after the students have been graduated from high school. 2. Respondents from twelve colleges stated that following high school graduation, gifted high school stu dents previously enrolled in their programs usually matriculated in courses with a degree objective at their college. 3. Respondents from twenty-five colleges stated that most high schools in their areas participated with them in offering a program for gifted high school students. 4. Respondents from four colleges stated that some high schools had withdrawn from participation in the TABLE 16 CHARACTERISTICS OF CURRENT PROGRAM Statements describing programs for gifted high school students Type of institution responding Junior State Public Private Private college college university college university Total 1. Gifted continue at your college after high school graduation 13 2. After high school, gifted matriculate towards degree objective at your college 9 3. Most high schools in your area participate with you in offering program 22 4. High schools have withdrawn their participation in your program 3 5. Regular college students given first choice in registering 2 6. Gifted participation in co-curricular activities 5 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 2 0 0 2 1 0 3 1 15 12 25 9 10 Total 54 4 5 5 7 75 117 118 program. 5. Respondents from nine colleges stated that regular college students were given first choice in regis tering for college classes desired by gifted high school students. 6. Respondents from ten colleges indicated that gifted high school students were permitted to participate in the co-curricular activities of the colleges. These students could purchase student body cards and attend college functions, according to one respondent. Criteria for Selecting Teachers The question was asked: "Which of the following criteria are used in selecting teachers for your program?" Six suggestive responses were listed: 1. Recent experience with the age group being taught. 2. Specific courses in methods to be used with gifted high school students. 3. Recommendation of the high school principal. 4. Recommendation of the appropriate college dean. 5. Academic preparation in the area being taught. 6. Instructors who possess a minimum of five years of experience in teaching. A summary of responses to this question is given in Table 17. The data appear to indicate: 119 TABLE 17 CRITERIA FOR SELECTING TEACHERS Criteria for the selection of instructors Number of of gifted high school students institutions 1. Recent experience with the age group being taught 1 2. Specific courses in methods to be used with gifted high school students 1 3. Recommendation of the high school principal 2 4. Recommendation of the appropriate college dean 22 5. Academic preparation in the area being taught 29 6. A minimum of five years of teaching experience 1 7. The instructor's willingness and interest 1 8. Excellence in teaching 1 9. A minimum of three years of teaching experience 1 10. Regular college instructors 26 11. Recommendation of the chairman of the department 1 120 1. The three criteria used most frequently by the colleges in selecting teachers for the programs involving gifted high school students were the following: (1) aca demic preparation in the area being taught, (2) regular college instructors (no special selection), and (3) the recommendation of the appropriate college dean. 2. The recommendation of the high school principal was accepted by two institutions of higher learning. Time of Year When Gifted Students Are Admitted The question was asked: ’’ During which part of the school year are gifted high school students admitted part time to your college classes?" Four possible answers were listed, A summary of responses to this question, analyzed in terms of type of institution, appears in Table 18. The data appear to indicate the following: 1. All institutions that offer courses for gifted high school students during the spring semester also offer them during the fall semester; however, not all institu tions that offer these courses in the fall semester also offer them during the spring. 2. Four institutions offered only summer session programs for gifted high school students. 3. TWenty-five institutions indicated that these TABLE 18 TIME OF YEAR WHEN gifted : STUDENTS ARE ADMITTED Time of year high school students are admitted Type of institution responding when Junior college State college Public university Private college Private university Total 1. Fall semester 28 1 2 2 2 35 2. Spring semester 24 1 2 1 2 30 3. Summer session 1 1 0 1 1 4 4. During any semester or summer session of the school year 17 4 1 0 3 25 5. No response 2 0 0 0 0 2 Total 72 7 5 4 8 96 ro ( —1 122 programs are offered during any semester or summer session of the school year. 4. Two institutions failed to respond to the question. Primary Purposes of the Program Respondents were asked to indicate: "Which one of the following purposes is primary in your program for gifted high school students?" Three possible answers were structured, as follows: 1. Acceleration of the students. 2. Enrichment of the program of the students. 3. A combination of the above. The data, as sunmarized in Table 19, reveal the following observations: 1. Respondents from nine institutions stated that acceleration of students is the primary purpose of their programs. 2. At fourteen institutions of higher learning, enrichment of the program of the students is a primary objective. 3. Respondents from forty-one institutions stated that the primary purpose of the programs is a combination of acceleration and enrichment. 4. Four institutions did not respond to the question. 123 TABLE 19 PRIMARY PURPOSE OF PROGRAMS Responses Primary purpose of the program of colleges 1. Acceleration of the students 9 2. Enrichment of the program of the students 14 3. A combination of the above 41 4. No response 4 Total 68 124 Placement of Gifted High School Students in Classes The question was asked: "Which of the following statements relate to the placement of gifted high school students part time in your college classes?" Three possi ble answers were suggested: 1. Gifted high school students are usually placed in classes with regular college students. 2. Gifted high school students are usually kept together in classes for their particular age group. 3. Both methods are used. Responses to this question are summarized in Table 20. Examination of the data inspires the following observations: 1. At sixty institutions, gifted high school stu dents are usually placed in classes with regular college students. 2. Both methods are used at six institutions of higher learning. One of the respondents from this group stated that certain general education course sections are designated on both the college and the high school levels. 3. Gifted high school students are usually kept together in classes for their particular age group at one college. 4. One respondent stated that the administration 125 TABLE 20 CLASS PLACEMENT OF GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS Placement of gifted high school students Responses in college-level classes of colleges 1. Gifted high school students are usually placed in classes with regular college students 60 2. Gifted high school students are usually kept together in classes for their particular age group 1 3. Both methods are used 6 Total 67 126 of his college favors having gifted high school students in classes with regular college students but that in prac tice these students are usually kept together in classes for their particular age group because of the transporta tion problem. Enrollment Trends by Sex Respondents were asked to indicate: "Which of the following statements reflect the status of your enrollment trend in programs for gifted high school students?" Six alternative responses were provided: 1. There are more boys than girls currently enrolled. 2. There are more girls than boys currently enrolled. 3. The number of boys and girls currently enrolled in this program is approximately the same. 4. From the inception of this program, more boys than girls have been enrolled. 5. From the inception of this program, more girls than boys have been enrolled. 6. From the inception of this program, the number of boys and girls enrolled in this program has been approximately the same. A summary of responses to this question is given 127 in Table 21. The following observations are based upon an examination of the data: 1. More boys than girls are currently enrolled at twenty-five institutions of higher learning. 2. More girls than boys are currently enrolled at eight institutions. 3. The number of boys and girls currently enrolled is approximately the same at sixteen institutions. 4. Since inception of the program, more boys than girls have been enrolled at twenty-three institutions. 5. Since inception of the program, more girls than boys have been enrolled at seven institutions. 6. Since inception of the program, the number of boys and girls enrolled has been approximately the same at fourteen institutions of higher learning. Counseling of Gifted High School Students Respondents were asked to indicate whether the "Counseling of gifted students is primarily the responsi bility of: (1) high school counselor, (2) college coun selor, or (3) teacher of the subject in which the student is enrolled." Responses to this question are summarized in Table 22. The following observations are based on an examination of the data: 1. Considerable overlapping of answers was found TABLE 21 ENROLLMENT TRENDS, BY SEX OF STUDENTS Enrollment trend, according to sex of student TyPe of institution responding Junior State Public Private Private college college university college university Total 1. More boys than girls are currently enrolled 21 2. More girls than boys are currently enrolled 6 3. The number of boys and girls currently enrolled is approximately the same 11 4. From the beginning more boys than girls have been enrolled 19 5. From the beginning more girls than boys have been enrolled 2 6. From the beginning the number of boys and girls enrolled has been approx imately the same 11 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 25 8 16 23 0 0 14 129 TABLE 22 PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR COUNSELING GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS Individual charged with responsibility of Responses gifted high school students of colleges 1. High school counselor 41 2. College counselor 21 3. Teacher of the subject in which the gifted high school student is enrolled 12 Total 74 130 on this question. This accounts for a greater number of responses than there are institutions in the study. 2. Forty-one colleges and universities indicated that the responsibility for counseling students in their programs rested with high school counselors. 3. Twenty-one institutions of higher learning assigned this responsibility to college counselors. 4. Twelve institutions of higher learning consid ered counseling to be part of the classroom teacher's responsibility. 5. Two institutions considered counseling in these programs to be a joint responsibility of high school and college counselors. 6. The district psychologist counsels students in one program. 7. Seven colleges and universities indicated that all three of the personnel involved are important in the counseling process. 8. The department head is primarily responsible for counseling the students in one program, while the admissions officer performs this function in one other. Relative Importance of Program Objectives Respondents were asked to "Rank the following objectives on a scale of one through five in relation to their importance to your program. Start with the most 131 important." Eight answer-categories were listed, as follows: 1. An orderly transition from high school to college work. 2. Social adjustment of the student. 3. Academic success of the student. 4. Personal adjustment of the student. 5. Exploration of interests and aptitudes by student. 6. Gaining advanced standing in an academic field of college work. 7. Preparation for a profession. 8. General education as the specific objective. One respondent added "providing a challenge for the academically more able student" as one of the important objectives. The mean was determined for each item, and objec tives were ranked according to their importance to the colleges. A summary of responses to this question appears in Table 23. It will be observed that college personnel attached greatest importance to the more college-oriented objec tives: (1) gaining advanced standing in an academic field of college work, (2) academic success, (3) orderly transi tion from high school to college work, and (4) exploration of interests and aptitudes. 132 TABLE 23 RANK-ORDER LISTING OF IMPORTANCE OF SELECTED PROGRAM OBJECTIVES Ranking of objectives by colleges and universities Sum Frequencies Mean 1. Gaining advanced standing in an academic field of college work 136 57 2.39 2. Academic success of the student 143 56 2.55 3. An orderly transition from high school to college work 129 47 2.74 4. Exploration of interests and aptitudes by student 140 51 2.75 5. Social adjustment of the student 50 15 3.33 6. Personal adjustment of the student 75 21 3.57 7. General education as the specific objective 65 18 3.61 8. Preparation for a profession 102 25 4.08 Location of Classes It was desired to learn where college courses for gifted high school students were held. The question was asked: "Gifted high school students usually attend col lege classes on which campus?" Three possible responses were listed: 1. College campus. 2. High school campus. 3. Either, depending upon the nature of the offering. Responses are summarized in Table 24. The follow ing observations are based upon an examination of the data 1. Fifty-eight of the sixty-eight California colleges that responded require that gifted high school students attend college-level classes on the college campus. 2. Respondents from six colleges stated that gifted high school students attend classes on either the college campus or the high school campus, depending upon the nature of the offering. 3. No response was forthcoming from four institutions. Student Evaluation of Programs Respondents were asked to indicate whether "Gifted high school students are asked to evaluate the program 134 TABLE 24 LOCATION OF CLASSES Campus on which classes are held for Responses gifted high school students of colleges 1. College campus 58 2. High school campus 0 3. Either, depending upon the nature of the offering 6 4. No response 4 Total 68 135 offered at your institution (1) frequently, (2) sometimes, (3) rarely, or (4) never." A summary of responses to this question is given in Table 25. The data indicate that: 1. Eighteen institutions ask gifted high school students to evaluate their programs frequently. 2. Nineteen institutions ask gifted high school students to evaluate their programs sometimes. 3. Thirteen institutions rarely ask gifted high school students to evaluate their programs. 4. Twelve institutions never ask gifted high school students to evaluate their programs. 5. One respondent who answered "frequently" stated that gifted high school students are asked to evaluate their program each semester. 6. Six institutions did not respond to this question. Withdrawal of High School Students from College Programs Respondents were asked to state whether "High school students withdraw from participation in your pro gram (1) frequently, (2) sometimes, (3) rarely, or (4) never." Responses to this question are summarized in Table 26. It will be observed that: 136 TABLE 25 STUDENT EVALUATION OF PROGRAMS Frequency with which gifted high school students Responses evaluate their programs of colleges 1. Frequently 18 2. Sometimes 19 3. Rarely 13 4. Never 12 5. No response 6 Total 68 137 TABLE 26 WITHDRAWAL OF HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS FROM COLLEGE PROGRAMS Frequency with which gifted high school students withdraw Responses from college-level classes of colleges 1. Frequently 0 2. Sometimes 21 3. Rarely 32 4. Never 5 5. No response 10 Total 68 138 1. Respondents from twenty-one institutions stated that gifted high school students "sometimes" with draw from their programs. 2. Respondents from five institutions indicated that gifted high school students "never" withdraw from their programs. 3. Gifted high school students "rarely" withdraw from the programs offered at thirty-two institutions. 4. Ten respondents did not answer the question. Sequence of College Courses Respondents were asked to answer the question: "A continuous sequence of college courses for gifted high school students is offered by your institution (1) start ing with the tenth grade, (2) starting with the eleventh grade, (3) starting with the twelfth grade, or (4) not at all." A summary of responses to this question is pre sented in Table 27. It is seen from an examination of the data that: 1. One institution has a continuous sequence of college courses starting with the tenth grade. 2. A continuous sequence starting with the eleventh grade is offered by two institutions. 3. Thirty-two colleges and universities have a continuous sequence of college courses for gifted high 139 TABLE 27 GRADE LEVEL AT WHICH SEQUENCE OF COLLEGE COURSES IS BEGUN Grade level at which institutions begin a continuous sequence of courses for gifted Responses of colleges 1. Starting with the tenth grade 1 2. Starting with the eleventh grade 2 3. Starting with the twelfth grade 32 4. No continuous sequence offered 23 5. No response 6 Total 66 140 school students starting with the twelfth grade. 4. Twenty-five institutions do not have a con tinuous sequence of college courses for gifted high school students. 5. Six institutions did not respond to the question. One respondent stated simply that college-level courses are of the student's choice. Another stated that a sequence is in operation in the fields of English compo sition and history at his institution; however, he failed to give the grade level at which this sequence starts. Influence of Appropriations on Programs The question was asked: "Has the allocation of funds by the California State Legislature for the educa tion of gifted high school students tended to increase enrollment in your program?" Response categories were: (1) greatly, (2) somewhat, or (3) not at all. The data are summarized in Table 28. An examina tion of this table reveals: 1. Two respondents declared that the allocation of funds by the California State Legislature had tended to increase enrollment in their programs "greatly." 2. Five respondents stated that the allocation of funds by the California State Legislature had tended to increase enrollment in their programs "somewhat." 141 TABLE 28 INFLUENCE OF STATE APPROPRIATIONS ON PROGRAMS Appropriations by California Legislature have tended to Responses increase enrollment: of colleges 1. Greatly 2 2. Somewhat 5 3. Not at all 47 4. No response 9 Total 63 142 3. Forty-seven institutions indicated that such allocation of funds did not tend to increase enrollment in their programs. 4. Nine respondents failed to answer the question. In addition, one respondent said that he did not know whether the allocation of funds by the California State Legislature tended to increase enrollment in the program of his institution for gifted high school students. Another indicated that he would hate to think that money was a consideration in any way in such a program. Another respondent said, "Not that I know of." Still another thought that the high schools received all the average daily attendance credit. One respondent did not consider this question applicable. Tuition and Financial Arrangements Respondents were asked to check the statements that applied to their programs. Five statements were listed, as follows: 1. Students are admitted without tuition. 2. Students are required to pay tuition. 3. The high school district pays the cost of educating the gifted high school students in your program. 4. The college and high school district share the cost of educating gifted high school students 143 in your program. 5. The college assumes the full cost of educating high school students in this program. Responses are summarized in Table 29. 1. Forty-three institutions charge no tuition of gifted high school students. 2. Students are required to pay tuition at thir teen institutions, although one respondent from a private university indicated that the unit rate is decreased for these students. 3. The high school district pays the cost of educating gifted students in six programs. 4. The college and high school district share the cost of educating gifted high school students in seven programs. 5. The college assumes the full cost of educating gifted high school students in thirty-two of these programs. 6. At two institutions, gifted high school stu dents are required to pay fees. 7. One respondent mentioned that the students pay for their textbooks. 8. Another respondent said that the incidental fees which students would normally pay are waived for those with financial need. 144 TABLE 29 TUITION AND FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS Statements which apply to programs Responses for the gifted offered by colleges of colleges 1. Students are admitted without tuition 43 2. Students are required to pay tuition 13 3. The high school district pays the cost of educating the gifted high school students in your program 6 4. The college and high school district share the cost of educating gifted high school students in your program 7 5. The college assumes the full cost of educating high school students in this program 32 145 Articulation Between High School and College Respondents were asked to indicate the method used in achieving college-high school articulation. They were asked: "How is close articulation achieved between the high school and the college in offering these programs at your institution?" Four possible answers were listed: 1. Teachers from both levels work on committees. 2. Sumner conferences bring program coordinators and teachers from both high school and college together. 3. Summer institutes are given for teachers in your program. 4. Workshops in the subject areas are held. The responses to this question are summarized in Table 30. It may be seen that: 1. Teachers from both levels work on committees to implement eleven of these programs. 2. One institution arranges summer conferences to bring together program coordinators and teachers from both high school and college. 3. Summer institutes are given for teachers in this program at one institution of higher learning. 4. TWo colleges provide time to conduct workshops in the subject areas. 5. Five respondents indicated that no articulation 146 TABLE 30 ARTICULATION BETWEEN THE HIGH SCHOOL AND THE COLLEGE Method of articulating programs Responses between high schools and colleges of colleges 1. Teachers from both levels work on committees 11 2. Summer conferences bring program coordinators and teachers from both high school and college together 1 3. Summer institutes are given for teachers in your program 1 4. Workshops in the subject areas are held 2 Total 15 147 effort is made. The students take what is available. 6. Counselors from the junior colleges and the high schools work out the articulation for six programs. 7. In one unified school district the central office issues information and directives. Then a counselor from each high school works with the head counselor-- coordinator for the district. 8. Other plans mentioned for articulating these programs included the following: a. Administrative agreements and procedures. b. Individual communication on various levels. c. Direct negotiation with the district curriculum department and counseling staff. d. Conferences during the year as needed. e. Deans of the college conferring with high school administrators. f. Liaison person in high school meeting with college personnel. g. Informal conferences between the high school counselors and the dean of admis sions . h. Discussion between counselors and adminis trative personnel on both levels. i. Meetings between the dean of admissions and other college personnel and the high school administrators. 148 j. Conferences between high school counselors and the director of counseling at the college. k. Contacts between the dean of students, the staff, and the district psychologist. 1. District-wide committees of administrators supplemented by local committees of teach ers who work together to implement pro grams . Measuring Achievement in Advanced Placement Programs In order to ascertain what methods were used to measure student achievement, the following question was asked: "Achievement in your advanced placement program is measured by what means?" Five possible answers were listed, as follows: 1. CEEB Advanced Placement Examinations. 2. Instructors' examinations. 3. Standardized college achievement tests. 4. Committees of readers, representing both high schools and colleges, who go over written examinations. 5. All of these. Responses to this question are summarized in Table 31. The data reveal: 149 TABLE 31 MEASURING ACHIEVEMENT IN ADVANCED PLACEMENT PROGRAMS Means by which achievement in programs for Responses gifted high school students is measured of colleges 1. CEEB Advanced Placement Examinations 2 2. Instructors' examinations 36 3. Standardized college achievement tests 7 4. Committees of readers, representing both high schools and colleges, who go over written examinations 0 5. All of these 0 Total 65 150 1. Two institutions measure student achievement in their programs by means of CEEB Advanced Placement Examinations. 2. Fifty-six institutions rely upon instructors' exam*nations. 3. Seven institutions utilize standardized col lege achievement tests in checking the achievement of students in their programs. 4. In two institutions grades were the deter minants in measuring the achievement of gifted students in advanced placement. 5. One respondent said that a comparison is made with the achievement of regular college students. Problems Related to Advanced Placement Programs In an effort to ascertain which academic problems are being encountered in administering programs, the fol lowing question was devised: "The following are regarded as problems in these programs. Check the ones that apply to your program." Five possible answers were structured, and respondents were invited to comment freely: 1. There is difficulty in transferring advanced placement credit from one college to another. 2. ROTC units will not accept this type of credit. 3. Departmental reluctance to credit advanced 151 placement courses toward the field of concen tration is a problem. 4. Acceleration may unduly affect a student's initial choice of major. 5. Students who skip the freshman year may not have an adequate background in certain subjects. A summary of responses to this question is exhib ited in Table 32. A number of interesting free responses were offered by participants: 1. Two respondents from junior colleges stated that sometimes there is difficulty in transferring advanced placement credit from one college to another. (In a sur vey conducted by El Camino College of students who had participated in the program for gifted high school stu dents , it was reported: "All but six indicated that their credits had been accepted at the transfer institution. Those institutions not accepting this type of credit were the California Institute of Technology, Harvard, and the United States Airforce Academy" [237]). 2. One institution reported that ROTC units do not accept this kind of credit. 3. Two institutions listed as a problem depart mental reluctance to credit advanced placement courses toward a field of concentration. 4. Two respondents believed that acceleration 152 TABLE 32 PROBLEMS RELATED TO ADVANCED PLACEMENT PROGRAMS Problems Chat; apply Co college programs Responses for glfCed high school sCudenCs of colleges 1. DifficulCy in Cransferring crediC from one college Co another 2 2. ROTC units not accepting this type of credit 1 3. Departmental reluctance to j^rant credit towards field of concentration 2 4. Acceleration affecting a student's initial choice of major 2 5. Students skipping freshman year not having adequate background in certain subjects 5 6. No response 45 Tocal 57 153 might unduly influence a student's initial choice of major. 5. Students who skip the freshman year may not have an adequate background in certain subjects, according to respondents from five institutions. The following were listed as additional problems by no more than one institution: 1. Transportation is sometimes a problem. 2. A student does not receive credit for classes unless he enrolls as a matriculated student after high school graduation. 3. There are parental pressures on high school principals because of the prestige factor of having a student in the program. 4. Scheduling college classes to meet high school schedules presents an ever-present problem. 5. The high school schedule frequently conflicts with the college schedule. 6. Sometimes the distance of the high schools from the college presents a problem. 7. The selection of students is a major problem. 8. The selection of a place to offer the classes presents a difficulty. 9. Some high school instructors resent having the superior students go to the college. This is basically what some might term "professional jealousy." 10. A problem for some students is their rejection 154 by high school classmates. 11. Attendance at college courses interferes with students' participation in the activity program at the high school. There is a belief held by some that gifted high school students who are student body leaders remain at the high school, while gifted students inclined towards research more frequently enroll in these programs. Evaluation of Programs A similar broadly evaluative question asked respondents to react to the over-all program: "The evalu ation of your program for gifted high school students has shown which of the following statements to be true in relation to your program?" Six possible answers were sug gested, and respondents were asked to comment freely: 1. Students performed as well, or better, in their continuing high school studies as they did prior to their participating in the program on the college campus. 2. Students' achievement marks in college courses tend to equal their high school marks in high school offerings in the same subject field. 3. Gifted high school students attending college- level classes part time do not tend to do equally well in their continuing high school studies. 155 4. Gifted high school students earn college marks that do not equal their high school marks in the same subject field. 5. Following graduation from high school, these gifted students perform as well, or better, in the regular college program than they did in college-level courses prior to their graduation from high school. 6. Such investigations have not been made. Responses to this question are summarized in Table 33. Other findings and comments were as follows: 1. In general, these students have performed at the top of their college classes. 2. Students do very well, with few exceptions. 3. Investigations by this institution have been casual. 4. One respondent felt that it was too early to judge. 5. Although the marks of gifted high school stu dents do not equal their high school marks in the same subject field, these high school students tend to be in the top third of the college students at one institution. 6. One comment was that some high school seniors have an opportunity to earn college credit and avoid the letdown of an easy year. 156 TABLE 33 COLLEGE EVALUATION OF ADVANCED PLACEMENT PROGRAMS FOR GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS Evaluation of programs for gifted high school students Responses by institutions of higher learning of colleges 1. Students performed as well, or better in their continuing high school studies as they did prior to their participation in the program on the college campus 31 2. Students' achievement marks in college courses tend to equal their high school marks in high school offerings in the same subject field 18 3. Gifted high school students attending college-level classes part time do not tend to do equally well in their continuing high school studies 0 4. Gifted high school students earn college marks that do not equal their high school marks in the same subject field 8 5. Following graduation from high school, these gifted students perform as well, or better, in the regular college programs as they did in college-level courses prior to their graduation from high school 21 6. Such investigations have not been made 14 157 On January 6, 1963, an article appeared in the Los Angeles Times describing the UCLA program instituted in 1958: Since the start of the program for gifted high school students at UCLA in 1958, 450 pupils have achieved a cumulative average of 3.27--a bit better than a B grade--in courses taken in 22 departments in both lower and upper divisions. As those who have gone on before them, the 103 presently enrolled from 11 high schools earn col lege credit for their studies, not as units for high school graduation (199). A brief description of this program is contained in Appendix P. Chapter Summary 1. The maximum number of units a gifted high school student may take before high school graduation varies from 3 to 20.5 units. Forty-two California colleges and universities permit a gifted high school student to enroll for from 5 to 12 units before he graduates from high school. The greatest single frequency allowed by institutions of higher learning is six units. 2. Twenty-two institutions allow gifted high school students to take only one college-level course during a semester; thirty-three institutions permit stu dents to take two college-level courses per semester. In summary, it can be stated that fifty-five of sixty-eight institutions of higher learning in California permit 158 gifted high school students to take one or two college- level courses per semester. 3. Sixty-three of sixty-eight institutions offer courses for gifted high school students during the regular school day. Twenty-seven institutions offer programs for gifted high school students during the regular summer sessions. Seventeen colleges and universities offer courses for gifted high school students as part of the extended day program. No classes are offered before the regular school day begins or on Saturdays. 4. In only five institutions do gifted high school students usually enroll in terminal courses. In fifty-one colleges gifted high school students usually select transfer courses. In seventeen institutions, gifted high school students usually register in general education courses. 5. In order of importance, the criteria used by colleges in selecting gifted high school students for their programs are: (a) the recommendation of the high school principal, (b) high school achievement marks, (c) the recommendation of high school and college counselors, and (d) college placement tests. 6. The title of the school official in immediate charge of programs for gifted high school students at institutions of higher learning varies from college to college. Titles of the four school officials to whom this 159 assignment is usually given are as follows: (a) dean of admissions, (b) dean of instruction, (c) dean of student services, and (d) dean of students. 7. With respect to the courses offered to gifted high school students, California colleges and universities have offered the greatest number of credit courses in the following twelve subjects: calculus, philosophy, American history, French, English composition, sociology, German, Spanish, chemistry, psychology, music, and European history. 8. Since the inception of advanced placement pro grams in these institutions, the greatest numbers of students have enrolled in the following courses: calculus, psychology, English composition, philosophy, American history, European history, French, and sociology. 9. While the majority of institutions (54 of 68) offer a continuous sequence of courses on the twelfth grade level, one institution starts its continuous sequence of college courses for gifted high school students with the ninth grade. Two institutions start their sequences at the tenth grade level, and eight begin theirs at the eleventh grade level. 10. Sixty-three of sixty-eight institutions use regular college instructors in their programs for gifted high school students. One institution hires high school instructors, and another institution will use either 160 college or high school instructors, depending upon the nature of the offering. 11. The problems encountered in administering programs were evaluated by respondents. In order of importance as rated, they are: a. Articulation of courses, credit, and time between the high school and college. b. Selection of students for the program. c. Formulation of a philosophy for the program. d. Selection of teachers for the program. e. Formulation of general objectives for the program. f. Financial support for the program. g. Achievement of gifted high school stu dents in these programs. h. Evaluation of the program. i. Supervision of the program. j. Follow-up with students who have participated in the program. 12. The philosophy adopted for this program does not differ from the philosophy formulated for the entire college at forty-seven institutions. Forty-six respondents indicated that the philosophy of their advanced placement program for gifted high school students was formulated as a cooperative undertaking by college and high school 161 personnel. Only ten institutions have put their philosophy for this program in written form. 13. Sixteen institutions have prepared a written statement of general objectives for their programs for gifted high school students. In spite of this, fifty institutions stated that the formulation of general objec tives for these programs had been a cooperative undertaking by college and high school personnel. Respondents from eleven institutions said that college personnel were solely responsible for formulating the general objectives for their programs. 14. At fifteen colleges, gifted high school stu dents usually continue their education after they have been graduated from high school. At twelve colleges gifted high school students usually matriculate towards a degree objec tive following graduation from high school. Twenty-five colleges indicated that most high schools in their areas participate with them in offering a program for gifted high school students; however, four colleges indicated that some high schools have withdrawn from participation in the pro gram. Nine colleges give first choice to regular college students in registering students for college classes. Only ten respondents stated that gifted high school stu dents could participate in the co-curricular activities of the college. 15. Colleges use varied criteria in selecting 162 teachers for their program for gifted high school students. Twenty-nine colleges and universities require that the teacher have academic preparation in the area being taught. Twenty-two institutions use the recommendation of the appropriate college dean as one of the criteria. Other criteria used are: (a) recent experience with the age group being taught, (b) specific courses in methods to be used with gifted high school students, (c) the recommenda tion of the high school principal, (d) a minimum of five years of teaching experience, (e) an instructor's willing ness and interest, (f) excellence in teaching, (g) a mini mum of three years of teaching experience, and (h) regular college instructors assigned to these classes. 16. Thirty-five institutions of higher learning admit gifted high school students to classes during the fall semester; thirty colleges and universities admit gifted high school students to classes during the spring semester; four offer courses during the summer session; and twenty-five admit students during any semester or summer session. 17. Acceleration is the primary purpose of pro grams for gifted high school students at nine institutions. Enrichment of the program is primary at fourteen institu tions. In forty-one institutions, the primary purpose of the programs is a combination of acceleration and enrich ment. 163 18. Gifted high school students are usually placed in classes with regular college students in sixty institutions. One institution usually keeps gifted high school students together in classes limited to their particular age group. Both of the foregoing methods are used by six institutions. 19. Sixteen institutions report that the numbers of boys and of girls currently enrolled is approximately the same. However, twenty-five institutions indicate that boys are in the majority, while girls are in the majority at eight institutions. This pattern has prevailed since the inception of these programs. 20. Counseling of gifted high school students in the programs of forty-one institutions is the responsibil ity of high school counselors. Twenty-one institutions assign the responsibility to college counselors. TWelve institutions of higher learning consider counseling for their programs to be part of the classroom teacher's responsibility. Seven institutions listed the responsi bility as being shared jointly by the high school and the college. This overlapping of answers accounts for more responses than there are institutions. 21. The following program objectives are listed in the order in which they were ranked by college respond ents : a. Gaining advanced standing in an academic 164 field of college work. b. Achieving academic success of the student. c. Achieving an orderly transition from high school to college work. d. Exploring interests and aptitudes by the student. e. Social adjustment of the student. f. Personal adjustment of the student. g. General education as the specific objective. h. Preparation for a profession. i. Providing a challenge for the academically more able students. 22. Fifty-eight of sixty-four institutions require gifted high school students to attend college-level classes on the college campus. Six hold classes for gifted high school campus, depending upon the nature of the offering. 23. Eighteen of sixty-two institutions ask gifted high school students to evaluate their programs "fre quently"; nineteen ask them to evaluate their programs "sometimes"; thirteen institutions "rarely" ask for an evaluation; and twelve "never" ask students to evaluate programs. 24. Twenty-one of fifty-eight institutions stated that gifted high school students withdraw from participa tion in their program "sometimes," thirty-two that students 165 "rarely" withdraw, and five students "never" withdraw from programs. 25. A continuous sequence of college courses for gifted high school students is offered by thirty-two colleges and universities, starting with the twelfth grade. Twenty-five institutions do not have such a sequence. One institution starts its continuous sequence at the tenth grade, and two start their sequences at the eleventh grade. 26. Two of fifty-four respondents declared that the allocation of funds by the California State Legislature had tended to increase enrollment in their programs "greatly"; five reported that the allocation had tended to increase enrollment in their programs "somewhat"; and forty-seven responses were negative. 27. With respect to financial arrangements for students, forty-three institutions do not charge tuition and thirteen institutions do. High school districts pay the costs in six programs, and the college and high school district share the costs in seven programs. In thirty-two programs the college assumes the full cost of the program. 28. Close articulation between the high school and the college is achieved in the following manner: (a) Teachers from both levels work on committees to imple ment eleven programs. (b) One institution arranges summer conferences to bring program coordinators and teachers from high school and college together. (c) Other plans 166 for articulation include summer institutes, workshops, meeting of counselors from the colleges and the high schools, conferences at the administrative level, and unified district organizations. 29. Fifty-six institutions rely upon instructors' examinations to measure student achievement in their pro grams; seven utilize standardized college achievement tests, and two use CEEB Advanced Placement Examinations. 30. The following are sometimes regarded as prob lems in these programs: (a) transferring credit, (b) departmental reluctance to credit advanced placement courses toward a field of concentration, (c) acceleration unduly affecting a student's initial choice of major, (d) no credit given by ROTC units, (e) students skipping fresh man year without adequate background in certain subjects, (f) transportation, (g) credit not granted until student matriculates at college following high school graduation, (h) parental pressures on high school principals because of prestige factor, (i) scheduling college classes to meet high school schedules, (j) high school schedule conflicting with college schedule, (k) distance of high school from college, (1) selection of students, (m) selection of a place to offer the classes, (n) professional jealousy of some high school instructors, (o) rejection of gifted high school students by some high school classmates, and (p) gifted high school students unable to participate in high 167 school activity program. 31. Gifted high school students performed as well, or better, in their continuing high school studies as they did prior to their participation in the program on the college campus, according to thirty-one respondents. In eighteen institutions, students' achievement marks in col lege courses tended to equal their high school marks in high school offerings in the same subject field; eight respondents disagreed with this. According to twenty-one respondents, gifted students perform as well, or better, in the regular college program as they did in college- level courses prior to their graduation from high school. Fourteen institutions failed to respond concerning this point. CHAPTER VI FINDINGS: REACTIONS OF STUDENTS TO ADVANCED PLACEMENT PROGRAMS The purpose of the two preceding chapters was to analyze the characteristics of advanced placement programs initiated by institutions of higher learning. The purpose of this chapter is to analyze the data obtained from the students themselves. An instrument was designed to assess the reactions of gifted high school students to the advanced placement programs in which they were enrolled (see Appendix I). A description of the group is presented, together with a comparison of the responses of boys and girls, a brief summary of each question, and a general summary of the chapter. The Nature of the Group Included with this group of students were 58 boys, 53 girls, and one who did not indicate the sex. Students were drawn from eleven cities of the following five coun ties of southern California: Los Angeles County, San Bernardino County, Riverside County, Orange County, and San Diego County. The number of students per city ranged 168 169 from one through twenty-eight, the mean being fifteen. One district mistakenly furnished several names of students participating in the College Entrance Examination Board Advanced Placement Program. Since only three question naires were received from these students, their responses were included as part of the total because their reactions to instruction in the CEEB program were considered to be as valid as the reactions of other students in other types of advanced placement programs given on the high school level. In subsequent analysis of the data reported in Chapter VII, the grades of the three students in the CEEB program are not included with the grades of students in other types of advanced placement programs. On May 24, 1963, 136 questionnaires were forwarded to gifted high school students who had enrolled in college- level courses before graduating from high school. During the ensuing two weeks, 42 additional questionnaires were mailed to students and school districts, making a total of 178 questionnaires forwarded by June 7, 1963. One district incorrectly furnished the names of twenty-four students who had never been enrolled in pro grams for gifted high school students. When this error was discovered, the district substituted names of twenty-four correctly-selected students, one of whom was eliminated for technical reasons. Thus, 177 questionnaires were actually forwarded to students. After the close of school seventeen 170 questionnaires were returned by one district that, through an oversight, had failed to give the questionnaires to the gifted students. The final total of questionnaires for warded to gifted high school students was 160. Of these, 112, or 70 per cent, were returned in time for Inclusion in the sample. General Findings of the Student Check Sheet Number of Courses Taken Students were asked to reply to the question: "How many courses did you take at a college or university before you were graduated from high school?" Spaces from 1 to 6 were provided so the student could answer by simply placing a check in the appropriate square. The responses of boys and girls are reported separately and then combined in Table 34. 1. In summary, the vast majority of students (93 of 109) had taken one or two courses at a college or university before being graduated from high school. 2. Supplementary findings were as follows: One girl had completed two courses in the CEEB Advanced Place ment Program, as had two boys. 171 TABLE 34 NUMBER OF COURSES TAKEN BY STUDENTS IN ADVANCED PLACEMENT PROGRAMS Number of courses Girls Boys Total 1 33 32 65 2 12 18 30 3 1 4 * 6 4 3 2 5 5 1 0 1 6 2 0 2 Total 52 56 109 One person, unidentified as to sex, had taken three courses before high school graduation. 172 Availability of Kinds of Courses Students Wanted Students were asked to answer the question: "While you were enrolled in high school, were you able to take the college-level courses you wanted?" by a yes or no response. Their answers to this question are summarized, by sex of student, in Table 35. TABLE 35 ABILITY OF STUDENTS TO TAKE THE KINDS OF COURSES THEY WANTED Sex of respondents Response Boys Girls Unidentified Total Yes 48 44 1 93 No 10 7 0 17 No response 1 1 0 2 Total 59 52 1 112 1. Forty-four girls and 48 boys were able to enroll for the college-level courses they wanted, while 7 girls and 10 boys were not. 2. In summary, 93 students were able to take the courses they wanted, and 17 students were not. 3. Typical of students' comments are the excerpts listed below as supplementary findings: 173 A sequence of Calculus and Analytic Geometry was the only actual college program offered. I would probably have been allowed to take more college courses if they had been offered. The school did present many honors programs in various subjects. There were only two classes offered--Western Civilization and Calculus. At the end of our senior year in high school, four of us students spoke to members of the school administration and the Board of Education regarding programs for gifted students. It was only then that they told us that many city college courses were at our disposal (not just the one I took), so although the courses were available, we did not consider them at the beginning of the year. It was unfortunate that the administration did not make their avail ability known earlier. I was able to take the classes I wanted as long as they did not interfere with my high school courses. The only college course offered for high school credit was the one I took. Having participated in a special program at a junior college, I am very interested in such attempts towards advanced education. However, I would rather see this useful effort concentrated on high school programs rather than college programs. I believe that high schools are failing to prepare potential college-bound students adequately, thus contributing to the great number of college drop outs. Furthermore, I don't believe colleges should have to take exception to the "better than average" high school students, but, rather, that high school should come up to the level of such students. As I felt a lack of interest for many of my high school courses, I am most grateful that I was allowed to take Sociology IA on the junior college campus. Perhaps even yet, I am not fully aware of the many benefits I have received from this opportunity. I sincerely hope that in the near future more stu dents may receive the same good fortune in a normal high school schedule that I have received from a special college program. 174 Number of Courses Desired The question was asked: "Were you permitted to enroll in as many of these college-level courses as you wished to take?" A summary of responses to this question, according to sex of students, appears in Table 36. TABLE 36 NUMBER OF COURSES DESIRED BY STUDENTS Sex of respondents Response Boys Girls Unidentified Total Yes 34 25 1 60 No 22 25 0 47 No response 3 2 0 5 Total 59 52 1 112 It will be observed that: 1. Twenty-five girls and 34 boys were permitted to enroll in as many college-level courses as they wished to take, while 25 girls and 22 boys were not. 2. In the combined sample, 60 students enrolled in as many college-level courses as they wished to take, and 47 students did not. 175 Opinions Regarding Merit of College-Level Courses It was desired to learn the over-all attitudes of students toward the college-level courses they attended. The question was sc stated that only a positive or negative response was called for: "Do you feel that college-level courses for gifted high school students are worthwhile?" Only one student failed to respond. All of the students who answered this question felt that college-level courses for gifted high school students were worthwhile. This finding is corroborated by the research of Baxter and Jones (63; 64; 65) in an extensive series of studies of an acceleration program offered to superior high school stu dents by Miami University. Increasing Enrollment Rather similar in intent and structure was the question: "Do you believe that greater number’ s of students with superior ability should participate in these programs?" Analyzed according to sex of student, responses to this question are summarized in Table 37. 1. All of the girls (51) and 53 of 57 boys believed that greater numbers of students with superior ability should participate in these programs; 4 boys did not agree. 2. In summary, most students believed that greater 176 numbers of students with superior ability should be allowed to participate in these programs. TABLE 37 OPINIONS REGARDING ENROLLMENT OF GREATER NUMBERS OF SUPERIOR STUDENTS Response Sex of respondents Total Boys Girls Unidentified Yes 53 51 1 105 No 4 0 0 4 No response 2 1 0 3 Total 59 52 1 112 Type of Campus Where Students Attended Classes The question was asked: "At which of the following types of institutions were your college-level courses held?" Four possible answers were listed: (1) high school, (2) junior college. (3) state college, and (4) university. The total number of answers exceeded the total number of students in the study because several students attended college-level classes on two campuses; e.g., some attended one class on the high school campus and another class on the junior college campus. Thus, some overlapping occurs in the findings. A summary of responses for this question appears in 177 Table 38. TABLE 38 TYPE OF CAMPUS ON WHICH STUDENTS ATTENDED CLASSES Type of institution Sex of respondents Boys Girls Unidentified Total High school 19 25 0 44 Junior college 40 29 1 70 State college 2 0 0 2 University 2 3 0 5 Total 63 57 1 121 1. In summary, 70 students attended classes on junior college campuses, 44 students attended college-level classes on high school campuses, 5 attended classes at a university, and 2 at a state college 2. Seven boys and two girls attended college-level classes on more than one campus. A summary of the dual responses to this question is given in Table 39. Plans for Post High School Registration Students were asked: "Following high school gradu ation, do you intend to enroll in the college or the university which you attended part time before high school graduation?" Slightly fewer than one half of the students were able at the close of their senior high school year to 178 indicate what their plans were for college enrollment in the fall. Their responses are summarized in Table 40. TABLE 39 ANALYSIS OF RESPONSES OF STUDENTS WHO ATTENDED CLASSES AT MORE THAN ONE INSTITUTION Type of institution Boys Girls Total High school 6 2 8 Junior college 5 1 6 State college 1 0 1 University 2 1 3 Total 14 4 18 TABLE 40 STUDENT PLANS FOR ENROLLMENT AFTER HIGH SCHOOL AT THE SAME COLLEGE GRADUATION Sex of respondents Response Boys Girls Unidentified Total Yes 7 5 0 12 No 22 19 0 41 No response 29 29 1 59 Total 58 53 1 112 179 1. Students were given the choice of answering this or the next questions. Only students who were still enrolled in high school classes were asked to respond to this question. 2. Forty-one students did not intend to enroll in the college or the university which they had attended before high school graduation, and 12 students did intend to enroll in that institution. College Enrollment of Those Who Have Graduated from High School Respondents who had already graduated from high school at the time of this study were asked: '‘Following high school graduation, did you enroll in the college or the university which you attended part time before high school graduation?" It will be noted that a few students checked two answers, replying to both this and the preceding question; their responses were tallied accordingly. A summary of responses to this question appears in Table 41. The data reveal: 1. Six students marked two answers, apparently indicating that they attended two institutions of higher learning. It is reasonable to conjecture that some of these students enrolled at the institution they attended part time before high school graduation and then proceeded 180 to register elsewhere. 2. In summary, 16 of 64 students enrolled at the institution they had attended before high school graduation, and 48 students enrolled elsewhere. TABLE 41 COLLEGE ENROLLMENT OF PARTICIPATING HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES Enrollment at same college Sex of respondents Total Boys Girls Unidentified Yes 4 12 0 16 No 27 20 1 48 No response 27 21 0 48 Total 58 53 1 112 College Graduation Plans The question was asked: "Do you plan to be gradu ated from the college or university at which you enrolled before high school graduation?" Responses to this question are summarized in Table 42. 1. The data indicate that 12 boys and 13 girls planned to graduate from the college or university they attended part time before high school graduation; while 39 girls and 39 boys did not. 2. Combining the sample, it is seen that 25 181 students planned to graduate from the same institution they had attended prior to high school graduation, and 79 did not. TABLE 42 COLLEGE PLANS OF STUDENTS Sex of respondents Response Boys Girls Unidentified Total Yes 12 13 0 25 No 39 39 1 79 No response 7 1 0 8 Total 58 53 1 112 College Co-curricular Activities With respect to college-level activities, students were asked: "Did you participate in college-level co-curricular activities before your graduation from high school?” (Co-curricular activities are defined as activi ties for boys and girls.) The responses summarized in Table 43 reveal rela tively little participation by gifted high school students in co-curricular activities on the college campus where they attended advanced placement classes. 1. Nine girls and 8 boys participated in college- level co-curricular activities before they were graduated from high school, but the majority (44 girls and 46 boys) 182 did not participate. 2. Of the total sample, 17 students participated in college-level co-curricular activities, and 91 students did not. TABLE 43 PARTICIPATION IN COLLEGE-LEVEL CO-CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES Response Sex of respondents Total Boys Girls Unidentified Yes 8 9 0 17 No 46 44 1 91 No response 4 0 0 4 Total 58 53 1 112 Social Contacts with High School Students The question was asked: "Were your social contacts with high school students adequate when you were attending college-level classes part time before high school gradua tion ?" A similarity of response is seen in the answers given by boys and by girls, as is suramai’ized in Table 44. 1. Fifty-one girls and 56 boys considered their social contacts with high school students adequate while they were attending college-level classes part time before high school graduation; two boys did not consider theirs to have been adequate. 183 2. For the combined groups, all of the girls and all but two of the boys felt that their social contacts with high school students were adequate. TABLE 44 SOCIAL CONTACTS WITH HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS Sex of respondents Response Boys Girls Unidentified Total Yes 56 51 1 108 No 2 0 0 2 No response 0 2 0 2 Total 58 53 1 112 Reactions to Instructors Students were asked to react to the question: "Do you feel that the teachers for your college-level classes were well qualified to teach gifted high school students ?" Their responses are summarized in Table 45. It will be seen that: 1. While 45 girls and 52 boys felt that the teachers for their college-level classes were well quali fied to teach gifted high school students, 7 girls and 6 boys did not share this opinion. 2. Of the total sample, thus, 98 students felt 184 TABLE 45 REACTIONS TO INSTRUCTORS Sex of respondents Response Boys Girls Unidentified Total Yes 52 45 1 98 No 6 7 0 13 No response 0 1 0 1 Total 58 53 1 112 that teachers for their coliege-level classes were well qualified to teach gifted high school students, and 13 stu- dents expressed opposing views. 3. The following comments of some students are included as supplementary findings: One teacher was a very well-qualified, excellent instructor. The other, I felt, was very poor, and did not give high school students an accurate impression of college classes. This answer is not a reflection on the qualifi cations of a college-level teacher, but perhaps on this one teacher in particular. I feel that, as a rule, the college-level teacher is very adequately qualified to teach such courses. The teachers are rarely knowledgable. They do not care about learning. Grades are the only important thing. And what the hell are grades? The opinion of a prejudiced inept person, the major ity of the time. These people don t understand the subject they're teaching. The whole goddam program is a sickening mess. We go to college to learn. You know the system of patrons that existed in the Middle Ages? Well, students have teachers for patrons, and if they don't get an A from them, they 185 can't go to college. Learning has been so completely forgotten, it makes me ILL. I have had four teachers who were good, and I have taken about a year of extra high school courses. On the whole I found the teaching of college- level courses in high school adequate. However, some of them tended to rely too heavily on designated texts while others were a little too dogmatic in their interpretations for a college-level class. Placement of Gifted High School Students The question was asked: "Were you in classes with regular college students?" Students' responses, according to sex-groupings, are summarized in Table 46. TABLE 46 PLACEMENT OF GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS Sex of respondents Response Boys Girls Unidentified Total Yes 27 27 1 55 No 31 25 0 56 No response 0 1 0 1 Total 58 53 1 112 1. While 27 girls and 27 boys were placed in classes with regular college students, 25 girls and 31 boys were not. 2. Two gifted high school students reported attending college-level classes during the evening. They indicated that most of the students in these classes were 186 adults. 3. For the composite sample, 53 students attended classes with regular college students, and 56 students did not. Rapport with College Students Students were asked: "Did you enjoy being in classes with regular college students?" This question was applicable to fewer than half of the respondents. Responses are summarized in Table 47. TABLE 47 RAPPORT WITH COLLEGE STUDENTS Sex of respondents Response Boys Girls Unidentified Total Yes 26 23 1 50 No 2 2 0 4 No response 30 28 0 58 Total 58 53 1 112 1. Although 23 girls and 26 boys said that they had enjoyed being in classes with regular college students, a few (2 boys and 2 girls) did not enjoy the experience. 2. Of the total sample, 50 students enjoyed being in classes with regular college students, and 4 students did not enjoy the experience. 187 3. One student commented: "We had fun being in with the colorful college students. I enjoyed their penetrating views (at times very thought-provoking)." 4. Since 56 students did not attend classes with college students, they could not answer the question. Two other students were in a position to answer but did not. Adjusting to Full-time College Work "Do you think college-level classes for gifted high school students help these students make a better adjust ment to full-time college work?" elicited an affirmative response, for the most part. Students' answers are summarized according to sex of respondent in Table 48. TABLE 48 ADJUSTMENT TO FULL-TIME COLLEGE WORK Sex of respondents Response Boys Girls Unidentified Total Yes 53 50 1 104 No 4 2 0 6 No response 1 1 0 2 Total 58 53 1 112 1. Fifty girls and 53 boys were of the opinion that these classes help students make a better adjustment to full-time college work; in contrast, 2 girls and 4 boys 188 thought that this was not the case. 2. In summary, 104 students believed that taking college-level classes helped them to make a better adjust ment to full-time college work, and 6 students did not share this opinion. 3. One student commented: I believe that this varies with the individual case. My high school program outside of my college course was quite heavy, so I never really had the time to devote to that course which it merited. It showed me the comparative difficulty of college courses and exposed me to their volume of material covered as compared to high school courses, but time kept me from doing justice to the course I took. Expression of Individuality Students were asked: "Do you feel that your college-level courses gave you a chance to express your individuality?" A diversity of response is seen in the summarization of boys' and girls' opinions, exhibited in Table 49. TABLE 49 CHANCE FOR EXPRESSION OF INDIVIDUALITY IN COLLEGE-LEVEL COURSES "' Sex of1 respondents" Response Boys Girls Unidentified Total Yes 44 36 1 81 No 15 15 0 30 No response 1 3 0 4 Total 60 54 1 115 189 1. While 36 girls and 44 boys believed that college-level courses gave students a chance to express their individuality, 15 girls and 15 boys did not believe this to be true. 2. In the combined groups, 81 students believed that their college courses gave them an opportunity to express their individuality, and 30 students expressed the opposite opinion. 3. Typical of students’ comments were the following: In college work I felt a need to express my own views, something taboo in high school. My class was a calculus class offering little chance for expression. This, however, is the nature of the course and not the more ’’expressive" areas of studies like the humanities, English, or speech. I was too scared then, but it did help for the next year in a much larger college. Individual Attention of College Teacher Reactions of students were sought to the question: "Did the teachers of these college-level courses give enough individual attention to each student?" A summary of responses to this question is given in Table 50. 1. While 39 girls and 49 boys believed that the teachers of these college-level courses gave enough indi vidual attention to each student, there were 15 girls and 9 boys who disagreed with this point of view. 190 TABLE 50 INDIVIDUAL ATTENTION GIVEN BY TEACHERS Response Sex of respondents Total Boys Girls Unidentified Yes 49 39 0 88 No 9 15 1 25 No response 0 5 0 5 Total 58 59 1 118 2. In all, 88 students thought that teachers of these courses did give enough individual attention to each student, while 25 students disagreed. 3. Students commented on the question as follows: The instructors gave less individual attention to each student than high school teachers did. However, if the instructors gave the extra atten tion, the course would have resembled a high school class. In my opinion, this would tend to do away with most of the benefits of a college course. There would be no true college experience. The student would be met with a great surprise upon entering a regular college program. The particular teacher let each one express him self as long as ideas did not clash too much with his own. After a few weeks, a handful of students led the discussion while others did not participate. Of course, the teacher gave more attention to those who showed interest in the class. 191 Freedom in College-Level Classes Students were asked to react to the question: "Do you feel that you had more freedom in college-level classes than you did in regular high school classes?" The responses to this question are summarized in Table 51. TABLE 51 FREEDOM IN COLLEGE-LEVEL CLASSES Response Sex of respondents Total Boys Girls Unidentified Yes 50 45 0 95 No 8 6 1 15 No response 0 2 0 2 Total 58 53 1 112 1. While 45 girls and 50 boys felt that they had more freedom in college-level classes than they did in regular high school classes, there were 6 girls and 8 boys who did not share this opinion. 2. Of the composite sample of boys and girls, 98 felt that college-level classes gave them more freedom than did high school classes, and 15 students did not agree with this point of view. 192 Time for Independent Study It was desired to ascertain student viewpoints con cerning the question: "Did your college-level courses provide ample time for independent study?" Their responses are summarized in Table 52. TABLE 52 ADEQUACY OF TIME FOR INDEPENDENT STUDY Response Sex of respondents Total Boys Girls Unidentified Yes 48 39 1 88 No 10 11 0 21 No response 0 3 0 3 Total 58 53 1 112 1. While 39 girls and 48 boys believed that college-level courses did provide ample time for independ ent study, 11 girls and 10 boys did not share this opinion. 2. For the total sample, 88 students believed that college-level courses provided ample time for independent study, and 22 expressed the opposite point of view. Comparison of College and High School Courses Student viewpoints were sought concerning the ques tion: "Were your college-level courses more stimulating 193 and challenging than your regular high school courses?" A summary of their responses appears in Table 53. TABLE 53 COMPARISON OF COLLEGE AND HIGH SCHOOL COURSES Response Sex of respondents Total Boys Girls Unidentified Yes 51 44 1 96 No 6 7 0 13 No response 1 2 0 3 Total 58 53 1 112 1. Forty-four girls and 51 boys felt that their college-level courses were more stimulating and challenging than regular high school courses; 7 girls and 6 boys did not feel that they were. 2. For the total sample, 96 students found college- level courses more stimulating than high school courses, while 13 students did not. 3. Students commented as follows: This was a qualified yes, for I believe I was stimulated and challenged by many of my high school classes. Although there were few college courses offered at my high school, the honors programs were extensive, and the teachers were excellent. A clear case of day versus night. My high school classes were exceptional in their stimulation and interest. In particular, I enjoyed the literature, foreign language, and forensics 194 programs. This does not mean that the college course was less stimulating. I enjoyed them equally. Regimentation in College Classes Students were asked to express their opinions con cerning the question: "Do you feel that your college-level classes had less regimentation than your high school classes?" Their responses are summarized in Table 54. TABLE 54 OPINIONS REGARDING REGIMENTATION IN COLLEGE CLASSES Sex of respondents Response Boys Girls Unidentified Total Yes 50 40 0 90 No 8 9 1 18 No response 0 4 0 4 Total 58 53 1 112 It will be observed that: 1. While 40 girls and 50 boys felt that there was less regimentation in their college-level classes, 9 girls and 8 boys did not share this opinion. 2. For the total sample, 90 students felt less regimentation in their college-level classes than they did in their high school classes, and 18 students did not. 195 Opportunities for Mixing with Classmates The question was asked: "Was mixing with other pupils adequate in college-level classes?" Students' experiences with respect to opportunities for mixing with classmates in college-level classes are summarized in Table 55. TABLE 55 OPPORTUNITIES FOR MIXING WITH PUPILS IN COLLEGE-LEVEL CLASSES Sex of respondents Response Boys Girls Unidentified Total Yes 49 42 1 92 No 9 9 0 18 No response 0 2 0 2 Total 58 53 1 112 1. While the majority of students (42 girls and 49 boys) were of the opinion that adequate opportunities were provided to n:ix with other students in their college- level courses, 9 girls and 9 boys did not think this was so. 2. For the sample as a whole, 92 students thought opportunities for mixing with other students were adequate in their college-level courses, and 18 students did not agree. 196 Repetition of High School Subject Matter Student viewpoints were sought concerning the ques tion: "Do you feel that there was too much repetition of high school subject matter in your college-level courses?" An interesting consensus is revealed in the responses of boys and girls, summarized in Table 56. TABLE 56 REPETITION OF HIGH SCHOOL SUBJECT MATTER Response Sex of respondents Total Boys Girls Unidentified Yes 4 2 0 6 No 54 49 1 104 No response 0 2 0 2 Total 58 53 1 112 1. Relatively few students (2 girls and 4 boys) thought that there was too much repetition of high school subject matter in their college-level courses; on the other * hand, 49 girls and 54 boys expressed the opposite point of view. 2. As a total group, 6 students felt that there was too much repetition of high school subject matter in their college-level courses, but 104 did not think that high-school-level subject matter was repeated. 197 Counseling of Students Viewpoints concerning the adequacy of counseling received while students were attending college-level courses were sought by means of the question: ' ’Did you receive sufficient counseling while you were enrolled in college-level courses?" Students' reactions are summarized in Table 57. TABLE 57 ADEQUACY OF COUNSELING OF STUDENTS Sex of respondents Response Boys Girls Unidentified Total Yes 47 40 1 88 No 8 10 0 18 No response 3 3 0 6 Total 58 53 1 112 1. While 40 girls and 47 boys felt that they had received sufficient counseling while they were enrolled in college-level courses, 10 girls and 8 boys felt that they had not been adequately counseled. 2. For the whole group, combined, 88 students felt that they had received adequate counseling while they were enrolled in college-level courses, and 18 students felt that the counseling they received had not been adequate. 198 Instructors of College-Level Courses The question was asked: "Were your classes taught by regular college instructors?" A summary of responses to this question is given in Table 58. TABLE 58 INSTRUCTORS OF COLLEGE-LEVEL COURSES Instructor was: Boys Sex of respondents Girls Unidentified Total Regular college instructor 41 36 1 78 Not a regular college instructor 16 14 0 30 No response 1 3 0 4 Total 58 53 1 112 The data reveal some diversity of practice by colleges in supplying instructors for advanced placement programs: 1. Thirty-six girls and 41 boys said that their college-level classes were taught by regular college instructors; in contrast, 14 girls and 16 boys stated that their classes were taught by instructors who were not on the regular college faculty. 2. In summary, 78 students indicated that their 199 classes were taught by regular college instructors, and 30 students that this was not the practice in their classes. Utilization of High School Instructors In amplification of the preceding question, stu dents were asked: "Were your classes taught by high school instructors hired by the college for these classes?" Their responses to this question are summarized in Table 59. In general, their responses support the responses given to the preceding question. TABLE 59 UTILIZATION OF HIGH SCHOOL INSTRUCTORS Response Sex of respondents Total Boys Girls Unidentified Yes 13 11 0 24 No 39 37 1 77 No response 6 5 0 11 Total 58 53 1 112 1. Eleven girls and 13 boys stated that their college-level classes were taught by high school instructors hired by the college, while 37 girls and 39 boys stated that their college-level classes were not taught by high school instructors. 2. In the combined sample, 24 students indicated 200 that their classes were taught by high school instructors hired by the college for their classes, while 77 students indicated that their classes were not taught by high school instructors. Attitudes of Regular High School Students Toward Those in the Program Students were asked to react to the question: "Did you notice a change in attitude of regular high school students towards students taking college-level courses?" Their responses are summarized in Table 60. TABLE 60 ATTITUDE OF REGULAR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS TOWARD STUDENTS ENROLLED IN PROGRAM Did attitude of regular high school students change toward you? 1 - a. t i-«A, B'-T. ■ S ' B ^ ‘ T' t l 1 1 ""VI i L S Sex of respondents Boys Girls Unidentified Total Yes 13 7 1 21 No 45 44 0 89 No response 0 2 0 2 Total 58 53 1 112 1. More boys than girls (13 and 7, respectively) reported that they had noticed a change in the attitudes of regular high school students toward them; in contrast, 44 girls and 45 boys did not sense a change in attitude. 201 2. For the combined sample, 21 students noticed a change in attitude of regular high school students toward students who attended college-level courses, while 89 stu dents were unaware of a change in attitude. Transportation as a Problem The question was asked: "Was transportation to and from college-level classes a problem for you?" Responses to this question are summarized in Table 61. TABLE 61 TRANSPORTATION AS A PROBLEM Was transportation a problem? Sex of respondents Boys Girls Unidentified Total Yes 2 4 0 6 No 55 48 1 104 No response 1 1 0 1 Total 58 53 1 112 1. Four girls and two boys indicated that trans- portation to and from college-level classes was a problem to them. In contrast, 48 girls and 55 boys did not experi- ence a problem with respect to transportation. 2. In summary, 6 students had a transportation problem, and 104 students did not. 202 Level of Achievement in High School versus College-Level Courses Students were asked: "Do you feel that you did as well in college-level courses as you did in regular high school courses?" A summary of the responses to this question is given in Table 62. TABLE 62 COMPARISON OF ACHIEVEMENT BETWEEN HIGH SCHOOL AND COLLEGE COURSES Did you do as well in college-level as in high school courses ? Sex of respondents Total Boys Girls Unidentified Yes 39 38 0 77 No 21 12 1 34 No response 1 3 0 4 Total 61 53 1 115 1. While 38 girls and 39 boys felt that they did as well in college-level courses as they did in regular high school courses, 12 girls and 21 boys believed that they did not do as well. Three boys checked both answers, indicating that they did well in one college-level course and did not do as well in another. 2. In summary, 77 students felt that they had done as well in college-level courses as they had in regular 203 high school courses, while 34 students felt that they had not. Premature Determination of College Major The question was asked: "Do you feel that select ing college-level courses in high school forces a student to determine his college major too soon?" There was unanimity of opinion among the students that selecting college-level courses in high school does not force a student to determine his college major too soon. College Credit for College-Level Courses Students were asked: "Did you receive full college credit for your college-level courses?" Responses concern ing college credits granted for work in advanced placement courses are exhibited in Table 63. TABLE 63 COLLEGE CREDIT FOR COLLEGE-LEVEL COURSES Issuance of college credits Sex of respondents Boys Girls Unidentified Total Yes 52 43 1 96 No 5 8 0 13 No response 1 2 0 3 Total 58 53 1 112 204 1. While 43 girls and 52 boys received full college credit for their college-level courses, 8 girls and 5 boys did not. 2. For the combined group, 96 students received full college credit for their college-level courses, and 13 did not. High School Credit for College Courses Students were also asked: "Did you receive only high school credit for your college-level courses?" Their responses to this question are summarized in Table 64. TABLE 64 HIGH SCHOOL CREDIT FOR COLLEGE COURSES Issuance of high school credits ■ ■ — » . ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Sex of respondents Boys Girls Unidentified Total Yes 4 3 0 7 No 54 49 1 104 No response 0 1 0 1 Total 58 53 1 112 1. Three girls and 4 boys received only high school credit for their college-level courses; 49 girls and 54 boys were not given high school credit for theirs. 2. In summary, 7 students received only high school credit for their college-level courses, while 104 205 students did not receive high school credit for theirs. High School and College Credit The question was asked: "Did you receive both high school and college credit for these courses?" A summary of responses to this question appears in Table 65. TABLE 65 ISSUANCE OF HIGH SCHOOL AND COLLEGE CREDIT Were both high school and college credits issued? Sex of respondents Total Boys Girls Unidentified Yes 11 9 1 21 No 47 43 0 90 No response 0 1 0 1 Total 58 53 1 112 1. Nine girls and 11 boys received both high school and college credit for their courses, while 43 girls and 47 boys did not receive both types of credit. 2. In summary, 21 students were given both high school and college credit for college-level courses, and 90 students were not. 206 Completion of High School Graduation The question was put to students: "Did you finish the courses required for a high school diploma before you enrolled in college-level courses?” A summary of responses to this question is given in Table 66. TABLE 66 COMPLETION OF REQUIREMENTS FOR HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA BEFORE ENTERING PROGRAM Was diploma received? Sex of1 respondents Total Boys Girls Unidentified Yes 14 8 1 23 No 43 44 0 87 No response 1 1 0 2 Total 58 53 1 112 1. While 8 girls and 14 boys finished all courses required for a high school diploma before they enrolled in college-level courses, 44 girls and 43 boys did not. 2. In summary, 23 students finished the courses required for a high school diploma before they enrolled in college-level courses, and 87 students did not. 207 Problems Encountered by Students The three final questions in the Student Check Sheet were free-response items. The first question was: "Did you encounter any major problems associated with your participation in this program?" The problems mentioned by boys and girls were tallied separately and totalled. Arranged in order of frequency of total mention, Table 67 displays these problems. 1. Thirty boys and nineteen girls indicated that they had encountered no problems that were associated with their programs. 2. As judged by the frequency with which problems were mentioned by students, the following four problems were among those encountered most often: a. Study skills b. Increased difficulty of work c. Poor quality of instruction d. Adjusting to college teaching (grading, tests, personality and attitudinal characteristics). Most Enjoyable Experiences of Students The second free-response item was the query: "What did you enjoy most about participating in college- level classes?" 208 TABLE 67 PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED BY STUDENTS Frequency of mention Problems listed by students Boys Girls Total 1. Study skills 7 7 14 2. Increased difficulty of work 4 6 10 3. Poor quality of instruction 2 4 6 4. Adjusting to college teaching (grading, tests, personality and attitudinal characteristics) 3 2 5 5. Freedom of college classes with a mature and unpampered outlook 4 0 4 6. Scheduling conflicts between high school and college (also control of students) 2 1 3 7. Junior college like high school in operation and class work 1 2 3 8. Loss of interest in high school 0 2 2 9. Access to reading and research materials 1 1 2 10. Transportation 0 2 2 11. No orientation to college extracurricular activities 0 2 2 12. Adjusting to adults and college students 1 1 2 13. Inability to take additional courses 1 0 1 14. Expense of college books 1 0 1 15. Limited selection of courses 0 1 1 209 TABLE 67 (continued) PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED BY STUDENTS Problems listed by students Frequency of mention Boys Girls Total 16. Office hours of college teacher 1 0 1 17. College students resenting high school students' getting top grades 0 1 1 18. Restriction of participation in high school activities 0 1 1 19. Resentment of college students toward high school students 0 1 1 20. College credit for courses taken 0 1 1 21. Interference of high school with college instructor 0 1 1 Total 28 36 64 210 Responses of boys and girls were again tallied separately, and totalled. Table 68 exhibits the experi ences which students found to be most enjoyable during their participation in college-level programs. Responses are listed in order of frequency of mention. 1. Eight boys and six girls each mentioned more than one experience that they considered a "most enjoy able" experience. Two boys did not answer the question, and indicated that they did not have any enjoyable experi ences to report. 2. In order of frequency of mention, the five most enjoyable experiences of students would seem to be the following: (a) the freedom arid challenge of taking advanced courses with advanced materials and guest speak ers; (b) the maturity expected of a person towards his work and social relationships; (c) the help in adjusting to regular college work and the insight into college life afforded by these courses; (d) mixing with college stu dents and the atmosphere of the class; and (e) the excellent teaching. Suggestions for Improving Programs The final item requested students to make sugges tions: "Do you have any suggestions for improving these programs?" It will be observed in the summarization of students' suggestions displayed in Table 69 that numerous TABLE 68 211 MOST ENJOYABLE EXPERIENCES OF STUDENTS Enjoyable experiences ' ' Frequency of mention"’ " _____ of students_________________ Boys Girls Total 1. Taking advanced courses with advanced materials and guest speakers 28 23 51 2. The maturity expected of a person 12 8 20 3. Help in adjusting to regular college work and insight into college life 5 6 11 4. Mixing with college students and atmosphere of the class 3 4 7 5. Excellent teaching 3 3 6 6. Opportunity for independent study 2 3 5 7. The change in student attitudes 2 3 5 8. Having classes composed prima rily of intelligent students 3 1 4 9. Escape from the boredom of high school 2 1 3 10. Prestige and recognition 1 1 2 11. Competition 0 2 2 12. Opportunity to express one's individuality 1 1 2 13. Learning how to study 0 2 2 14. Acceleration of college program 0 2 2 15. Anonymity afforded by the lectures to large groups of students 0 1 1 Total 62 59 121 212 TABLE 69 SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVING PROGRAMS Suggestions for Frequency of mention _____ improving programs_______________Boys Girls Total 1. More able students to take more classes 12 9 21 2. Greater variety of course offerings 10 5 15 3. Higher quality of teaching 4 7 11 4. Earlier admittance of students to programs 3 2 5 5. Better counseling 1 4 5 6. Issuance of both high school and college credit 2 2 4 7. All such classes held at college 2 2 4 8. More publicity for advanced placement programs 1 2 3 9. More information about the college for high school students 2 1 3 10. Better articulation of scheduling and coordination of classes with the college 2 1 3 11. Better course descriptions 1 1 2 12. College courses held during the regular school day at high school 2 0 2 13. Uniform credit procedures at colleges 0 2 2 14. More participation in extra curricular activities of the college 0 2 2 213 TABLE 69 (continued) SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVING PROGRAMS Suggestions for improving programs Frequency of mention Boys Girls Total 15. Some high school subjects offered at college level 0 1 1 16. National Honor Society to evaluate college "B" as high school MA in determining high school grade point average 0 1 1 17. Courses based upon concepts and ideas rather than upon facts 0 1 1 18. Advanced high school students to drop high school completely 0 1 1 19. Examinations for dogmatic high school requirements 1 0 1 20. Higher standards for college- level courses on high school campuses 1 0 1 21. Expansion of programs to proceed slowly 1 0 1 22. Additional time in class to talk with students and teachers 1 0 1 Total 46 44 90 214 suggestions were offered, and that many points were men tioned by more than one. Suggestions are listed in order of frequency of mention. 1. All but 21 boys and 11 girls made suggestions for improving advanced placement programs for gifted high school students. 2. The suggestions made by the greatest number of students were the following: a. More able students to take more classes b. Greater variety of course offerings c. Higher quality of teaching d. Earlier admittance of students to programs e. Better counseling f. Issuance of both high school and college credit g. Holding all classes on college campus h. Better articulation i. More and better publicity for the program j. More information about the college furnished to high school students. Chapter Summary 1. Of 160 questionnaires forwarded to students, 112, or 70 per cent, were completed and returned to the investigator. 2. Ninety-five of the 112 students in this study 215 had taken one or two advanced placement courses before high school graduation. 3. Ninety-three students were able to take the college-level courses they wanted, and 17 students were not. 4. Sixty students were permitted to enroll in as many advanced placement courses as they wished to take, and 47 students were not. 5. All students felt that college-level courses for gifted high school students were worthwhile. 6. All but four of the students responding (105) believed that greater numbers of superior students should participate in these programs. 7. Sixty-nine students took their college-level courses on junior college campuses, and 44 took theirs on high school campuses. 8. While 41 students do not intend to enroll in the college or university which they attended prior to high school graduation, 12 students plan to enroll at that institution. 9. Sixteen students enrolled at the Institution they had attended before high school graduation, and 48 students enrolled elsewhere. 10. Twenty-five students planned to be graduated from the institution they had attended prior to high school graduation, and 79 did not. 216 11. Seventeen students participated in college- level co-curricular activities before their graduation from high school, and 91 students did not participate in such college-level activities. 12. All but two students (108 students) felt that their social contacts with high school students were adequate during the period when they were attending college-level classes. 13. While a majority (98) of the students felt that the teachers for their college-level classes were well qualified to teach gifted high school students, 13 students felt otherwise. 14. Fifty-five of the students in this study attended classes with regular college students, and 56 students did not. 15. All but four (50 of the students) enjoyed being in classes with regular college students. 16o While most (104) of the students believed that taking college-level classes helps students to make a better adjustment to full-time college work, 6 students were not of this opinion. 17. While 81 students believed that their college- level courses gave them an opportunity to express their individuality, 30 students expressed the opposite opinion. 18. While 25 students believed that the teachers 217 of these courses did not give enough individual attention to each student, the majority (88 students) thought that they gave ample individual attention. 19. Ninety-five students felt that college-level classes gave them more freedom than high school classes did; 15 students disagreed with this view. 20. Eighty-eight students believed that college- level courses provided ample time for independent study, but 22 students did not share this opinion. 21. Ninety-six students found college-level courses more stimulating than high school courses; 13 students did not. 220 Ninety students felt that there was less regimentation in their college-level classes than in their high school classes; 18 students were not of this opinion. 23. Ninety-two students thought that they had ample opportunity to mix with other students in their college-level classes, while 18 students did not think so. 24. While 6 students felt that there was too much repetition of high school subject matter in their college- level courses, the vast majority of students (104) voiced the opposite point of view. 25. Eighty-eight students felt that they had received sufficient counseling while they were enrolled in college-level courses; 18 students felt that they had not received the counseling they needed. 218 26. While 78 students indicated that their classes were taught by regular college instructors, 30 students indicated that their classes were not. 27. While 24 students indicated that their classes were taught by high school instructors hired by the college for their classes, 77 students indicated that their classes were taught by college instructors. 28. Although 21 students had noticed a change in attitude of regular high school students toward students who attended college-level courses, 89 students were unaware of a change in attitude. 29. Only 6 of 110 students had encountered trans portation problems. 30. While 77 students felt that they had done as well in college-level courses as they had in regular high school courses, 34 students felt that they had not. 31. There was unanimity of opinion among students that selecting college-level courses in high school does not force a student to determine his college major too soon. 32. Ninety-six students received full college credit for their college-level courses, and 13 did not. 33. While 7 students received only high school credit for their college-level courses, 104 students did not receive high school credit for theirs. 219 34o Twenty-one students were given both high school and college credit for the courses, and 90 students were not, 35. Twenty-three students finished the courses required for a high school diploma before they enrolled in college-level courses, and 87 did not, 36. Four problems encountered most frequently by students who participated in these programs were the following: (a) study skills, (b) increased difficulty of work, (c) poor quality of instruction, and (d) adjusting to college teaching (grading, tests, personality and attitudinal characteristics of teachers), 37. Students felt that their most enjoyable experiences during the program had been: (a) the freedom and challenge of taking advanced placement courses with advanced materials and guest speakers, (b) the maturity expected of a person toward his work and social relation ships, (c) the help in adjusting to regular college work and the insight into college life afforded by these courses, (d) mixing with college students and the atmos phere of the class, and (e) excellent teaching. 38. The following suggestions are those which were made by the students most frequently for improving advanced placement programs: (a) more able students to take more classes, (b) greater variety of course offerings, (c) higher quality of teacher, (d) earlier admittance students to programs, and (e) better counseling. CHAPTER VII FINDINGS: COMPARISON OF SUBJECT MARKS Are high school subject marks for gifted high school students significantly higher than their college subject marks? Are there differences between boys and girls in this area? Do high school marks for physical education have an important influence upon the relation ship of students' high school and college subject marks? Are there significant within-group differences for boys and girls in this sample? Answers to these and similar questions about the achievement of students included in this study were sought by statistical means. The results are reported in this chapter. Description of the Sample During the week of April 8, 1963, high school and college subject marks for 112 gifted high school students were obtained from eleven cities located in five counties of southern California. All students in this sample had attended college part time while they were seniors in high school. No names of students who had been graduated prior 221 222 to January 1960 or after June 1963 were accepted for inclusion in the sample. Procedures utilized by school districts in select ing students to participate in advanced placement programs varied from community to community. In general, the selection procedures can be separated into three distinct categories: 1. Some districts adhered strictly to the criteria established by the State Board of Education, i.e., an intelligence quotient of 130 or above. 2. A second group of school districts permitted the top 5 per cent of high school seniors to enroll in advanced placement classes. 3. A third group of school districts allowed qualified high school seniors to attend college part time. Some of these students had finished regular high school requirements and were interested in exploring regular college offerings. Although these students were screened by the high school counselors, not all of them could be classified as gifted. According to one junior college official, all or most of the high school students who were attending college part time from the secondary schools in that area scored at the ninetieth percentile or above on the School and College Aptitude Test or on a similar instrument. Therefore, these students are here referred to as being among the top 10 per cent of the student 223 population. It is recognized that some of the students in cate gories two and three were among the top 2 per cent of the student population. Nevertheless, the school districts involved did not differentiate; therefore these students could not be identified for this study. Statistical Procedures The first procedure was to arrange three tables of data, one for each of the three categories established as described in the preceding section. The tables were com posed as follows: 1. The first table included data for thirty-four students who qualified under the state criterion for the "mentally gifted minors" program--an IQ of 130 or more. 2. The second table contained data pertaining to fifty students from districts that selected the upper 5 per cent of high school seniors for admission to college classes. 3. The third table presented data about twenty- eight students who comprised the top 10 per cent of the high school seniors in selected districts. Both normality of the data and correlation were assumed. Since the sample of students* subject marks was relatively small, the t test of significance was selected as the best method for processing the data because chi 224 square tends to be too conservative when small samples are involved. The means and standard deviations for all sub groups and the total group were computed. They are reported in Tables 70 through 76. Then the following formula was applied: The t ratios given for the data are equal to d~\ /^ Where d ■* the mean difference S, V N * the number of cases S , “ the standard deviation of the differences Reject * M2 if or if t>t:oy2 w^ere 10^2 *s the value from a t table at N-1 degrees of freedom at alpha (OO level of significance. The data were then programmed for the IBM 1401 computer. Comparison of Subject Marks for the Total Group Hypothesis one: There is no difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects and the mean of the marks for all high school sub jects except physical education. Since there were 112 students in the total group, 111 degrees of freedom prevailed, making the one per cent level of significance 2.616 and the 5 per cent level 1.979. 225 TABLE 70 SUMMARY OF GRADES FOR GIRLS WHO MEET THE CRITERIA FOR THE MENTALLY GIFTED MINORS PROGRAM IN CALIFORNIA Top 2 per cent of girls High school subject marks High school marks w/o PE College marks 1. Girl A 3.29 3.33 4.00 2. Girl B 3.88 4.00 4.00 3. Girl C 2.75 3.00 2.20 4. Girl D 3.60 3.88 4.00 5. Girl E 3.60 3.75 3.00 6. Girl F 2.22 2.00 1.60 7. Girl G 4.00 4.00 3.50 8. Girl H 3.88 3.83 3.40 9. Girl I 2.78 3.00 2.60 10. Girl J 4.00 4.00 3.50 11. Girl K 3.90 3.88 3.00 12. Girl L 3.40 3.50 4.00 13. Girl M 3.60 3.88 3.00 14. Girl N 3.70 3.83 2.00 15. Girl 0 3.70 3.75 2.00 16. Girl P 3.67 3.25 3.00 Sums 55.970 56.880 48,800 Means 3.498 3.555 3.050 Standard deviation 0.4912 0.5196 0.7657 Degrees of freedom: 15 TABLE 71 226 SUMMARY OF GRADES FOR BOYS WHO MEET THE CRITERIA FOR THE MENTALLY GIFTED MINORS PROGRAM IN CALIFORNIA w 2 per cent of boys High school subject marks High school marks w/o PE College marks 1. Boy A 2.67 2.67 2.00 2. Boy B 3.20 3.13 2.00 3. Boy C 3.50 3.38 3.00 4. Boy D 3.38 3.17 3.00 5. Boy E 3.88 3.86 3.00 6. Boy F 3.13 3.17 2.50 7. Boy G 3.50 3.33 3.00 8. Boy H 3.40 3.75 2.00 9 . Boy I 3.90 4.00 4.00 10. Boy J 3.60 4.00 4.00 11. Boy K 4.00 4.00 3.00 12. Boy L 3.50 3.75 3.00 13. Boy M 3.70 3.88 3.00 14. Boy N 3.70 3.75 4.00 13. Boy 0 2.90 3.00 2.50 16. Boy P 3.40 3.75 4.00 17. Boy Q 3.60 3.75 4.00 18. Boy R 3.11 3.00 3.00 Sums 62.070 Means 3.448 Standard deviation 0.3390 Degrees of freedom: 17 63.340 3.519 0.4026 55.000 3.056 0.6849 227 TABLE 72 SUMMARY OF GRADES FOR GIRLS WHO WERE SELECTED FROM THE TOP 5 PER CENT OF THEIR SENIOR CLASSES Top 5 per cent High school High school College of girls subject marks marks w/o PE marks 1. Girl A 3.50 3.33 3.00 2. Girl B 3.00 3.00 2.00 3. Girl C 3.40 3.50 2.00 4. Girl D 3.50 3.67 2.00 5. Girl E 3.00 3.00 3.00 6. Girl F 3.40 3.75 3.00 7. Girl G 3,75 4.00 3.00 8. Girl H 3.40 3.50 2.00 9. Girl I 3.80 3.75 3.00 10. Girl J 3.67 3.80 3.00 11. Girl K 2.75 3.00 4.00 12. Girl L 2.60 2.75 2.00 13. Girl M 3.60 3.50 2.00 14. Girl N 3.50 3.67 4.00 15. Girl 0 2.25 2.00 2.00 16. Girl P 3.75 3.67 4.00 17. Girl Q 3.20 3.25 3.00 18. Girl R 3.20 3.25 4.00 19. Girl S 3.75 4.00 3.00 20. Girl T 3.80 4.00 4.00 228 TABLE 72 (continued) SUMMARY OF GRADES FOR GIRLS WHO WERE SELECTED FROM THE TOP 5 PER CENT OF THEIR SENIOR CLASSES Top 5 per cent High school High school College of girls subject marks marks w/o PE marks 21. Girl U 3.60 3.75 2.00 22. Girl V 3.80 3.67 2.00 23. Girl W 3.00 2.75 3.00 24. Girl X 3.00 3.00 4.00 Sums 80.220 81.560 69.000 Means 3.343 3.398 2.875 Standard deviation 0.4111 0.4754 0.7806 Degrees of freedom: 23 229 TABLE 73 SUMMARY OF GRADES FOR BOYS WHO WERE SELECTED FROM THE TOP 5 PER CENT OF THEIR SENIOR CLASSES Top 5 per cent High school High school College of boys subject marks marks w/o PE marks 1. Boy A 3.75 3.67 2.50 2. Boy B 2.75 2.67 2.50 3. Boy C 3.25 3.67 2.00 4. Boy D 3.40 3.25 3.00 5. Boy E 3.20 3.00 3.00 6 . Boy F 3.80 4.00 1.00 7. Boy G 4.00 4.00 4.00 8. Boy H 3.25 3.33 2.50 9. Boy I 3.80 3.75 3.00 10. Boy J 3.80 3.75 3.00 11. Boy K 4.00 4.00 4.00 12. Boy L 3.20 3.00 2.00 13. Boy M 4.00 4.00 3.00 14. Boy N 3.60 3.75 4.00 15. Boy 0 3.80 4.00 3.00 16. Boy P 3.40 3.33 3.00 17. Boy Q 3.20 3.00 2.00 18. Boy R 4.00 4.00 4.00 19. Boy S 3.00 3.00 2.00 • o CM Boy T 3.20 3.25 3.00 230 TABLE 73 (continued) SUMMARY OF GRADES FOR BOYS WHO WERE SELECTED FROM THE TOP 5 PER CENT OF THEIR SENIOR CLASSES Top 3 per cent High school of boys subject marks High school marks w/o PE College marks 21. Boy U 3.00 2.67 2.00 22. Boy V 3.60 3.67 3.00 23. Boy W 3.60 3.75 3.00 24. Boy X 4.00 4.00 4.00 25. Boy Y 3.25 3.00 2.00 26. Boy Z 3.00 2.75 2.00 Sums 90.850 90.260 72.500 Means 3.494 3.472 2.788 Standard deviation 0.3712 0.4574 0.7743 Degrees of freedom: 25 TABLE 74 SUMMARY OF GRADES FOR GIRLS WHO USUALLY SCORED ABOVE THE NINETIETH PERCENTILE ON THE SCAT OR SIMILAR TEST Top 10 per cent of girls High school subject marks High school marks w/o PE College marks 1. Girl A 3.33 3.50 3.00 2. Girl B 4.00 4.00 3.50 3. Girl C 3.00 3.00 2.50 4. Girl D 3.75 3.67 3.00 5. Girl E 2.67 2.00 2.50 6 . Girl F 2.25 2.33 3.00 7. Girl G 3.75 4.00 2.00 8 . Girl H 3.50 3,67 2.50 9. Girl I 2.75 3.00 2.00 10. Girl J 3.75 3.67 3.00 11. Girl K 3.25 3.33 2.00 Sums 36.000 36.170 29.000 Means 3.273 3.288 2.636 Standard deviation 0.5244 0.6209 0.4810 Degrees of freedom: 10 232 TABLE 75 SUMMARY OF GRADES FOR BOYS WHO USUALLY SCORED ABOVE THE NINETIETH PERCENTILE ON THE SCAT OR SIMILAR TEST Top 10 per of boys cent High School ; subject marks riigh School marks w/o PE College marks I. Boy A 3.20 3.00 4.00 2. Boy B 2.60 2.50 3.00 3. Boy C 2.60 2.25 2.50 4. Boy D 2.75 2.67 2.00 5. Boy E 2.25 2.00 1.50 6. Boy F 3.25 3.00 3.00 7. Boy G 3.00 2.67 3.00 8. Boy H 2.50 2.33 3.00 9. Boy I 2.00 1.67 2.00 10. Boy J 2.50 2.00 3,00 11. Boy K 2.50 2.33 4.00 12. Boy L 3.25 3.00 3.00 13. Boy M 3.25 3.67 3.00 14. Boy N 2,33 2.00 2.50 15. Boy 0 2.00 2.00 1.00 16. Boy P 3.50 3.67 2.00 17. Boy Q 3.25 3.33 2.00 Sums 46.7 30 Means 2.749 Standard deviation 0.4609 Degrees of freedom: 16 44.090 2.594 0.5889 44.500 2.618 0.7770 TABLE 76 SUMMARY OF TOTAL GROUP OF GIFTED STUDENTS WHO ATTENDED COLLEGES PART TIME BEFORE HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION Number of students = 112 Degrees of freedom = 111 Categorized information HS marks HS marks w/o PE College marks HS marks less HS marks w/o PE HS marks less college marks HS marks w/o PE less college marks Sums 371.84 372.30 318.80 -0.460 53.04 53.50 Means 3.320 3.324 2.846 -0.004 0.474 0.478 Standard deviation 0.4944 0.3943 0.7546 0.2000 0.7141 0.7599 t ratios for variables 4, 5, and 6 -0.2173 7.0182 6.6522 Level of significance for t ratios--2.616 at 1 per cent and 1.979 at 5 per cent NOTE: HS * high school w/o = without to PE * = physical education 234 The t ratio was -0.2173, and the null hypothesis was upheld. There is no significant difference between these two variables for the total group. Hypothesis two: There is no difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks. The t ratio for the total group was 7.0182, and a significant difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks for the total group was found at the one per cent level of significance. The mean of marks for high school subjects is significantly higher than the mean of marks for college subjects for the total group of 112 students. Hypothesis three: There is no difference between the mean of marks for all high school sub jects except physical education and the mean of marks for college subjects. The t ratio for the total group was 6.6522, and the one per cent level of significance was 2.616. There fore, the difference between the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education and the mean of marks for college subjects is significant at the one per cent level. Again, the mean of high school marks is significantly greater than the mean for college marks. 235 Analysis of Subject Marks for the Top 2 Per Cent of Boys and Girls Together Hypothesis one: There is no difference between the mean of marks for all high school subjects and the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education. Since there were thirty-four students in this group, thirty-three degrees of freedom were found. The 5 per cent level of significance was 2.030 and the one per cent level 2.724. The t ratio was 2.1028, and the null hypothesis was upheld at the one per cent level of signifi cance but was barely rejected at the 5 per cent level. Therefore, at the 5 per cent level of significance there is a significant difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education for the boys and girls in the top 2 per cent group. Hypothesis two: There is no difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks. The t ratio was 4.0054, and the null hypothesis was rejected at the one per cent level of significance. Therefore, there is a significant difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of 236 college subject marks for the students in this group. Hypothesis three: There is no difference between the mean of marks for all high school sub jects except physical education and the mean of marks for college subjects. The t ratio was 4.7308, and the one per cent level of significance was 2.724. At the one per cent level of significance the difference between the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education and the mean of college marks is significant for boys and girls in the top 2 per cent group. Analysis of Subject Marks for the Top 5 Per Cent of Boys and Girls Together Hypothesis one: There is no difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects and the mean of the marks for all high school sub jects except physical education. The ratio was -0.6367, and the one per cent level of significance was 2.678. Even at the 5 per cent level of significance (2.008) the null hypothesis was upheld. The differences were not significant. Hypothesis two: There is no difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the 237 mean of college subject marks. At the one per cent level of significance the difference between the mean of all high school marks and the mean of college subject marks was significant. The ratio was 5.5966. Hypothesis three; There is no difference between the mean of marks for all high school sub jects except physical education and the mean of college subject marks. At the one per cent level of significance the difference between the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education and the mean of college subject marks was significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. The t ratio was 5.6630. Analysis of Subject Harks for the Top 10 Per Cent of Boys and Girls Together Hypothesis one: There is no difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects and the mean of the marks for all high school sub jects except physical education. The twenty-eight students in this group permitted twenty-seven degrees of freedom. Thus, the one per cent level of significance was 2.771, and the 5 per cent level 238 was 2.052. The t ratio for the group was 1.9217, and the null hypothesis was upheld at the one per cent level. Hypothesis two: There is no difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks for this group. The t ratio for the group was 2.3687. Therefore, at the one per cent level of significance the null hypoth esis was upheld; however, at the 5 per cent level of significance the null hypothesis was rejected. There is a significant difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks for this group at the 5 per cent level. Hypothesis three: The difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education and the mean of the marks for college subjects is not significant. The t ratio was 1.4553, and the null hypothesis was upheld. Analysis of Subject Marks for the Boys of the Total Group Hypothesis one: There is no difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects 239 and the mean of the marks for all high school sub jects except physical education for the boys in this study. Since there were sixty-one boys in the sample, sixty degrees of freedom prevailed, making 2.660 signifi cant at the one per cent level and 2.000 at the 5 per cent level. The t ratio was 1.2359, and the null hypothesis was upheld at the 5 per cent level. Hypothesis two: There is no difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks. The t ratio was 5.1550, and the null hypothesis was rejected at the one per cent level. There is a significant difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks for this group. Hypothesis three: There is no difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education and the mean of college subject marks. The t ratio was 4.3892, and the null hypothesis was rejected. Again, there was a significant difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects 240 except physical education and the mean of college subject marks for this group. Analysis of Subject Marks for the Girls of the Total Group Hypothesis one: There is no difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects and the mean of the marks of all high school sub jects except physical education for the girls in this study. There were fifty-one girls in this study, permitting fifty degrees of freedom. Thus, 2.678 was significant at the one per cent level, and 2.008 was significant at the 5 per cent level. The t ratio was -1.8087, and the null hypothesis was upheld at the 5 per cent level. Hypothesis two: There is no difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks for this group of girls. The t ratio was 4.7735, and the null hypothesis was rejected at the one per cent level. There was a signifi cant difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks for this group of girls. 241 Hypothesis three: There is no difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education and the mean of marks for college subjects. The t ratio was 5.0778, and the difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education and the mean of marks for college sub jects was significant for these girls at the one per cent level. Analysis of Subject Marks for the Boys in the Top 2 Per Cent of the Group Hypothesis one: There is no difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects and the mean of the marks for all high school sub jects except physical education for the boys in this group. There were eighteen boys in the top 2 per cent of the group, allowing seventeen degrees of freedom. Signifi cance at the one per cent level is 2.898 and 2.110 at the 5 per cent level. The t ratio was -1.6945, and the null hypothesis was upheld. 242 Hypothesis two: There is no difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects and the mean of marks for college subjects. The t ratio was 2.9930, and the difference was significant at the one per cent level. Thus, the null hypothesis was rejected. Hypothesis three: There is no difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education and the mean of the marks for college subjects. The t ratio was 3.6682, and the difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education and the mean of the marks for college subjects was significant at the one per cent level. Analysis of Subject Marks for the Boys in the Top 5 Per Cent of the Group Hypothesis one: There is no difference between the mean of marks for all high school subjects and the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education. Twenty-six boys allowed twenty-five degrees of freedom for the group and made the one per cent level of significance 2.787 and the 5 per cent level 2.060. 243 The t ratio was 0.7047, and the null hypothesis was upheld. The difference between mear.3 was not significant. Hypothesis two: There is no difference between the mean of high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks for these students. The t ratio was 5.7228, and the null hypothesis was rejected at the one per cent level of significance. There fore, the difference between the mean of high school sub ject marks and the mean of college subject marks for the boys in the top 5 per cent of the group was significant. Hypothesis three: There is no difference between the mean of marks for all high school sub jects except physical education and the mean of marks for college subjects. The t ratio for the group was 5.3096, and there was a difference between the mean for the marks of all high school subjects except physical education and the mean of marks for college subjects at the one per cent level of significance. 244 Analysis of Subject Marks for the Boys in the Top 10 Per Cent of the Group Hypothesis one: There is no difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects and the mean of the marks for all high school sub jects except physical education. The seventeen boys in this group permit sixteen degrees of freedom. The one per cent level of significance is 2.921 and the 5 per cent level, 2.120. The t ratio was 2.9468. At the one per cent level of significance the difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects and the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical educa tion was significant. Hypothesis two; There is no difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks for the top 10 per cent of the boys. Since the t ratio was 0.7265, the null hypothesis was upheld. There was no significant difference between the means. Hypothesis three: There is no difference between the mean of the marks for all high school 245 subjects except physical education and the mean of the marks for college subjects. The t ratio was -0.1160. The null hypothesis was upheld. Analysis of Subject Marks for the Girls in the Top 2 Per Cent of the Group Hypothesis one: There is no difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects and the mean of the marks for all high school sub jects except physical education for the girls in the top 2 per cent of the groups. The sixteen girls in this group allowed fifteen degrees of freedom, placing the significance levels at 2.947 for the one per cent level and 2.131 for the 5 per cent level. Since the t ratio for the group was -1.2723, the difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects and the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education was not signifi cant . Hypothesis two; There is no difference between the mean of high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks for the girls in this group. 246 Since the t ratio for the group was 2.7034, the difference between the mean of high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks was not significant at the one per cent level of significance but was signifi cant at the 5 per cent level. Hypothesis three: There is no difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education and the mean of marks for college subjects. The t ratio was 3.0843, and the difference between the means was significant at the one per cent level. Therefore, a significant difference was found between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education and the mean of marks for college for the girls in the top 2 per cent of the group. Analysis of Subject Marks for the Girls in the Top 3 Per Cent of the Group Hypothesis one: There is no difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects and the mean of the marks for all high school sub jects except physical education. With twenty-three degrees of freedom prevailing for twenty-four students, the level of significance is 2.807 at 247 the one per cent level and 2.069 at the 5 per cent level. The t ratio was -1.7163, and the difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects and the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education was not significant. Hypothesis two: There is no difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks for these girls. With the t ratio at 2.7272, the difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks was not tenable at the one per cent level of significance but was significant at the 5 per cent level. Hypothesis three; There is no difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education and the mean of the marks for college subjects. The t ratio was 3.0321, and the null hypothesis was rejected at the one per cent level. There was a signifi cant difference between these means. 248 Analysis of Subject Marks for the Girls in the Top 10 Per Cent of the Group Hypothesis one: There is no difference between the mean of marks for all high school subjects and the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education. With eleven students in this group, there are ten degrees of freedom, making the one per cent level of significance 3.169 and the 5 per cent level, 2.228. The t ratio was -0.2101, and the null hypothesis was upheld. The difference between these means was not significant. Hypothesis two; There is no difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks. The t ratio was 3.4748, and the difference between the mean of all high school marks and the mean of college subject marks was significant at the one per cent level. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. Hypothesis three: There is no difference between the mean of marks for all high school sub jects except physical education and the mean of marks for college subjects. 249 With the t ratio at 2.9744, the null hypothesis was upheld at the one per cent level of significance but rejected at the 5 per cent level. At the 5 per cent level of significance the difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical educa tion and the mean of the marks for college subjects was significant. Comparison of Subject Marks of Students in the Top 2 Per Cent with Students in the Top 5 Per Cent Hypotheses: The following six hypotheses were postulated to determine significance between these two groups of students: 1. There is no difference between the mean of all the high school subject marks for the 2 per cent group and the mean of all high school subject marks for the 5 per cent group. 2. There is no difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical educa tion for the 2 per cent group and the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education for the 5 per cent group. 3. The means of the college subject marks do not differ for the two groups. 4. The difference between the mean of the marks 250 for all high school subjects and the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education is not significant for the two groups. 5. There is no difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks for the two groups. 6. There is no difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical educa tion and the mean of the marks for college subjects for the two groups. With eighty-two degrees of freedom prevailing for eighty-four students, the one per cent level of signifi cance was 2.638 and the 5 per cent level was 1.990. The t ratios were -0.558, -0.962, -1.325, 1.291, 1.117, and 0.797. Therefore, the null hypotheses were upheld, and no significance was found (see Table 77). Comparison of Subject Marks of Students in the Top 2 Per Cent with Students in the Top 10 Per Cent Hypotheses: The six hypotheses given for the com parison of subject marks of students in the top 2 per cent with students in the top 5 per cent were used to determine the difference between the top 2 per cent of the student group and the top 10 per cent. However, sixty degrees of freedom for sixty-two students made the one per cent level 251 TABLE 77 COMPARISON OF SUBJECT MARKS OF STUDENTS IN THE TOP 2 PER CENT WITH STUDENTS IN THE TOP 5 PER CENT Basis of comparison Significance t ratio level 1. Mean of all high school subject marks 2. Mean of all high school subject marks except physical education 3. Mean of college subject marks 4. Mean of all high school subject marks when they include physical educa tion or when they do not 5. Difference between mean of high school subject marks and mean of college subject marks 6. Difference between mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education and mean of marks for college subjects -0.558 -0.962 -1.325 1.291 1.117 Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant 0.797 Not significant Degrees of freedom » 82 Significance at 1 per cent level * 2.638 Significance at 5 per cent level = 1.990 252 of significance 2.660 and the 5 per cent level of signifi cance 2.000. The t ratios for the six hypotheses were as follows (1) -4.204, (2) -4.553, (3) -2.385, (4) 2.848, (5) -0.522, and (6) -1.286. 1. The difference between the mean of all the high school subject marks for the 2 per cent group and the mean of all high school subject marks for the 10 per cent group was significant at the one per cent level. 2. The difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education for the 2 per cent group and the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education for the 10 per cent group was significant at the one per cent level. 3. The difference between the mean of college sub ject marks for the 2 per cent group and the mean of college subject marks for the 5 per cent group was not significant at the one per cent level but was tenable at the 5 per cent level. 4. The difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects and the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education was significant at the one per cent level for these two groups. 5. The difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks for the two groups was not significant. The null 253 hypothesis was upheld. 6. There was no difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical educa tion and the mean of the marks for college subjects for the two groups. The null hypothesis was upheld. A summary of the findings for these six comparisons appears in Table 78. Comparison of Subject Marks of Students in the Top 5 Per Cent with Students in the Top 10 Per Cent Hypotheses: Again, the six bases of comparison used in the hypotheses stated on pages 249 and 250 were employed to compare the subject marks of students in the top 5 per cent group with those in the top 10 per cent group. Seventy-six degrees of freedom prevailed for seventy-eight students. The one per cent level of signif icance was 2.638; the 5 per cent level 1.990. The t ratios for the six hypotheses were as follows (1) -4.319, (2) -4.334, (3) -1.168, (4) 2.218, (5) -1.492, and (6) -1.928. 1. The difference between the mean of all the high school subject marks for the 5 per cent group and the mean of all high school subject marks for the 10 per cent group was significant at the one per cent level. 2. The difference between the mean of the marks 254 TABLE 78 COMPARISON OF SUBJECT MARKS OF STUDENTS IN THE TOP 2 PER CENT WITH STUDENTS IN THE TOP 10 PER CENT Basis of comparison t ratio Significance level 1. Mean of all high school subject marks -4.204 2. Mean of all high school subject marks except physical education -4.553 3. Mean of college subject marks -2.384 4. Mean of all high school subject marks when they include physical educa tion or when they do not 2.848 5. Difference between mean of high school subject marks and mean of college subject marks -0.522 6. Difference between mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education and mean of marks for college subjects -1.286 .01 .01 .05 .01 Not significant Not significant Degrees of freedom * 60 Significance at 1 per cent level « * 2.660 Significance at 5 per cent level * 2.000 255 for all high school subjects except physical education for the top 5 per cent group and the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education for the 10 per cent group was significant at the one per cent level. 3. The means of the college subject marks did not differ for the two groups. The null hypothesis was upheld. 4. The difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects and the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education was not significant at the one per cent level for the two groups; however, this difference was significant at the 5 per cent level. 5. There was no difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks for the two groups. The null hypothesis was upheld. 6. There was no difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical educa tion and the mean of the marks for college subjects for the two groups. Again, the null hypothesis was upheld. A summary of the findings for these groups of stu dents appears in Table 79. 256 TABLE 79 COMPARISON OF SUBJECT MARKS OF STUDENTS IN THE TOP 5 PER CENT WITH STUDENTS IN THE TOP 10 PER CENT Basis of comparison Significance t ratio level 1. Mean of all high school subject marks -4.319 2. Mean of all high school subject marks except physical education -4.334 3. Mean of college subject marks -1.168 4. Mean of all high school subject marks when they include physical education or when they do not 2.218 5. Difference between mean of high school subject marks and mean of college subject marks 6. Difference between mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education and mean of marks for college subjects -1.928 .01 .01 Not significant .05 Not 1.492 significant Not significant Degrees of freedom *■ 76 Significance at 1 per cent level *= 2.638 Significance at 5 per cent level « 1.990 257 Comparison of Subject Marks of All Boys with Marks for All Girls Hypotheses: The six hypotheses mentioned previ ously were used to compare all of the boys' subject marks with all of the girls' subject marks. There were 110 degrees of freedom for 112 students. The one per cent level of significance was 2.626 and the 5 per cent level 1.984. The t ratios for the six comparisons were as fol lows: (1) 1.107, (2) 1.641, (3) 0.411, (4) -2.139, (5) 0.329, and (6) 0.864. The difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects and the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education was not significant at the one per cent level but was significant at the 5 per cent level. The comparisons of subject marks for the other five hypotheses were not significant. The null hypothesis was upheld in each case (see Table 80). Comparison of Subject Marks of Boys in the Top 2 Per Cent Group with Girls in the Top 2 Per Cent Group Hypotheses: The same six hypotheses were used to compare the subject marks for these two groups of students. There were thirty-two degrees of freedom for thirty-four 258 TABLE 80 COMPARISON OF SUBJECT MARKS OF ALL BOYS WITH MARKS FOR ALL GIRLS Basis of comparison Significance t ratio level 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Mean of all high subject marks school Mean of all high school subject marks except physical education Mean of college subject marks Mean of all high school subject marks when they include physical education or when they do not Difference between mean of high school subject marks and mean of college subject marks Difference between mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education and mean of marks for college subjects 1.107 1.641 0.411 -2.139 0.329 Not significant Not significant Not significant .05 Not significant Not 0.864 significant Degrees of freedom * 110 Significance at 1 per cent level,* 2.626 Significance at 5 per cent level * 1.984 259 students, and the 5 per cent level of significance was 2.042, The t ratios for the six comparisons were as fol lows : (1) 0.347, (2) 0.228, (3) -0.022, (4) 0.224, (5) 0.265, and (6) 0.204. All null hypotheses were tenable. No significance was found (see Table 81). Comparison of Subject Marks of Boys in the 5 Per Cent Group with Girls in the 5 Per Cent Group Hypotheses: The six hypotheses previously given were used to compare the subject marks of the boys in the 5 per cent group with girls in the 5 per cent group. With fifty students and forty-eight degrees of freedom, the 5 per cent level of significance was 2.008. The t ratios for the six comparisons were as fol lows: (1) -1.372, (2) -0.555, (3) 0.393, (4) -1.713, (5) -1.141, and (6) -0.750. No significance was found for any differences between means. The null hypothesis was upheld in each case (see Table 82). 260 TABLE 81 COMPARISON OF SUBJECT MARKS OF BOYS IN THE TOP 2 PER CENT GROUP WITH GIRLS IN THE TOP 2 PER CENT GROUP Basis of comparison t ratio Significance level 1. Mean of all high school subject marks 0.347 2. Mean of all high school subject marks except physical education 0.228 3. Mean of college subject marks -0.022 4. Mean of all high school subject marks when they include physical education or when they do not 0.224 5. Difference between mean of high school subject marks and mean of college subject marks 0.265 6. Difference between mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education and mean of marks for college subjects 0.204 Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Degrees of freedom = 32 Significance at 1 per cent; level ■ 2.750 Significance at 5 per cent level « 2.042 261 TABLE 82 COMPARISON OF SUBJECT MARKS OF BOYS IN THE 5 PER CENT GROUP WITH GIRLS IN THE 5 PER CENT GROUP Basis of comparison Significance t ratio level 1. Mean of all high school subject marks 2. Mean of all high school subject marks except physical education 3. Mean of college subject marks 4. Mean of all high school subject marks when they include physical education or when they do not 3. Difference between mean of high school subject marks and mean of college subject marks 6. Difference between mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education and mean of marks for college subjects -1.372 -0.555 0.393 Not significant Not significant Not significant Not 1.713 significant Not 1.141 significant Not -0.750 significant Degrees of freedom “ 48 Significance at 1 per cent level - 2.678 Significance at 5 per cent level * 2.008 262 Comparison of Subject Marks of Boys with Marks of Girls for the Top 10 Per Cent of Students Hypotheses: The six hypotheses previously men tioned were used to determine significance. With twenty- eight students and twenty-six degrees of freedom, the one per cent level of significance was 2.779 and the 5 per cent level 2.056. The t ratios for the six hypotheses were as fol lows: (1) 2.784, (2) 2.985, (3) 0.071, (4) -1.936, (5) 1.879, and (6) 2.145. 1. The difference between the mean of all the high school subject marks for the girls in the top 10 per cent and the mean of all the high school subject marks for the boys in the top 10 per cent was significant at the one per cent level of significance. The mean of the girls was significantly higher than that of the boys. 2. The difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education for the girls in the top 10 per cent and the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education for the boys in the top 10 per cent was significant at the one per cent level of significance. The mean of the marks for the girls was significantly higher than the mean of the marks for the boys. 3. The difference between the mean of the marks 263 for all high school subjects except physical education and the mean of the marks for college subjects for the two groups was not significant at the one per cent level of significance but was significant at the 5 per cent level. 4. The difference between the means of the college subject marks was not significant. 5. The difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects and the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education was not significant. 6. The difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks was not significant (see Table 83). Chapter Summary The data for this chapter are summarized on tables found in this section. In addition to the statement of hypotheses being tested, each table contains a description of the group being evaluated and a determination of the significance for each hypothesis. Tables 84 through 86 summarize the data for total groups of students. Table 87 exhibits the results of comparisons within groups. Hypotheses: The following three hypotheses are summarized in Tables 84 through 86 for the total group: 1. There is no difference between the mean of 264 TABLE 83 COMPARISON OF SUBJECT MARKS OF BOYS WITH MARKS OF GIRLS FOR THE TOP 10 PER CENT OF STUDENTS Significance Basis of comparison t ratio level 1. Mean of all high school subject marks 2.784 2. Mean of all high school subject marks except physical education 2.985 3. Mean of college subject marks 0.071 4. Mean of all high school subject marks when they include physical education or when they do not -1.936 5. Difference between mean of high school subject marks and mean of college subject marks 1.879 6. Difference between mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education and mean of marks for college subjects 2.145 .01 .01 Not significant Not significant Not significant .05 Degrees of freedom ■= 26 Significance at 1 per cent level = 2.7 79 Significance at 5 per cent level ** 2.056 TA3LE 84 SUMMARY OF COMPARISONS FOR HYPOTHESIS 1 Hypothesis I: There is no difference between the mean of marks for all high school sub jects and the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education. Description of group t ratio Degrees of freedom To be sig. at 1% Sig. at 1% level To TT1 sig. at 5 7 c Sig. at 5 7 c level Not sig. Total group -0.2173 111 2.616 1.979 X Groups one and two together 2.1028 33 2.724 2.030 X Groups three and four together -0.6367 49 2.678 2.008 X Groups five and six together 1.9217 27 2.771 2.052 X Total group of boys 1.2359 60 2.660 2.000 X Total group of girls -1.8087 50 2.678 2.008 X Group one -1.6945 17 2.898 2,110 X Group three 0.7047 25 2.787 2.060 X Group five 2.9468 16 2.921 X 2.120 Group two -1.2723 15 2.947 2.131 X Group four -1.7163 23 2.807 2.069 X Group six -0.2101 10 3.169 2.228 X Group references: Group one * boys in the top 2 per cent Group four = girls in the top 5 per cent Group two ■ girls in the top 2 per cent Group five ** boys in the top 10 per cent Group three 1 , 8 boys in the top 5 per cent Group six * girls in the top 10 per cent 265 TABLE 85 SUMMARY OF COMPARISONS FOR HYPOTHESIS 2 Hypothesis 2: There is no difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks. Description of group t ratio Degrees of freedom To be sig. at 1% Sig. at 1% level To be sig. at 5% Sig. at 57, level Not sig. Total group 7.0182 111 2.616 X 1.979 Groups one and two together 4.0054 33 2.724 X 2.030 Groups three and four together 5.5966 49 2.678 X 2.008 Groups five and six together 2.3687 27 2.771 2.052 X Total group of boys 5.1550 60 2.660 X 2.000 Total group of girls 4.7735 50 2.678 X 2.008 Group one 2.9930 17 2.898 X 2.110 Group three 5,7228 25 2.787 X 2.060 Group five 0.7265 16 2.921 2.120 X Group two 2.7034 15 2.947 2.131 X Group four 2.7272 23 2.807 2.069 X Group six 3.4748 10 3.169 X 2.228 Group references: Group one * * boys in the top 2 per cent Group four «= girls in the top 5 per cent Group two * girls in the top 2 per cent. Group five = boys in the top 10 per cent ^ Group three = boys in the top 5 per cent Group six * = girls in the top 10 per cent c r > TABLE 86 SUMMARY OF COMPARISONS FOR HYPOTHESIS 3 Hypothesis 3: There is no difference between the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education and the mean of marks for college subjects. Description of group t ratio Degrees of freedom To be sig. at 17o Sig. at 1% level To be sig. at 5 ° / o Sig. at 5% level Not sig. Total group 6.6522 111 2.616 X 1.979 Groups one and two together 4.7308 33 2.724 X 2.030 Groups three and four together 5.6630 49 2.678 X 2.008 Groups five and six together 1.4533 27 2.771 2.052 X Total group of boys 4.3892 60 2.660 X 2.000 Total group of girls 5.0778 50 2.678 X 2.008 Group one 3.6682 17 2.898 X 2.110 Group three 5.3096 25 2.787 X 2.060 Group five -0.1150 16 2.921 2.120 X Group two 3.0843 15 2.947 X 2.131 Group four 3.0321 23 2.807 X 2.069 Group six 2.9744 10 3.169 2.228 X Group references: Group one * boys in the top 2 per cent Group four » girls in the top 5 per cent Group two ® girls in the top 2 per cent Group five - boys in the top 10 per cent Group three = boys in the top 5 per cent Group six - girls in the top 10 per cent 267 15 3 X X X X < < X X 3 3 3 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 rt ft rt rt rt S ' S ' S tr S It it It it It It it It it it H H H h H (« It it it It < < H H H H i < 1 H H H • P It H 0H # # H fens' » s 3 OS os'll HO ss o troo WH t*0H # 0 0 n o 0 0 0 H 0 H H i H I# p. H H o e « 3 « to (tit H 3 a 3 0'S 3 0 S3 o u o HO KUO 0 0 S' 0 0 ho a o a o o a HHH «>* 3 HH 0 ffi H i S H H# H i W H i 0 H H i 0 0 0 P i 0 3 () 0 XH 3 H S3 H # 0 0 0 x ao 3 0 3 03 # 3 S3 0 HO HH 0 Urt 0 0 nso 0 0 p i 0 03 s 0 tr H S rt sro HO 0 0 MX ft 0 0 H IK a M HiHO 0) 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H 0 3 3 (10 3 H n HH rt rt 3 ft H H S'OS' trs- OHS 0 3.0 u g 3 SO 3 0 0 rt o 3 0 0 H 0 O o HO 0 0 0 0 it# J HOP) H3 03 H 3 O K 0 0 HIT H 3 0 HO S # 0 0 H PTH 0 H 3 P i n H 3 3 rt P i HOH # as1 HH dHS > it 0 H 0 0 it H P > S' W H0 0 s HH HH# M H sot 0 H Sir OS sspt 0 It 3 Hit 0 H# 3 H i <0 • SH 0 o s 0 OH 0 # H H wo 0 P > H H SO ItH 0 0 H SH 3 It 0 H 0 3 3 H S' U S S H i Lu H w 0 W S' 0 S H HH it H 0 H OS 0 s 0 s HO so H 0 H OH SfH HO 00 It 0 S H 0 H H HH !C It It 0 B H 3 H t 3 S3 3 00 UO HO 0 S w a o a o a HH HH H 0 H # H HH 3 H H $ H 3 0 00 0 0 # H X H H • 0 0 0 W 0 3 03 H 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 HO 3 0 h H s 3 S # s 0 SO • 0 H X H H t M t 0 HO 0 0 00 0 3 0 3 3 H H H H S OS S 0 ao 0 3 0 00 0 0 oo 0 0 HO 0 3 H3 3 » o n 0 ) 3 0 0 0 H HH H 0 0 HH 0 0 S H H HO H H S 0 00 s w 0 H 0 HH W in S # o # 3 It S MH 0 u HO S 0 OH 0 0 3 0 H 3 0 H It H 0 • H # 0 3 H S S pr H u # W 0 S 0 H 0 Ztfl H NH AOO 0 MW HHH 3 H 0 0 0 3 W 3 3 3 3 3 3 H » 1 WtOH 0 H HW 0 SH 1 1 1 H OW 0 H 3 SWS 3 OH OHO 0 H X hu; 0 HH B H# n » 0 # 0 H H 3 3 3 H3 0 0 3 0 H H # V I SH S H 0 SO W H 0 3 S H H HO OHO H 3 03 HH 3 0 0 U l M (1 < to 3 0 3 3 0 H 03 0 0 HOH 0 H HH 0 0 0 0 0 0 H # 3 0 3 H H 3 H HW h S3 0 C l 0 OH H 0 H 0 0 0 0 3 3 HHH P I 0 0 0 0 H 0 3 3 3 H 3 3 3 « H SUit1 0 # 3 1 1 n W 0 H WSM H< 0 HO H rt 3 HXH S Hit H 0 S a it X h a H3 H P > H 3 3 HS H P ) 0 H SH 0 S OS 3 0 0 0 H H HOH 0 0 3 0 0 3 3 3 H H HOUl tl 0 W 3 3 0 3 0 0 B OHH i On H< H o HO Cfifi T! S3 O ' 0) H on o o it It 3 3 3 ft rt rt m H U l i - S S ' * H U l ^ . N * U i 0 ) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H H H H H H H H H H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 # < It # { it # $ « # S B U H H H H H tort H urn w UlHH WH H s ( » E J * W s S s H H 0 ( i ( B ( u p i p i H H I s u 3 3 3 3 3 3 S S a a a a a a p i P ) 0 n 3 3 O ' O ' w to H H a a 0 0 3 3 S U l 3 3 f> to H U i H U i ^ f* fP 8 4 X X X X H U i H U l X X X X H U l .v ’ S '! X X X X X U i U i U i U i H U l X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X W H w z H \ w H w (0 H w H z H s w H w M X H W X H z H 3 \ H M 0 H w r t S n H 0 w H # z < \ 0 to H 0 W W H W Z < \ C fl H W W H w < z H \ w H W SIGNIFICANCE OF* COMPARISONS FOR SIX HYPOTHESES 269 marks for all high school subjects and the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education. 2. There is no difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks. 3. There is no difference between the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical educa tion and the mean of marks for college subjects. General findings. The difference between the mean of marks for all high school subjects and the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education is significant for the boys in the top 10 per cent of the group at the one per cent level of significance. This hypothesis is also significant at the 5 per cent level for the top 2 per cent of the group and for the total group of girls. A significant difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks was found for the following groups at the one per cent level of significance: (a) the total group, (b) the top 2 per cent of the group, (c) the top 5 per cent of the group, (d) the total group of boys, (e) the total group of girls, (f) the boys of the 2 per cent group, (g) the boys in the 5 per cent group, and (h) the girls in the 10 per cent group. Significance at the 5 per cent level was found 270 for the top 10 per cent of the group, the top 2 per cent of the girls, and the top 5 per cent of the girls. No signif icance was found for the top 10 per cent of the boys. A significant difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical educa tion and the mean of the marks for college subjects was found at the one per cent level for the following groups: (a) the total group, (b) the top 2 per cent of the group, (c) the top 5 per cent of the group, (d) the total group of boys, (e) the total group of girls, (f) the top 2 per cent of boys, (g) the top 5 per cent of boys, (h) the top 2 per cent of girls, and (i) the top 5 per cent of girls. Sig nificance was also found at the 5 per cent level for the top 10 per cent of girls. No significance was found for the top 10 per cent of boys or for the combined group of boys and girls in the top 10 per cent. A significant difference between the means of all high school subject marks was found at the one per cent level of significance in comparing the following groups: (a) the top 2 per cent of boys and girls with the top 10 per cent, (b) the top 5 per cent of boys and girls with the top 10 per cent, and (c) the top 10 per cent of the boys with the top 10 per cent of the girls. A significant difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical educa tion was found at the one per cent level of significance in 271 comparing the following groups: (a) the top 2 per cent of boys and girls with the top 10 per cent, (b) the top 5 per cent of boys and girls with the top 10 per cent, and (c) the top 10 per cent of the boys with the top 10 per cent of the girls. In comparing the top 2 per cent of boys and girls with the top 10 per cent, the difference between the means of college subject marks was not significant at the one per cent level of significance but was significant at the 5 per cent level. No other comparisons were significant. The difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects and the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education was signifi cant in comparing the following groups: (a) the top 2 per cent of boys and girls with the top 10 per cent at the one per cent level; (b) the top 5 per cent of boys and girls with the top 10 per cent at the 5 per cent level; and (c) the total group of boys with the total group of girls at the 5 per cent level. The within-group comparisons of the difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks were not significant. The difference between the mean of the marks for all high school subjects except physical education and the mean of the marks for college subjects was significant at the 5 per cent level when the top 10 per cent of the boys 272 was compared with the top 10 per cent of the girls. No other within-group comparisons were significant. CHAPTER VIII SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Before presenting the conclusions and recommenda tions of this investigation, it is well to review very briefly the purpose and procedure used and to summarize the major findings. This brief recapitulation provides the foundation upon which conclusions were based. Design of the Study Programs initiated by institutions of higher learn ing for gifted high school students of California have been increasing in number during recent years, particularly since the advent of Sputnik I in 1957, but few evaluations of college programs in which gifted high school students are enrolled part time have been made. Although many colleges now offer summer programs for gifted high school students, these programs were not within the scope of this investigation. The Problem The purpose of this study was to place in perspec tive the programs that California colleges and universities 273 274 now offer for gifted high school students who attend college-level classes part time during the regular school year before high school graduation. Specifically, the purpose of the investigation was to examine the following aspects of these programs: (1) the prevalence and types of programs, (2) objectives of the curriculum, (3) curric ular offerings, (4) criteria for selecting students and teachers, (5) enrollment trends, (6) personal and social adjustment of participating students, (7) reactions of students to instruction, (8) continuing registration of students, and (9) the relationship of gifted students' college subject marks to high school subject marks. The following questions were answered by this investigation: 1. What are the general objectives of the programs of advanced placement for gifted high school students who attend institutions of higher learning part time before high school graduation? 2. What are the curricular offerings of these programs ? 3. How are students selected to participate in these programs? 4. On what basis are teachers selected to participate in these programs? 5. Have more boys than girls participated in these 275 programs ? 6. Has enrollment In these programs tended to increase during the past several years? 7. Do students consider these programs worthwhile? 8. Are students' high school marks lower than their college-level marks? 9. Do students make a satisfactory social adjust ment to high school and college students in these programs? 10. Do students find the quality of instruction satisfactory in these programs? 11. Are there differences of opinion between boys and girls regarding the merits of these programs ? The following hypotheses were tested in relation to the comparison of high school subject marks with college subject marks (question 8, above): 1. There is no difference between the mean of marks for all high school subjects and the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education. 2. There is no difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks. 3. There is no difference between the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical educa tion and the mean of marks for college subjects. 276 In comparing subgroups, three additional hypotheses were posed: 4. There is no difference between the mean of all high school subject marks for one group and the mean of all high school subject marks for another group. 5. There is no difference between the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical educa tion for one group and the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education for another group. 6. There is no difference between the mean of col lege subject marks for one group and the mean of college subject marks for another group. The groups compared were the following: (1) the total group, (2) the total group of boys with the total group of girls, (3) the top 2 per cent group with the top 5 per cent group, (4) the top 2 per cent group with the top 10 per cent group, (5) the top 5 per cent with the top 10 per cent group, (6) the top 2 per cent of boys with the top 2 per cent of girls, (7) the top 5 per cent of boys with the top 5 per cent of girls, and (8) the top 10 per cent of girls with the top 10 per cent of boys. In addi tion, each group of boys and girls was compared as a group. The standard deviation was determined for each group as well as for the entire group. Differences between means were also noted. 277 in southern California. The first instrument was a post card containing four questions. It was forwarded to 146 institutions of higher learning in the State of California. Answers to the postcard inquiry were tallied, and on the basis of the information thus obtained, eighty-seven col leges and universities were selected to receive copies of the second, or "major," questionnaire. The names, addresses, and subject marks of gifted high school students were then collected from twenty school districts in five counties of southern California. Gifted students were selected on the basis of information given by school dis tricts and colleges. Total samples were taken from six high schools and a random alphabetical selection was made in the large districts. Check lists were mailed to 160 gifted high school students for their reactions to advanced placement programs in which they had enrolled. The three instruments used for the collection of data were developed from a review of the literature, a study of the instruments used in several other investiga tions, suggestions of the doctoral committee, and a preliminary mailing of five questionnaires. Summary of Findings Review of the Literature Although many studies of gifted high school stu dents were found in the literature, no formal state-wide 278 study was found that was devoted to an analysis of programs for gifted high school students of California who attended institutions of higher learning part time during the regu lar school year before high school graduation. A letter to the California State Department of Education confirmed this finding. The literature indicated that in California, increasing numbers of advanced placement programs were coming into existence. Postcard Questionnaire Results The general findings of a postcard inquiry regard ing the prevalence, beginning dates, enrollments, and credits granted of existing programs were as follows: 1. Eighty-seven colleges and universities in the State of California admit gifted high school students part time to college classes. Two of these colleges offer only summer programs. 2. Approximately 1,415 gifted high school students were enrolled part time in the colleges and universities of California during the fall of 1962. Figures provided by several colleges indicated that their enrollments would more than double during the spring of 1963. 3. Although one college in California first admitted gifted high school students part time as early as 1945, a decade passed before other institutions followed this example. The beginning dates of programs in other institutions were as follows: 279 Year Number Year Number 1955-1956 2 1959-1960 20 1956-1957 1 1960-1961 14 1957-1958 12 1961-1962 7 1958-1959 18 1962-1963 8 4. Sixty-eight of 87 institutions grant co credit to gifted high school students attending their classes. One college respondent stated that only high school credit is allowed for courses offered at his college. Four institutions give both high school and college credit concurrently; the other institutions allow high school or college credit for their courses, but not both. Characteristics of Programs A summary of the findings for the principal instrument follows: 1. More than one half of the California colleges offering advanced placement courses allow gifted high school students to enroll for from three to twelve units of college-level work before they have been graduated from high school. The range is from three to twenty and one- half units, the greatest single frequency being six units. Twelve colleges havfe established no limits. 280 2. Fifty-five of 68 institutions permit gifted high school students to take only one or two college-level courses each semester. 3. Sixty-three institutions offer courses for gifted high school students during the regular school day. Twenty-seven institutions offer programs for gifted high school students during regular summer sessions. Seventeen institutions offer courses as part of extended day pro grams. No institution offers Saturday classes for gifted students. 4. Gifted high school students in 5 colleges usually enroll in terminal courses, and in 51 colleges usually select transfer courses. In 17 institutions, they usually choose general education courses. 5. The criteria for selecting gifted high school students for advanced placement programs were checked as follows: a. Forty-four colleges and universities use high school achievement marks. b. Thirty-eight institutions regard the recommendation of high school and college counselors as being important. c. Eighteen colleges use college placement tests. d. Four institutions consider a student's social adjustment to his high school classes. e. Two institutions use CEEB Advanced Placement Tests. 281 f. Other criteria included STEP (Sequential Tests of Educational Progress) scores, conferences with the division head and the instructor, recommendation of the Committee on Advanced Standing, recom mendation of high school counselors, score of 125 or more on the Wechsler Intelligence Test, scores of the SAT (Scholastic Aptitude Test), scores of the SCAT (School and College Aptitude Test), academic rank in high school class (top 10 per cent), maturity and purposiveness of the student, Stanford- Binet score of 130 or above, high school recommendation, and a special test series designed by the University Coun seling Center. 6. The Dean of Instruction is in immediate charge of the program for gifted high school students at 17 insti tutions; the Dean of Admissions heads the program at 18 colleges and universities; the Dean of Student Services is the person in immediate charge of 8 programs for the gifted; and the Dean of Students heads 3 programs. Other school officials charged with responsibility for these programs include (a) Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, (b) counselor, (c) President of the College, (d) Registrar, (e) Dean of Student Personnel, (f) Director of the Evening College, (g) Vice President of the College, (h) Director of Counseling and Guidance, (i) Assistant Director of Student Personnel, Counseling and Placement, (j) Dean of the College, (k) Coordinator of the Able-Student Program, (1) Chairman, and (m) Associate Dean, College of Letters and Science, Gifted Student and Honors Program. 7. The greatest number of colleges and 282 universities have offered courses in the following twelve subjects: calculus, philosophy, American history, French, English composition, sociology, German, Spanish, chemistry, psychology, music, and European history. 8. The greatest number of students have enrolled in the following subjects: calculus, psychology, English composition, philosophy, American history, European his tory, French, and sociology, in order of size of enroll ments . 9. One institution permits gifted high school students to attend college courses, starting in the ninth grade. Two institutions accept tenth graders, while eight institutions permit eleventh graders to participate. The majority (54 colleges and universities) permit only twelfth graders to enroll in college courses. 10. In 63 institutions, only regular college instructors teach classes for gifted high school students. High school instructors are occasionally used by the other institutions. 11. Deans of instruction in California institutions of higher learning listed some of the problems encountered in relation to the operation of programs. In order of frequency of mention, these problems were: a. Articulation of courses, credit, and time between the high school and college. b. Selection of students for the program. 283 c. Formulation of a philosophy for the program. d. Selection of teachers for the program. e. Formulation of general objectives for the program. f. Financial support for the program. g. Achievement of gifted high school stu dents in these programs.- h. Evaluation of the program. i. Supervision of the program. j. Follow-up with students who have partic ipated in the program. 12. No respondent indicated that the philosophy for this program is separate from the general philosophy of the college. In fact, 47 respondents declared that the philos ophy for such a program did not differ from the philosophy formulated for the entire college. The philosophy adopted for advanced placement pro grams in 46 institutions was formulated as a cooperative undertaking by college and high school personnel. In only 10 institutions was a statement of philosophy prepared in written form. 13. Sixteen institutions have issued written state ments of general objectives for the program. One college has given gifted high school students the opportunity to participate in formulating general program objectives. __ Personnel of 50 colleges and universities formulated program objectives cooperatively with high school personnel, 284 while 11 respondents indicated that general objectives were formulated solely by college personnel. 14. Fifteen college representatives indicated that gifted high school students usually continued their educa tion at the college after graduation from high school; 12 respondents reported that these students usually matriculate toward a degree objective. 15. Respondents from 25 colleges stated that high schools in their areas participate with them in planning programs for gifted high school students. 16. Four colleges reported that some high schools •'have withdrawn from participation in programs. 17. Nine colleges give regular college students preference over gifted high school students in registering for college classes. 18. Ten colleges permit gifted high school stu dents to participate in their co-curricular activities. 19. Among criteria used by the colleges in select ing teachers for programs for gifted high school students are the following: a. Academic preparation in the area being taught was mentioned by twenty-nine institutions. b. Twenty-two institutions follow the recommendation of the appropriate col lege dean. c. Most of the colleges and universities use their regular college instructors for these classes. 285 d. Other criteria included recent experi ence with the age group being taught, specific courses in methods to be used with gifted high school students, recommendation of the high school principal, five years of teaching experience, willingness and interest of the instructor, excellence in teaching, and three years of teaching experience. 20. Thirty-five institutions of higher learning admit gifted high school students to classes during the fall semester of the school year, while 30 of the colleges and universities admit high school students during the spring. Four institutions checked summer session, and 25 institutions indicated any semester or summer session of the school year. 21. Acceleration of the students is the primary purpose of these programs at 9 institutions, and enrichment is primary at 14. Respondents from 41 institutions stated that the primary purpose of their programs is a combination of acceleration and enrichment. 22. Gifted high school students are usually placed in classes with regular college students at 60 institutions and are kept together in classes for their particular age group at one college. Both methods are used at 6 institu tions of higher learning. 23. There are more boys than girls currently enrolled in programs for gifted high school students at 25 California institutions, and more girls than boys at 8 institutions; 16 institutions have enrolled approximately 286 the same number of boys and girls. Since the inception of the program, more boys than girls have been enrolled at 23 institutions, more girls than boys at 7 institutions; and the same number of boys and girls at 14 institutions. 24. At 41 colleges and universities the responsi bility for counseling students rests with the high school counseloi, although 21 institutions assign this responsi bility to a college counselor. Twelve institutions consider counseling to be part of the classroom teacher's responsibility, while 7 believe counseling to be a joint responsibility of high school and college counselors. 25. The following objectives were rated highest in importance by college and university representativ ~ a. Gaining advanced standing in an academic field of college work. b. Academic success of the student. c. Orderly transition from high school to college work. d. Exploration of interests and aptitudes by the student. e. Social adjustment of the student. f. Personal adjustment of the student. g. General education as the specific objective. h. Preparation for a profession. i. Providing a challenge for the academ ically more able students. 287 26. Fifty-eight of the colleges hold classes for gifted high school students on the college campus; 6 hold classes on either college or high school campus, depending upon the nature of the course. 27. With respect to the frequency with which programs are evaluated, 18 institutions evaluate their programs "frequently," 19 institutions "sometimes," and 12 institutions "never." 28. As to the withdrawal of students from the programs, 21 institutions stated that gifted high school students withdraw "sometimes," 32 institutions that they "rarely" withdraw, and 5 institutions that they "never" withdraw. 29. With respect to the high school year when gifted students can begin a continuous sequence of college courses, one institution starts with the tenth grade, 2 with the eleventh grade, and 31 with the twelfth grade. Twenty-three institutions do not offer a continuous sequence of college courses for gifted high school students. 30. Two respondents declared that the allocation of funds by the California State Legislature has tended greatly to increase enrollments in their programs, 5 that the allocation has increased enrollments "somewhat," and 47 that the allocation of funds has not increased their enrollments. 31. No tuition fees are charged for enrollment of 288 gifted high school students in 43 participating institu tions, but 13 institutions make such charges. The high school district pays the cost of 6 programs, and the col lege and high school district share the cost in 7 programs. The college assumes the full cost in 32 programs. 32. Close articulation is achieved between high school and college in the following manner: (a) in 11 pro grams, teachers from both levels work on committees; (b) in one institution summer conferences bring program coordina tors and teachers from high school and college together; and (c) in five colleges no articulation effort is made. Other methods include summer institutes for teachers of the gifted; workshops in subject areas; administrative agree ments and procedures; individual communication on various levels; direct negotiation with the district curriculum department anh counseling staff; deans of the high school and college confer; liaison person in high school and college are assigned; informal conferences between the high school counselors and the dean of admissions; discussions between counselors and administrative personnel; meetings between the dean of admissions, and other college personnel and high school administrators; conferences between high school counselors and the director of counseling at the college; contact between the dean of students, the staff, and the district "plsychologist; and district-wide committee of administrators and teachers work with local committees 289 to implement the program. 33. Student achievement is measured in 56 institu tions by instructors' examinations; in 7, standardized college achievement tests are administered; in 2, College Entrance Examination Board Advanced Placement Examinations are given; 2 use course grades as indices of the achieve ment of students; and in one high school student grades are compared with the achievement of regular college students. 34. Credits are sometimes a problem: two junior colleges have experienced difficulty in transferring advanced placement credit from one college to another; in one, ROTC units do not accept credit from this type of program; and in two there was departmental reluctance to credit advanced placement courses toward a field of concen tration. Two thought that acceleration might unduly affect a student's initial choice of major, and five believed that students who skip the freshman year may lack adequate back ground in some subjects. 35. The following were listed as other prevalent problems encountered in administering programs: (a) trans portation, (b) matriculation at the college as a require ment for credit, (c) parental pressures on high school principals because of the prestige factor of having a student in the program, (d) conflicting schedules between high school and college, (e) the distance from high school to college, (f) selection of students, (g) selection of a 290 place to offer classes, (h) "professional jealousy" of high school instructors who resent having superior high school students go to college, (i) interference with the activity program at the high school, and (j) rejection of superior students by high school classmates. 36. In analyzing student performance, 31 institu tions indicated that in continuing high school studies, students performed as well as or better than they did prior to participation in the college program. While 18 stated that students' achievement marks in college courses equaled their high school marks in the same subjects, 8 reported that gifted high school students earned lower marks in college courses than in high school studies in the same subjects. Twenty-one colleges reported that, in the regu lar college program following graduation from high school, gifted students performed as well as or better than they did in college-level courses prior to their graduation from high school. Student Reactions to Programs A summary of student responses to the student check list follows. 1. Sixty-five of 109 students in this study had taken only one college-level course prior to high school graduation, 30 students had taken two courses, and 14 stu dents had taken from three to six courses. 291 2. Ninety-three students were able to take the college-level courses they wanted, while 17 students were not. 3. Sixty students were allowed to enroll in as many college-level courses as they wished to take; 47 stu dents were not. 4. There was unanimity among students that coliege-level courses for gifted high school students were worthwhile. 5. All but 4 of the students believed that greater numbers of students of superior ability should participate in these programs. 6. Sixty-nine students attended, classes on junior college campuses; 44 attended college classes on high school campuses; 2 attended classes at state colleges; and 5 attended advanced placement classes on university campuses. 7. After they graduate from high school, 41 stu dents plan not to enroll in the college or university they attended before high school graduation; 12 students expect to enroll in that college. 8. After they had graduated from high school, 16 students enrolled at the same institution they attended before high school graduation, and 48 enrolled elsewhere. 9. Twenty-five of 104 students plan to be gradu ated from the same institution they attended prior to high 292 school graduation, and 79 have made other plans. 10. Only 17 of the 112 students participated in college-level co-curricular activities while attending college courses before they graduated from high school. 11. All but two (108 students) expressed the opinion that social contacts with high school students were adequate when they were attending college-level classes part time before high school graduation. 12. Ninety-eight of 111 students considered teach ers for their college-level classes well qualified to teach gifted high school students; the other 13 did not agree. 13. Fifty-six students were not in classes attended also by regular college students; 54 students were classmates of regular college students. Fifty of the latter 54 students enjoyed being in classes with regular college students; the other four did not. 14. All but 2 girls and 4 boys believed that college-level classes for gifted high school students helped them to make a better adjustment to full-time college work. 15. Eighty-one of 111 students believed that their college-level courses gave them an opportunity to express their individuality; the other 30 students disagreed with this view. 16. Eighty-eight students believed that the teach ers of college-level classes gave enough individual 293 attention to each student; 25 students did not think so. 17. Ninety-five students felt that they had more freedom in college-level classes than in regular high school classes; 15 students did not agree. 18. Eighty-eight students believed that college- level courses provided ample time for independent study; 21 students did not think so. 19. Ninety-six students found college-leve1 courses more stimulating than high school courses; 13 stu dents did not. 20. Ninety students felt that there was less regimentation in college-leve1 classes than in high school classes; 18 students did not agree. 21. Ninety-two students thought that there were adequate opportunities to mix with other students in their college-level courses; 18 students felt otherwise. 22. Only 6 of 112 students felt that there was a repetition of high school subject matter in their college- level courses. 23. Eighty-eight students felt that they had received sufficient counseling while in college-level courses; 18 did not. 24. Seventy-eight students indicated that their college-level classes were taught by regular college instructors; 30 students stated that their classes were not taught by regular college teachers. Although 24 294 students answered affirmatively, 77 stated that their classes were not taught by high school instructors hired by the college for these classes. 25. Twenty-one students noticed a change in the attitudes of regular high school students toward them when they were taking coliege-level courses; 89 students were not aware of such a change. 26. Only 6 of 112 students experienced a trans portation problem. 27. Seventy-seven students felt that they did as well in college-level courses as they did in regular high school courses, but 34 felt that they did not. 28. No student in the study felt that selecting college-level courses in high school forces a student to determine his college major too soon. 29. Ninety-six students received full college credit for their college-level courses; 13 students did not. 30. Seven students received only high school credit for their college-level courses, while 104 students did not. Twenty-one students received both high school and college credit for these courses, and 90 students did not. 31. Twenty-three students in this study finished all courses required for a high school diploma before they enrolled in college-level courses. 32. The students thought that the following prob lems were the most important they encountered: 295 (a) increased difficulty of work, (b) study skills, (c) poor quality of instruction, and (d) adjusting to college teaching (grading, tests, personality and attitudinal characteristics). 33. The most enjoyable experiences of students were reported to be: (a) the freedom and challenge of taking advanced courses with advanced materials and guest speakers; (b) the maturity expected of a person toward his work and social relationships; (c) the help iri adjusting to regular college work and the insight into college life afforded by these courses; (d) mixing with college students and the atmosphere of the class; and (e) excellent teaching 34. The suggestions made most frequently by stu dents for improving the advanced placement programs were the following: (a) greater variety of course offerings, (b) higher quality of teaching, (c) earlier admittance of students to programs, (d) more able students to take more classes, and (e) better counseling. Comparison of Subject Marks A summary of the results of comparisons of subject marks is given here. The difference between the mean of marks for all high school subjects and the mean of marks for all high school subjects (except physical education) is significant for boys in the top 10 per cent of the group, at the one 296 per cent level of significance. This hypothesis is also significant at the 5 per cent level for the top 2 per cent of boys and girls together, and for the total group of girls. A significant difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks was found for the following groups at the one per cent level of significance: (a) the total group, (b) the top 2 per cent of the group, (c) the top 5 per cent of the group, (d) the total group of boys, (e) the total group of girls, (f) boys in the 2 per cent group, (g) boys in the 5 per cent group, and (h) girls in the 10 per cent group. Significance at the 5 per cent level was found for the top 10 per cent of the group, the top 2 per cent of girls, and the top 5 per cent of girls. No significance was found for the top 10 per cent of boys. A significant difference between the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education and the mean of marks for college subjects was found at the one per cent level for the following groups: (a) the total group, (b) the top 2 per cent of the group, (c) the top 5 per cent of the group, (d) the total group of boys, (e) the total group of girls, (f) the top 2 per cent of boys, (g) the top 5 per cent of boys, (h) the top 2 per cent of girls, and (i) the top 5 per cent of girls. Significance was also found at the 5 per cent level for the top 10 per 297 cent of girls. No significance was found for the top 10 per cent of boys or for the combined group of boys and girls in the top 10 per cent. A significant difference between the means of all high school subject marks was found at the one per cent level of significance in comparing the following groups: (a) the top 2 per cent of boys and girls, with the top 10 per cent, (b) the top 5 per cent of boys and girls, with the top 10 per cent, and (c) the top 10 per cent of boys with the top 10 per cent of the girls. A significant difference between the mean of marks for all high school subjects (except physical education) was found at the one per cent level of significance in com paring the following groups: (a) the top 2 per cent of boys and girls, with the top 10 per cent, (b) the top 5 per cent of boys and girls, with the top 10 per cent, and (c) the top 10 per cent of boys with the top 10 per cent of girls. In comparing the top 2 per cent of boys and girls with the top 10 per cent, the difference between the means of college subject marks was not significant at the one per cent level of significance but was significant at the 5 per cent level. No other comparisons were significant. The difference between the mean of marks for all high school subjects and the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education was significant 298 in comparing the following groups: (a) the top 2 per cent of boys and girls with the top 10 per cent, at the one per cent level; (b) the top 5 per cent of boys and girls with the top 10 per cent, at the 5 per cent level; and (c) the total group of boys with the total group of girls, at the 5 per cent level. The within-group comparisons of the difference between the mean of all high school subject marks and the mean of college subject marks were not significant. The difference between the mean of marks for all high school subjects except physical education and the mean of marks for college subjects was significant at the 5 per cent level when the top 10 per cent of boys was compared with the top 10 per cent of girls. No other within-group comparisons were significant. Conclusions Consideration of the data and analysis of the find ings provide the following basic conclusions. 1. From an axiological point of view, the merits of making special provisions for mentally gifted minors are widely accepted. Students and teachers find advanced placement programs worthwhile. Gifted students enjoy pursuing advanced courses and mixing with college students and other gifted high school students. 299 One of the basic strengths of advanced placement is that it provides one method of meeting the needs of the gifted. A second strength lies in the fact that curricular adaptations are being initiated on both high school and college levels. Improvement in the breadth and depth of curricular offerings for all students in the high school should result from this type of curricular experimentation. 2. The California State Legislature has recognized the importance of these programs by appropriating funds for their support, thus lending official status to the educa tion of the gifted. 3. The widespread implementation of these programs requires clear delineation of purposes and objectives at both college and high school levels. The function of the college in these programs is to offer the kinds of courses for gifted high school students that the high school cannot or should not offer. A corollary of this statement is that the high schools, for their part, are challenged to develop more suitable secondary curricula to meet the needs of gifted students, many of whom have felt that their high school courses were not stimulating and that their senior year was wasted. 4. Counseling is extremely important in the selec tion of students for advanced placement programs. The 300 social and emotional maturity of students must be carefully evaluated. "Cockiness" and socially immature attitudes may be exhibited by students who are improperly placed or inadequately counseled. 5. In many communities the physical nearness of the college to the surrounding high school campuses is an important factor in facilitating advanced placement programs. 6. The need for thorough evaluation of advanced placement programs in the State of California within the next three years is indicated, in order to determine how well they are meeting their objectives. It is still too early to predict the direction which these programs will take in the years ahead; however, at the present time the number of programs is increasing steadily. 7. Advanced placement courses could be strength ened if colleges and universities would (a) prepare written statements of the philosophy and general objectives of the programs; (b) articulate courses and schedule classes care fully with the high schools; (c) utilize committees of teachers and administrative personnel from both colleges and high schools to assist with planning, articulation, research and evaluation of programs; (d) enlist the partic ipation of students regularly in evaluation of courses and 301 programs; (e) develop standards for the measurement of student achievement; (f) standardize the granting of credits; and (g) work closely with the State Department of Education in a state-wide study of these and other programs for gifted high school students. 8. A consensus seems to have developed, largely since 1957, that there is no basic conflict between the principles of democracy and the provision of special pro grams for the academically gifted. Recommendations On the basis of the findings and conclusions, the following specific recoimnendations are offered: 1. That students be fully informed about the offerings of these programs when they are in the ninth grade. 2. That financial support for these programs be increased to the level proposed in the Garrigus Bill. 3. That uniform procedures for accepting credit for these courses be adopted by all institutions of higher learning in the state. 4. That better means of articulation between high school and college be worked out with respect to schedul ing, time, credit, and informational services. 5. That evaluation and follow-up procedures be 302 utilized in assessing the worth of these programs. 6. That these programs not be allowed to replace important high school offerings unless the advanced offer ings are for the direct benefit of the individual student. 7. That high school faculties be asked to partic ipate in the evaluation and planning of these programs. 8. That these courses be reserved strictly for the gifted students. Suggestions for Further Research The following are suggested as promising areas of needed research: 1. A state-wide study initiated by the California State Department of Education of programs for gifted high school students who attend institutions of higher education part time during the regular school year before graduation from high school. 2. An investigation similar to this one conducted at the school district level to determine the attitudes of regular high school students and administrators of second ary schools toward these programs. 3. A study of the qualifications of instructors of these courses to determine their attitudes and views con cerning teaching classes for the gifted. 4. Additional research conducted in the area of the relationship of high school and college subject marks 303 for gifted students who participate in advanced placement programs. 5. A longitudinal study of the success of these students in the college and the post-college years. 6. A study of the high school and college co-curricular activities of gifted students during the period when they are attending college-level classes. 7. A comprehensive study of creativity in teach ing. 8. A study and analysis of the patterns of admin istrative organization of programs for gifted students. 9. A study of the attitudes of high school teach ers toward these programs. 10. An investigation of the reasons why certain colleges and universities do not grant credit for satis factory completion of advanced placement courses. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Abraham, Willard. Common Sense about Gifted Children. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1958. Birch, J. W., and McWilliams, E. M. Challenging Gifted Children. Bloomington, Indiana: Publie School Publishing Company, 1955. Bish, C. E., and Fliegler, L. A. Summary of Research on the Academically Talented Student. Washington, D.C.: National Education Association, 1959. Bristow, W. H. The Gifted in the New York City Schools--A Memorandum and Bibliography. New York: New York City board of Education, Bureau of Curriculum Research, 1959. College Entrance Examination Board. Advanced Place- ment Program Syllabus. Princeton"! N.J.: ttie Board, if58. Conant, J. B. The American High School Today. New York: McGraw-Hi11 Book Company, 19397 (chairman). Invitational Conference on the Academically Talented Secondary School Pupil. Washington, D.C.T "National Education Association, 1958. Coy, Genevieve Leonore. The Interests. Abilities, and Achievements of a Special Class for Gifted Children. New York: Columbia University Press. ty r r . — Cutts, Norma E., and Moseley, Nicholas. Teaching the Bright and Gifted. Englewood Cliffs, W.J.: Prentice-Wall, Inc., 1957. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 306 DeHaan, Robert F., and Havighurst, Robert J. Educating Gifted Children. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,1957. Dewey (John) Society. Programs for the Gifted. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1961. Educational Policies Commission. Education of the Gifted. Washington, D.C.: National Education Association, 19 50. Everett, S. (ed.). Programs for the Gifted: A Case Book in Secondary Education^ New York: Harper and Brothers, 1961. Fliegler, Louis A. Curriculum Planning for the Gifted. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1961. Freehill, M. F. Gifted Children. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1961. French, Joseph L. Educating the Gifted. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1959. Gifted Child Education in California. Sacramento: California Teachers Association, 1955. Gowan, John C. Annotated Bibliography, California Teachers Association, 1956. Washington, D.C.: National Education Association, 1961. Hall, Theodore. Gifted Children--The Cleveland Story. Cleveland: The World I>ublishing Company, 1956'. Harris, Chester W., et al. Encyclopedia of Educational Research. 3d e"3T "~Sew York: 'fne Macmillan Company m — Hartshorn, W. C. Music for the Academically Talented Student in the Secondary School. Washington, D.C. Music Educators National Conference and the NEA Project on the Academically Talented Student, National Education Association, 1960. Havighurst, R. J., et al. A Survey of the Education of Gifted Children. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1955. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. ?8. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 307 Henry, Nelson B. (ed.). The Education of Exceptional Children. Forty-ninth Yearbook o£ the National Society for the Study of Education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1950. Hildreth, Gertrude. Educating Gifted Children. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1952. Kough, Jack. Practical Programs for the Gifted. Chicago: Science Research Associates, I960. Long Beach (California) City Schools. The Very Superior Pupil: A Handbook for the Senior High School T*eacne~rT Long Beach: Long Beach City School System, 1955. Medsker, Leland L. The Junior College. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1*760. Modesto (California) City Schools. Instructional Program for Gifted Students. Modesto: Modesto City School System, Curriculum Department, Secondary Schools Division, 1953-54. National Education Association. Project on the Academ ically Talented Student. Washington, D.C.: The Association, 1960. New Approaches to the Education of the Gifted. Morristown, N.J.: Silver Burdette and Company, 1961. Newman, John Henry Cardinal. The Idea of a University New York: Doubleday and Company, 1959. Ortega y Gasset, Jose. Mission of the University. London: Routledge and kegan Paul, Ltd., 1946. Paschal, Elizabeth. Encouraging the Excellent. New York: Fund for the Advancement of Education, 1960. San Diego (California) City Schools. Information Regarding the Program for Gifted Pupils. San Diego: San Diego City Schools, 1953. Shertzer, Bruce, et al. Working with Superior Students: Theories and Practices. Chicago: Science Research Associates, 1960. Stedman, Edith. The Gifted Child and Personnel Programs in Colleges and Universities. Pasadena, California: Western Personnel Institute, 1956. Terman, Lewis M., and Oden, Melita H. The Gifted Child Grows Up. Palo Alto, California: Stanford University Press, 1947. The Gifted Child in Portland Public Schools. Portland, Oregon: fhe Schools, T959. The School and College S' ’ ^ ‘ ' ’ ’ Advanced Standing: Announcements and Bulletin of Information, 1954. Whitehead, Alfred North. The Aims of Education. New York: The Macmi1lan Company, 1929. Witty, Paul. The Gifted Child. Boston: D. C. Heath and Company^ 1951. Abramowitz, J. "Honors Program in Social Studies," High School Journal, 43:381-6, April 1960. "Administration: Procedures and School Practices--for the Academically Talented School Student in the Secondary School." Washington, D.C.: National Education Association, 1960. "Advanced Placement Programs," The Superior Student (Newsletter of the Inter-University Committee "on the Superior Student, Boulder, Colorado), 5:2:26, November-December, 1962. Allison, Harold. "California Principals' Study of Curriculum for the Gifted," The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School 'Principals, 43 :102-6 ."February 'TfbTl---- Alpren, M. "Trends in Special Classes for Gifted Adolescents," The Bulletin of the National Associ ation of Secondary School Principals, 44 V13S-7, October 1960. Advanced Standing Periodical Articles and Bulletins 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 309 Altman, S. "College Admissions: What Is Their Stand on High School Honors Programs?" Overview, 1:46-9, April 1960. Amar, M. B. "Ceiling Unlimited for Ability Students," The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, 47:1-6. March 1963. Anderson, Harold A. "College Study in High School," Advanced Placement School Review, 64:386-8, December 1^56. _____ . "Educational News and Editorial Comment," The School Review, 64:385-90, December 1956. Applbaum, M. J. "Should Gifted Students Be Acceler ated?" Journal of Secondary Education, 36:297-300, May 196TT ______. "Survey of Special Provisions for the Educa- tion of Academically Superior Students," The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals. 43:26-43, October 1959. Arbolino, J. N. "What’s Wrong with the Advanced Placement Program," Education Digest, 26:19-21, May 1961. Arncff, M. "Prevailing Practices in Education for the Gifted?" Ohio Schools, 37:22-3, December 1959. A Selected and Annotated Bibliography on the Gifted. Columbus, Ohio: The State Board of Education, 1960. Austin, C. 0. "Advanced Programs for Able Students," Illinois Education, 46:346-7, May 1958. Baker, J., and Hughes, M. "Experimental Classes for Academically Superior Children," The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, 45 :125-9, September 1961. Barbe, W. B., and Norris, D. E. "Special Classes for Gifted Children in Cleveland," Exceptional Children, 21:55-7, November 1954T Barnette, W. L. "Advanced Credit for the Superior High School Student," Journal of Higher Education, 28:15-20, January 1951 ~ . 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 310 Bass, C. F. "Physics Program for the Gifted," New York State Education, 46:644-5, June 1959. "Summer Physics Program for Gifted Stu- dents," American Journal of Physics. 28:746-7, November 1960. Baumgartner, Reuben A. "A Mathematics Curriculum for the Gifted," School Science and Mathematics, 53:207-13, MarcTi'1'953. Baxter, J. R., and Jones, R. L. "Acceleration of Superior High School Students: University Study Program for Superior High School Students," School and Society, 90:64-6, February 10, 1962. _______ . "Demographic Variables Associated with Superior High School Student Participation in a Program of Acceleration," High School Journal, 45:342-5, May 1962. ______ . "Superior High School Student Performance in a Program of Acceleration," The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, 47:13-25, March 1963. Bell, C. "Summer Mathematics Training Program for High-Ability Secondary-School Students," Math Teacher, 55:276-8, April 1962. Bereday, G. Z. F. "Opposition of Education of the Gifted in the United States," Yearbook of Education, 1961, pp. 352-67. Bestor, A. E. "Educating the Gifted Child," New Republic, 136:12-16, March 1957. Bish, C. E. "Concerning the Academically Talented," Virginia Journal of Education, 53:28-31, September , et al. "Discovering the Talented Students-- Liaison with the High Schools," Superior Student, 2:15-18, October 1959. _____ . "National Education Association Project on the Academically Talented Student," National Association of Women Deans and Counselors Journal, 24 :3-6, bctober 1960. 311 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. Bish, C. E. "Putting Our Best Minds Forward: NEA Project on the Academically Talented Student," National Education Association Journal. 48:34, T5¥ceiBer"T9, 59. -------------------------- Bissex, H. S. "Newton Plan Challenges Traditions of Class Size," The Nation's Schools, 65:60-64, March i960. Bonwit, Dorothy, and Ivins, Wilson. "How Can the Senior High School Best Provide for the Academ ically Talented Student?" The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, 43:24-8, April 1959. Boutwell, W. D. "What's Happening in Education?" National Parent-Teacher, 51:15-16, February 1959. Bowman, Lillie L. "Educational Opportunities for Gifted Children in California, California Journal of Educational Research, 6:195-266, 1955. Bradley, G. H. "Summer Science Training Program for High-Ability Secondary School Students," The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, 45:72-80, November 1961. Breinan, A. "School and College Program of Admission with Advanced Standing," High Points (New York City Board of Education), 38:13-23, 1956. Briggs, Leslie J. "Intensive Classes for Superior Students," Journal of Educational Psychology, 38:207-15, April 1947.---- ------------ Bryan, J. N. "Education of the Gifted," School Life, 44:13-15, April 1962. California State Advisory Council on Educational Research. "Survey: Gifted Child Education in California," Research Resum£ No. 2, 1955. Casey, James C. "Saturday University Seminars in Science for Exceptional High School Students," The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, 47:281:7-12. March TWT. Chaffee, E. "Programs for the Gifted in California Secondary Schools," The Bulletin of the National 312 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. Association of Secondary School Principals, 44:110-14, FebruaryI960.------------------ Chavoor, Sherman, Appleby, Max M., and Merrill, Foster C. "Grouping Practices in Grades Nine through Twelve of the Burbank Unified School District," California Journal of Secondary Education, 30:46-8, January 1955. "Coliege-Level Courses in High Schools," School and Society, 87:180, April 11, 1959. "College Science Courses for Gifted Secondary Pupils," School and Society, 86:422, November 22, 1958. "Commissioner's 1961 Catalogue of Educational Change," Bulletin (Albany: New York State Education Depart- ment, 1961). Conant, J. B. "Gifted Child and the High School Curriculum," Phi Delta Kappan, 39:340, April 1958. Cooley, W. W., and Bassett, R. D. "Evaluation and Follow-up Study of a Summer Science and Mathe matics Program for Talented Secondary School Students," Science Education, 45:209-16, April 1961. Cornell, Ethel. "Ability Grouping in Education," National Society for the Study of Education Yearbook, Vol. 35, Part 1, pp. 289-304. Cornog, W. H. "The High Schools Can Educate the Exceptionally Able Child," The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, 39:210:386-6, April 1955. Cortage, C. "A Report of Programs of Education for Intellectually Gifted Children in Public Schools of California," Bulletin (San Francisco State College, 1953). Cullen, J. H. "College Seminars for High School Gifted," School Executive, 78:70-1, November 1958. Day, J. W. "Summer Physics Program for Talented High School Students," American Journal of Physics, 27:169-71, March 1939": 95. DeZafra, C. "Honors Classes in Social Studies," High School Journal, 43:352-8, April 1960. 96. 97. 98. 99. 100. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107. 313 Diederich, P. B. "Rutgers Plan for Cutting Class Size in Two," English Journal, 49:229-36. April 1960. Dockrell, W. B. "Special Education for Gifted Children," Canadian Education Research Digest, 2:37-45, March' T9'62. --- Dudley, D. A. "Advanced Placement Program,"The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, 42:242:1-5, December 1958. Durr, W. K., and Collier, C. C. "Recent Research on the Gifted," Education, 81:163-9, November 1960. Dwight, L. A. "Summer Program in Mathematics for High-Ability Secondary Students," Math Teacher, 55:179-83, March 1962. Eales, John, et al. "Grouping Practices in the Secondary”"§cTiools of Los Angeles County," California Journal of Secondary Education, 30:54-7, January 1^55. Educational Programs for Gifted Children. A Report to the California Legislature Prepared Pursuant to Section 2 of Chapter 2385, Statutes of 1957, by the California State Department of Education, January 1961. Englert, F. "Advanced Placement Program in English," National Catholic Education Association Bulletin. 57:281-6, 'August T960.-------------------------------------------- Estes, H. J. "College Level English in High School," English Journal, 48:332-4, September 1959. Farrell, E. J. "College Study Skills: the Develop ment of a Course for the Gifted," California Journal of Secondary Education, 33:523-7, October T93T.— -------- ----------- Fetherston. R. "Honors Institute for Young Scien tists, ^£ho£l_J^cecutive, 78:50-1, April 1959. Fliegler, L. A. "Acceleration-Curriculum Practices for the Gifted: U.S.A.," Year Book of Education, 1961, pp. 327-43. 314 108. 109. 110. 111. 112. 113. 114. 115. 116. 117. 118. 119. 120. Fox, Mildred G. "Providing for the Gifted," The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, 37:78-81, November 1953. Frankel, E. "Advanced Placement Program in Biology," American Biology Teacher, 21:351-8, December v?w:-- ----------------- Frederiksen, M. "Establishing an Honors Course," School and Comnunity, 46:15-16, February 1960. Freese, Frances. "Gifted Students in Senior High School Mathematics," The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals. 415771- -4,' May 1959. K--- Freese, Theron. "The Challenge of the Gifted," Educational Leadership, 11:156-9, December 1953. Fretwell, Elbert K., Jr. "The Challenge of the Gifted," Journal of Higher Education, 28:303-8, June 195 71 Fullerton, G. "Summer School Science and Mathe matics," National Education Association Journal, 49 :35-6, April 1960. Furniss, W. T. "University, the High Schools, and the Superior Student," Education Research Bulletin, 37:169-71, October 1958. Gallagher, James J. "Analysis of Research on the Education of Gifted Children" (Urbana: State of Illinois, 1960). Gamelin, F. C. "Acceleration in the High School," Minnesota Journal of Education, 43:27, October m ; -------------------------------- Gerich, J. J. "How Can Advanced Placement Programs Benefit Qualified Students?" The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, 44:215-8, April 1960. Ghent, R. S. "Advanced Placement for Business Educa tion ," JourriaJofBusinessEd^catic^, 37:245-6, March 1962. "Gifted Child Programs in California," Research Resume No. 18 (Burlingame: California Teachers Association, 1961). 315 121. 122. 123. 124. 125. 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. 131. 132. 133. Godin, J. D. "Advanced Placement Program in French," High Points, 43:56-8, June 1961. Gowan, J. D., and Wilbar, Mildred. "Santa Monica High School Evaluates a Program for Gifted Chil dren," California Journal of Secondary Education, 30:218-'22'j April 1955. Grossman, G. "Advanced Placement Mathematics," High Points, 43:22-3, October 1961. ______ . "Computer Mathematics: Program for Saturday Scholars," National Education Association Journal, 51T22-4, March 1962. . "Probability and Statistics in the Twelfth Tear?" Math Teacher, 59:540-6, November 1961. Guidelines and Opportunities for Leadership in the Education of'Gifted Chilciren and Youth. Washington, D.C.: Council o£ Chief State School Officers, 1962 (Executive Secretary: Edgar Fuller, 1201 16th Street, N.W., Washington 6, D.C.) . Gustav, A., and Crosman. A. M. "College Grades of Under-age Students, School and Society, 90:298-9, September 1^62. Gutzman, W. W. "Description of a Summer Institute for Academically Talented High School Juniors," Math Teacher, 55:279-81, April 1962. Hall, George V. "The Gifted Child Program in San Diego, California Journal of Secondary Educa tion, 34 :342-4, October 1959. Haubrich, V. F. "Evening Science Seminar," Illinois Education, 46:168-9, January 1958. Havighurst, Robert (chairman). "Education for the Gifted,"57th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education| Part II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958. Hebberd, M. H„ "Superior Students Profit by Summer Program at La Crosse," Wisconsin Journal of Education, 92:8-9, November 1959, Hoedt, K. C., and Rothney, J. W. M. "High School Principal and the Superior Student," The Bulletin 134. 135. 136. 137. 138. 139. 140. 141. 142. 143. 144. 145. 316 of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, 47:40-9. March 1963. Hoggard, J. K. ’’Grading the Accelerated Student," Education, 83:286-8, January 1963. Holland, J. L. "Progress of Research in 1961-- Summary Report," School and Society, 90:199-200, April 21, 1962. Horowitz, M. M. "High School Students in College Courses," High Points. 42:72-4, October 1960. Hughes, H. H., and Converse, H. D. "Characteristics of the Gifted: a Case for a Sequel to Terman's Study," Exceptional Child, 29:179-83. December 1.962. Hynes, H. G. "Special Classes for the Gifted," National Catholic Education Association Bulletin, 58:426-9, August 1961. Ivie, C., and Waldrip, R. "Nine Ways to Challenge the Gifted," Overview, 2:49-50, July 1961. Jackson, D. M., and Rogge, W. M. "Five Proposals for Program Development for Gifted Children," Illinois Education, 51:19 7-200, January 1963. Jones, R. L., and Baxter, J. R. "Impact of Concur rent College Work on the Grades and Activities of Superior High School Students," Exceptional Children, 28:415-20, April 1962. Jumper, Will C. "The Gifted Child in High School," California Journal of Secondary Education, 36:76-82, February 1951.. Kahn, P. "Advanced Placement, Research, and Micro biology ," i>£ience_Teacher, , 27:14-19, May 1960. Keller, C. R. "Advanced Placement in Jeffersonian Terms," National Association of Women Deans and Counselors Journal, 22:8-13, October 1958. . "Advanced Placement Program Now Has a History," The Bulletin of the National Associa- tion of Secondary School Principals, 42:6-12, December 1958.-- --------------- 317 146. 147. 148. 149. 150. 151. 152. 153. 154. 155. 156. 157. 158. Klinge, P. E. "University Summer Program for Gifted Science Students: Indiana University High School Science Student Institute," Indiana University School Education Bulletin, 3671-52, March i960. Kuhn, E„ J. "How Best Are the Gifted Lifted?" Illinois Education Journal. 50:202-3, January T9 62. Larsen, J. L. "Summer Seminar for the Gifted," Clearing House, 33:150-1, November 1958. Larson, A. "Early Admission Experiment of the Fund for the Advancement of Education," Education Forum. 23:101-8, November 1958. Longnecker, D. D., et al. "Experimental Summer High School Program,’ "’ ’ ’Educational Research Bulletin, 38:113-9, May 19597 Madsen, J. M. "Critique of Programs for the Superior Student," Class Journal, 57:80-3, November 1961. Manning, William R., and Olsen, Lionel R. "Petaluma Plan for Academically Talented High School Stu dents; a Tutorial Approach to the Pursuit of Ideas," California Journal of Secondary Educa tion, 35:510-12, December T960. "Man with an Idea," Carnegie Corporation of New York Quarterly. 6:5, April 1 9 ' 5 8 Y ---------------- Mation, J. C. "Advanced Placement Program in Edina- Morningside Senior High School," Social Education, 23:323-6, November 1959. Mayer, T. H. "Eastmoor's Answer for the Gifted," Ohio Schools, 37:14-15, January 1959. Meister, Morris. "Cooperation of Secondary School and Colleges in Acceleration of Gifted Students," Journal of Educational Psychology, 29:220-7, January 1956. Metzner, J., and Reiner, W. B. "Provisions for the Academically Talented Students in Science and Mathematics," Educational Research, 31:324-7, June 1961. Moore, G. D. "Counseling the Gifted Child," School Review, 68:63-70, Spring 1960. 159. 160. 161. 162. 163. 164. 165. 166. 167. 168. 169. 170. 171. 172. 318 "New Honors Programs at the University of Illinois," The Superior Student. 2:2, March 1959. Newland, T. E. "Critique of Research on the Gifted," Exceptional Children, 29:391-5, April 1963. Newton, D. E. "Curricular and Instructional Prac tices for Superior Students," The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, 45:23-6, February 1961. Nichols, E. D. "Summer Mathematics Program for the Mathematically Talented," Math Teacher, 53:235- 40, April 1960. Passow, A, H., et al. "Adapting the Curriculum to the Needs. Capabilities and Talents of Individual Students," Review of Educational Research, 27:3, June 1957. Passow, A. H., and Goldberg, M. L. "Talented Youth Project; a Progress Report 1962," Exceptional Children, 28:223-31, January 1962. Pettit, L. "Summer Science Camp," Science Education, 44:134-8, March 1960. Pressey, S. L. "Educational Acceleration: Occasional Procedure or Major Issue?" Personnel and Guidance Journal, 41:12-17, September 1962. "Principals Comment on a Program for the Acceleration of Superior High School Students," The Bulletin of the National Association of Seco'ndary School Principals, Vol. 45, No. 269', December 1961. "Program for the Superior Student," Education, 78:492-5, April 1958. "Programs for the Benefit of Able Students," Education, 79:28-33, September 1958. Putnam, W. S. "Advanced Placement Program in Biology," American Biology Teacher, 21:85-90, March 1959. Raafat, M. N. "Egypt--Ability and Genius in a Muslim Country," Yearbook of Education, 1961, pp. 313-6. Raasch, M. "Milwaukee's Pilot Program," Education, 80:143-6, November 1959. 319 173. 174. 175. 176. 177. 178. 179. 180. 181. 182. 183. 184. 185. Reichard, J. R„ "German Advanced Placement under the College Board: Promising Signs," German Quarterly. 33:153-8, March 1960. Redford, Edward H. "Special Opportunities for the Gifted," The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, 41:144-33. February 1957. Reichelderfer, Paul Valentine. "Ohio State University Works with Talented High School Seniors," The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, 43:86-8, May 1959. Research Bulletin, Bulletins Nos. 1 and 2. Riverside, California: Office of the Riverside County Super intendent of Schools, 1962. Rifugiato, F. J. "Special Courses for the Ability Student," The Bulletin of the National Associa tion of Secondary School Principals, 47:26-33, March 1963. Ristau, R. "High-Achievement Student in Bookkeeping: a Challenge," Business Education World, 39:22-3, April 1959. Roberts, W. N., and Marr, K. V. "Portola Project," California Journal of Secondary Education. 33iT5T-7T,“March I960:--------- ----------- Rosenbaum, E. "Preparation Advanced Placement in German at Central High School, Philadelphia," German Quarterly, 31:304-8, November 1958. Ross, A. E. "Notre Dame's 1960 Summer Program for Gifted High School Children," Math Teacher, 54:440-3, October 1961. Rothney, J. W. M. "State-wide Approach: Wisconsin," School and Society, 89:271-4, September 1961. Rupe, M. J. "Helping the Gifted," The Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, ~4'7:106-11, March- 1^3." ------- "Russia's Way with the Gifted," Times Educational Supplement, 2347:963, May 13^ 1"9W. Scolnick. "Advanced Placement Program for College- Level Business Subjects," High Points, 43:52-5, June 1961. -------- 320 186. 187. 188. 189. 190. 191. 192. 193. 194. 195. 196. 197. 198. Shannon, Dan C. "What Research Says about Accelera tion," Phi Delta Kappan, 39:2:70-72. November 1957. Shofstall, W. P. "The Achievement of High School and College Students in the Same Classes," School and Review, 43:184-8, March 1935. Snyder, N. "Honor Biology," American Biology Teacher, 22:87-91, February 1960. Snyder, R. A. "Physical Education for the Gifted Student," Gifted Child, 4:86-8, Winter 1960. "Special Programs for the Academically Talented," California Teachers Association Journal, 55:14, January 1959. Strittmatter, L. R. "Advanced-Standing Course," Catholic School Journal, 60:19-20, March 1960. "Successful Programs for Educating Gifted Youth: Symposium," California Journal of Secondary Education, 33:159-92, March 1958. "Suggested Enrichment Activities for the Gifted Child." San Diego, California: Office of San Diego County Superintendent of Schools, 1954. Summers, D. B. "College-Level Chemistry for Gifted High School Students," Science Teacher, 24:220-4, September 1957. Tannenbaum, A. J. "Recent Trends in the Education of the Gifted," Educational Forum, 26:333-43, March 1.962. "The High Schools Can Educate the Exceptionally Able Student," The Bulletin of the National Associa- tion of Secondary School Principals, 39:28-36, April 1"9'55. ------------- *-- Thompson, J., and Meyer. L. H. "What Research Says about Acceleration," Journal of Secondary Education, 36:301-5, May 1961. Trimble, V. E. "Provisions for Gifted Students in California Public Secondary Schools," California Guidance Newsletter, 9:3-4, 1955. 199. 200. 201. 202. 203. 204. 205. 206. 207. 208. 209. 210. 211. 212. 321 Turpin, Dick. "Educator Takes Aim at Fadism," Los Angeles Times. Sec. H5, January 6, 1963. "UCLA's Special Program for High School Students," The Superior Student, 2;7, November 1959. University of California. "California Notes," Monthly Newsletter of the University at Berkeley: Office of Educational Relations, University of California, 7:3, November 1961. Valley, J. R. "College Action on Candidates for Advanced Placement in History," Social Education, 23:330-2, November 1959. Vogel, R. M. "Transition to College Plan," School and Society, 89:115-17, March 11, 1961. Vredevoe, L. E. "Grouping of Secondary School Pupils," California Journal of Secondary Educa tion, 30 : 3T- 7,'"January" 19 55'. ------------------ Waddington, M. "Great Britain, Problems of Educating Gifted Young Children with Special Reference to Britain," Year Book of Education, 1961, pp. 199- 219. Wagner, Guy. "What Schools Are Doing in Challenging the Rapid Learner," Education, 78:59-62, September 1957. Wavell, B. B. "Mathematics Summer School at Rollins College," Math Teacher, 55:28, April 1962. Weir, W. D., and Ratner, M. "Longmont Experiment," Journal of Higher Education, 31:270-5, May 1960. Wilson, F. T. "Motivation of the Gifted and Teacher Education," Journal of Teacher Education, 12:179-84, june"''19'6T. Winkler, H. R. "Advanced Placement Program and Examination in European History," Social Education, 25:332-4, November 1961. Witty, P. A. "Educational Programs for the Gifted," School and Society, 87:165-7, April 11, 1959. "Gifted Children--Our Responsibility and Our Hope," National Parent-Teacher, 52:4-7, December 195?. 322 213. 214. 215. 216. 217. 218. 219. 220. 221. 222. 223. Witty, P. A., and DeBoer, D, L. ’’Selected Bibliog raphy of Studies and Research on the Gifted and on the Creative Individual,” Education, 82:496-9, April 1962. Yager, R. E. "Summer Programs for High-Ability Science Students," Mid Schools, 75:21-2, March 1961. Yearbook of Education. The Education of the Gifted. London: Evans Brothers", Ltd., 1961. Youngert, Eugene (chairman). "What Are the Features and Implications of the Experimental Program Which Permits High School Students to Enter Colleges with Advanced Standing?" North Central Association Quarterly" , 30:360-6, 1956. Zemek, J. "English Honors Course for the Small School," Illinois Education, 49:198, January 1961. Government Publications California Department of Education. Educational Programs for Gifted Pupils, 1960. 73 pp. California, State of. California Schools. Sacra mento: State Department of: Education, October 1961. 381 pp. County and District Personnel Responsible for Pro- grams for Mentally Gifted Minors. Tentative Directory, 1962-63. Sacramento: California State Department of Education. 21 pp. Directory of California Public Junior Colleges. Sacramento: California State Department of Educa tion, October 1962. 56 Practices for the Gifted from Secondary Schools of New York State with Selected Bibliography. New York State Education department, Bureau of Secondary Curriculum Development, 1958, Univer sity of the State of New York. Hatch, Winslow R. Reporter, U. S. Office of Educa tion, April 1962, No. 5. 40 pp. 323 224. 225. 226. 227. 228. 229. 230. 231. 232. 233. Martinson, Ruth (chairman). Educational Programs for Gifted Pupils. Sacramento: California State Department of Education, 1961. National Science Foundation. Summer Science Training Programs for High-Ability Secondary School Students. 1963. Washington. D.C.: The Foundation, January 1963. 28 pp. Price, Hugh G. "Study of Enrollment of Superior High School Students in California Public Junior College." Sacramento: California State Depart ment of Education, Bureau of Junior College Education, 1960. Radcliffe, Shirley A., and Hatch, Winslow R. "Advanced Standing," New Dimensions in Higher Education. No. 8. Washington, D.C.: d. S. Office of Education, May 1961. Rice, Joseph P., and Plowman, Paul D. "The Gifted Pupil," Newsletter of Programs for Mentally Gifted frflnors. Sacramento: California State Department of Education, Office of Programs for Mentally Gifted Minors, April 1963. 17 pp. "Special Programs for Gifted Pupils," Bulletin of the California State Department of Education, Vol. 31, No. 1, January 1962. State of California. California Education Code. St. Paul: West Publishing Company, 1.959, plus supplements. United States Office of Education. The Gifted Student. Washington, D.C., I960” 83 pp. Unpublished Materials and Conferences Carr, William G. "The Past Is Prologue." Condensa tion of an address to the Representative Assembly at Philadelphia, NEA Handbook for Local, State, and National Associations 1957-1958. Conference on the Academically Talented Students held at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles, May 1963. The Los Angeles Teachers Association was the sponsoring organization. 324 234. 235. 236. 237. 238. 239. Dale, Kermit. "Identifying and Encouraging the Superior Student." Unpublished document. University of California at Los Angeles, Fall 1961. Nason, Leslie James. "Patterns of Circumstances Related to Educational Achievement of High School Pupils of Superior Ability," June 1954. 192 pp. Nicklin, Helen. "A Comparative Study of the Origins and Development of Selected School-College Coordinate Programs for the Gifted Student in Los Angeles." Unpublished document. University of California at Los Angeles, March 1962. Swanson, H. Lee. The Advanced Placement Program at El Camino College. El Camino College, June 6, VSbT. ■ST'pp. TMt toed.) General References in Education Education Index. New York: H. H. Wilson Company, n.d. State of California, State Board of Education. A Master Plan for Higher Education in California, 1960-75. Sacramento: California State Printing Office, 1959. APPENDICES APPENDIX A LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL FOR POSTCARD QUESTIONNAIRE 327 2323 Caracas Street La Crescenta, California December 21, 1962 Dear ______________________ : I am initiating a state-wide study of "Programs Initiated by Institutions of Higher Learning for Gifted High School Students of California," under the guidance of Dr. E. V. Pullias of the University of Southern California. This study will be reported as my doctoral dissertation. The recent concern of the State Board of Education and the California State Legislature with programs for gifted high school students indicates that an investigation of the status of existing programs would be both timely and unique. This investigation will be concerned solely with those programs of advanced placement for gifted high school students who attend institutions of higher learning before high school graduation. I have asked the California Junior College Associa tion for official sponsorship of this study. This approval is pending at the present time. Since this study is state-wide in scope, all insti tutions of higher learning in California are being asked to participate. Your contribution will be of great value, as it will add much to an insightful analysis of the status of the programs for gifted high school students. A postcard is enclosed. Will you be kind enough to answer the four questions posed thereon or to have one of your staff do so? Answering these questions should take only a few moments. I hope to hear from you soon. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Theodore G. Twitchell Student, School of Education University of Southern California APPENDIX B POSTCARD QUESTIONNAIRE 329 December 21, 1962 1. Do you admit gifted high school students part time to college classes? Yes No____ 2. How many gifted high school students are currently enrolled part time in your college classes? _____ 3. During which year was your program of admitting gifted high school students part time to college classes begun? (Please Check.) 1957-1958 1960-1961 1958-1959 Z Z H 1961-1962 1959-1960 Other (Year) 4. Which type of credit do you allow these students? (Please Check.) college credit only high school credit only high school and college credit concurrently Other (Explain) APPENDIX C LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL FOR QUESTIONNAIRE SUBMITTED TO COLLEGES 331 January 24, 1963 Dear Fellow Educator: Educators are vitally concerned with the pursuit of excellence at all levels of education. An investigation of college-level programs for gifted secondary students will assist the educational profession in achieving this excellence in one area. I have asked the California Junior College Associa tion to endorse my study, "Programs Initiated by Institu tions of Higher Learning for Gifted High School Students of California," This approval is pending at the present time. This state-wide study is concerned solely with those programs of advanced placement for gifted high school stu dents who attend institutions of higher learning part time before high school graduation. Therefore, the emphasis of this study is on programs offered during the regular school year. Will you be kind enough to respond to the enclosed questionnaire? Your response will be of great value to this study. All institutions interested in the results of this study will be totally apprized of this information after the study has been completed. I have enclosed a stamped envelope for returning the questionnaire. It Is my hope that you will be able to complete and return this check list within two weeks. Please accept my sincere appreciation for taking your valuable time to respond. I hope to hear from you soon. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Theodore G. Twitchell Student, School of Education University of Southern California APPENDIX D QUESTIONNAIRE SUBMITTED TO COLLEGES Program s Initiated By Institutions of H igher Learning For G ifted High School Students of C alifornia A UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA DOCTORAL STUDY PURPOSE OF STUDY E ducators hcrve becom e increasingly a w a re of the necessity to provide for the enorm ous ra n g e of indi vidual differences found am o ng gifted high school students. Program s adm itting high school students p art time to college-level courses h av e provided one solution to this problem . The program s initiated b y institutions of higher learning for gifted high school students of California n eed to be placed in p er spective in the following areas: 1 The O bjectives of the Curriculum 2. The Offerings of the Curriculum 3. The C riteria for Selecting Students a n d T eachers 4. The S tatus of Enrollment The objective of this study is to p ro vide edu cators w ith inform ation reg ard in g the developm ent of these p rogram s in the state of Ccdifornia. DERECTION OF STUDY R esearch by Theodore C. Twitchell Comm ittee C hairm an: Dr. E. V. Pul lias Instructor Professor of H igher Education ^ B urbank Unified School District University of Southern C alifornia t-O GENERAL INFORMATION This investigation will be concerned solely with those program s of a d v an ce d placem ent for gifted high school students who a tten d institutions of h igh er learning before high school gradu ation . Jvlost of the questions can b e an sw ered by checking or circling the ap p ro p riate answ er. H ow ever, a few questions require the respondent to n u m b er his response. The estim ated answ erin g tim e for the Questionnaire is approxim ately tw enty m inutes. The criteria for the selection of students a n d teachers w ere taken from the w ritings of one or m ore a u thors, or sources. The investigator p led ges to m aintain the anonym ity of the respondents a n d to treat all responses in a confidential m anner. P lease return the com pleted Q uestionnaire in the stam p ed envelope provided. A reply w ithin the next t w o w e e k s will be greatly app reciated. If you wish to receive a sum m ary of this study, p lease fill in the blanks below. N am e of R espondent T i t le College or University A ddress 334 INSTRUCTIONS Your views concerning programs for gifted high school students are of great importance to this study. 1. Please read each question carefully and check or circle the appropriate response. 2. Some questions require an evaluation type of response. All of these questions are posed in relation to a five-point scale. Number 1 refers to the most significant item, and number 5 refers to the least significant. 3. If you wish to comment upon a question or to add something, please do so at the end of each question. 335 PROGRAMS FOR THE GIFTED 1. W hat is the maximum num ber of college units a student in your program m ay take before his high school graduation? (Please circle.) (a) 1 (e) 5 (i) 9 (m) 13 (q) 17 (b) 2 (f) 6 (i) 10 (n) 14 (r) 18 (c) 3 (g) 7 (k) 11 (o) 15 (s) 19 (d) 4 (h) 8 (1) 12 (p) 16 (t) 20 (u) Other. 2. How m any college courses m ay a gifted high school student take during a semester? (Please check) □ (a) one □ (c) three □ (b) two □ (d) __________________________________ (Explain) 3. Which of the following statem ents apply to your program for gifted high school stu dents? (Please check.) □ (a) Courses a re offered during the regular school day. □ (b) C ourses are offered during regular sum m er sessions. □ (c) C ourses are offered during a period before the regular school d ay begins. □ (d) C ourses are offered as part of the extended day program. □ (e) C ourses are offered for gifted high school students on Saturdays. □ (f) Other------------------------------------- ------- -------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- 4. Gifted high school students in your program usually enroll in which type of educational program? (Please check.) □ (a) Terminal □ (b) Transfer Q (c) G eneral Education (no specific goal indicated) □ (d) O ther ________________________________ _____________ ____________ _____________ 5. Which of the following are part ol your criteria lor the selection of gifted high school students for college classes? (Please check.) □ (a) College Placem ent Tests □ (b) CEEB A dvanced Placem ent Tests □ (c) High school achievem ent marks □ (d) Stanford-Biniet score of 130 or above □ (e) Recomm endation of the high school principal □ (f) A student's social adjustm ent in relation to his high school classes □ (g) Recom m endation of high school an d college counselors □ (h) O ther . _ _ . ___ 6. W hat is the title of the college adm inistrator in im m ediate charge ol your program? (Please check.) □ (a) D ean of Instruction Q (d) Dean of Student Services □ (b) D ean of the College □ (e) Dean of Admissions of Arts an d Sciences □ (f) O ther__________ ________ □ (c) Dean of Academ ic Affairs _____________ ________ 336 7. In which oi the following courses have gifted high school students in your program enrolled for credit? (Please check.) — .(a) A lgebra ___(s) G eography ___(b) Am erican History -----(t) G eom etry -----(c) A m erican Literature ___(u) G erm an -(d) Biology - -(v ) Journalism - .(e) Business - -_(w) Latin - - ( i ) C alculus _____(x) Law - -(g ) Chemistry — (y) Library Science - - ( h ) C inem a -----(z) Literature (introductory) -(i) C lassics -----(aa) Music -(j) D ram a _____(bb) Philosophy . (k) Education — (cc) Physics — (1) Engineering -----(dd) Radio ... (m) English -----(ee) Sociology _____(n) English Composition - -(ID S panish -----(o) English Literature - -(gg) S peech -----(p) E uropean History -(hh) Television - -(q) Fine Arts (u) World History -----(r) French — (ii) O thers _ 8. in which of the following courses for gifted high school students has the greatest num- b er of students enrolled since the inception of your program ? (Please check.) (a) A lg ebra ___(s) G eo graph y -(b) A m erican History ----(t) Geom etry -----( 0 A m erican Literature ___(u) G erm an - -(d ) Biology - -<V) Journalism - - ( e ) Business ---- (w) Latin (f) C alculus . -(X) Law -( g ) Chemistry - -(Y) Library Science (h) C in em a (z) Literature (introductory) .(i) Classics — (aa) Music - -(i) D ram a -(bb) Philosophy (k) Education ---- (cc) Physics — (l) Engineering - - ( d d ) Radio ---- (m) English — (ee) Sociology - _Cn) English Composition ---- <ff) Spanish ---- (o) English Literature - (gg) Speech (p) E uropean History .. (hh) Television - -(q ) Fine Arts . (ii) World History - -(r) French ---(ii) O thers___ ___ 9. At which g ra d e level are gifted high school students first perm itted to take courses in your program? (Please check.) □ (a) Tenth □ (b) Eleventh □ (c) Twelfth 10. Instruction in classes for gifted high school students in your program is given almost entirely (Please check.) □ (a) b y regular college instructors. [1 (b) b y high school instructors hired by the college to teach the desig n ated courses. Q (c) by either of the above, depen d in g upon the nature of the course. 337 11. Using n u m bers through 5, p lease indicate the relative im p o rtan ce to yo u r program of the problems listed below Irom most important to least important. (S elect only □ live.) (a) Selection of students for the program u (b) Selection ol teachers lor the program □ (c) Formulation ol a philosophy for the program □ (d) Formulation of g en eral objectives for the program □ (e) Financial support for the program □ (1) Articulation of courses, credits, a n d time b etw een the high school □ (g) a n d the college Evaluation of the program □ (h) Follow-up with students who h ave p articipated in the prog ram □ (i) Supervision of the program □ (j) A chievem ent of gifted high school students in thesie courses □ (k) O ther______________ _ _ ______ ___________ _______ ___________ 12. Check those items that describe the philosophy governing your p ro g ra m □ (a) The philosophy ol this program is se p a ra te from the g en eral p h ilo so p h y ot the college. □ (b) The philosophy tor this program does not differ from the philosophy formulated for the entire college. □ (c) The philosophy w as formulated solely by college personnel. □ (d) Lay advisory groups w ere utilized in formulating the p h ilo sop h y lor this program . □ (e) The philosophy of your ad v a n ce d placem ent program for g ifted high school students w as a cooperative undertaking by college a n d high school personnel. □ (1) The philosophy is in written form. □ (g) O ther .. ------------------------ ------------ --------------- ----------------------------- 13. C heck those statem ents below that relate to the g en eral objectives ol y ou r program . □ (a) There is a written statem ent of the g en eral objectives. □ (b) Lay advisory groups w ere utilized in formulating the genera! ob jec tiv e s for your program. □ (c) Gifted high school students w ere given the opportunity to p a rtic ip a te in formulating the g e n era l objectives of your program. □ (d) The formulaion of g en era l objectives for your program w as a c o o p era tiv e u ndertaking by college an d high school personnel. □ (e) The g eneral objectives governing your program w ere fo rm u lated solely by college personnel. □ (f) Other . . . . 14. Check the statem ents describing the program that exists at your institution. □ (a) Gifted high school students in your program usually continue their education at your college after they h av e g ra d u a te d from high school. (J lb) After g rad u atin g from high school, gifted high school students from y o u r program usually m atriculate tow ards a d eg ree objective at y o u r college. □ (c) Most high schools in your a re a participate with you in offering a p ro g ra m for gifted high school students. □ (d) Some high schools have w ithdraw n their participation in your p rogram . □ (e) R egular college students are given first choice in registering for college classes d esired b y gifted high school students. □ (f) Gifted high school students in your program m ay participate in the co-curricular activities ol the college. 15, W hich of the following criteria are used in selecting teachers for your p ro g ram ? (Please check.) [J (a) Recent experience with the a g e group bein g taught. ; j (b) Specific courses in methods to bo used with gifted high school students. 338 □ (c) Recomm endation of the high school principal. □ (d) Recomm endation of the appropriate college dean. □ (e) A cadem ic preparation in the a r e a being taught. □ (f) Instructors w ho possess a minimum of five years of experience in teaching. □ (g) Other 16. During which part of the school year are gifted high school students adm itted part time to your college classes? (Please check ) Q (a) Fall Sem ester □ (c) Summ er Session □ (b) Spring Sem ester □ (d) During an y sem ester or sum mer session of the school year. 17. Which one oi the following purposes is prim ary in your program for gifted high school students? (Please check.) □ (a) Acceleration of the students. □ (b) Enrichment of the program of the students. □ (c) A combination of the above. □ (d) O ther (Explain)_____________________________________________________________ _ _ 18. Which of the following statem ents relate to the placem ent of gifted high school stu dents part time in your college classes? (Please check.) □ (a) Gifted high school students are regular college students. usually placed in classes with □ (b) Gifted high school students are their particular a g e group. usually kept together in classes for □ (c) Both methods are used. □ (d) Other.. . . . 19. Which of the following statem ents reflect the status of your enrollment trend in pro gram for gifted high school students? (Please check.) □ (a) There are more boys than girls currently enrolled. □ (b) There are more girls than boys currently enrolled. □ (c) The num ber of boys an d girls currently enrolled in this program is approxim ately the sam e. □ (d) From the inception of this program, more boys than girls have b een enrolled. □ (e) From the inception of this program, more girls than boys have b e e n enrolled. □ (f) From the inception of this program, the num ber of boys and girls enrolled in this program h as been approxim ately the same. 20. Counseling of gifted students in your program is primarily the responsibility of which of the following? (Please check ) □ (a) High school counselor. D (b) College counselor. □ (c) Teacher of the subject in which the student is enrolled, □ (d) O ther-___________________________________________________ ___________________ 21. Rank the following objectives on a scale of one through five in relation to their im portance to your program . Start with the most important. (Select only five.) □ (a) An orderly transition from high school to college work. □ (b) Social adjustm ent of the student. □ (c) A cadem ic success of the student. □ (d) Personal adjustm ent of the student. □ (e) Exploration of interests and aptitudes by student. n (f) G aining ad v an c ed standing in an acad em ic field of college work □ (g) Preparation for a profession. 339 □ (h) G enera] education as the specific objective. □ (lj O thers ... ______ _ ____ 22. Gifted high school students in your program usually attend college classes on which cam pus? (Please check.) Q (Q) C ollege ca m p u s □ (c) Either, depending upon the nature Ll (b) High school cam p us ol the oftering 23. Gilted high school students are asked to evaluate the program offered at your institution. □ (a) trequently □ fb) sometimes □ (c) rarely □ (d) never 24. High school students withdraw from participation in your program. □ (a) frequently □ (b) sometimes □ (c) never □ (d) rarely 25. A continuous se q u en c e oi college courses for gifted high school students is offered by your institution (Please check.) □ (a) starting with the tenth grade. □ (b) starting with the eleventh grade. □ (c) starting with the twelfth grade □ (d) iot at all. □ (e) O ther_____________________ _______ 26. Has the allocation of funds by the California State Legislature for the education of gilted high school students tended to increase enrollment in your program? (Please check.) □ (a) grecrtly Q (b) som ew hat □ (c) not at all 27. Check the statem ents that apply to your program. □ (a) Students a re adm itted without tuition. □ (b) Students are required to pay tuition. L) (c) The high school district pays the cost oi educating the gifted high school students in your program. LJ (d) The college a n d high school district share the cost oi educating gifted high school students in your program. □ (e) The college assu m es the full cost of educating high school students in this program. 28. How is close articulation achieved betw een the high school and the college in offering these program s at your institution? □ (a) T eachers Irom both levels work ori committees □ (b) Sum m er conferences bring program coordinators and teachers from both high school a n d college together. □ (c) Sum m er institutes are given for teachers in your proyram, n (d) W orkshops in the subject areas are held. □ (e) O ther . ._ . .... .... .. .. _______ 29. Achievem ent in your A dvanced Placement Program is m easured by w hat m eans? (Please check.) □ (a ) CEEB A dvanced Placem ent Examinations. 340 L I! lb) Instructors' exam inations. □ (c) S tan d ard ized college achievem ent tests. □ (d) C om m ittees ol readers, representing both high schools an d colleges, w ho go over written exam inations, □ (e ) All ol these. □ (!) O ther_________________________________ _ _ __________________________ ________ 30. The following a re re g a rd e d as problem s in these program s. Check the ones that apply to your program . LJ \a) There is difficulty in transferring ad v an ce d placem ent credit from one college to another. □ ib) ROTC units will not accep t this type of credit. II] (cj D epartm ental reluctance to credit a d v a n c e d placem ent courses tow ard the field ol concentration is a problem. □ (d) A cceleration m ay unduly aliect a student's initial choice of major. □ (e) Students w ho skip the freshm an y e a r m ay not h av e an a d e q u a te b ack g ro u n d in certain subjects. □ (f) O thers (com m ents)- _____ _________ _____ ________________________________________ 31. The evaluation of your program for gilted high school students h as shown which of the tallowing statem ents to bo true in relation to your program ? [J (a) Students perlorined as well, or better, in thoir continuing high school studies a s they did prior to their participation in the program on the college cam pus. [ j th) Students' achievem ent m arks in college courses tend to e q u a l their high school m arks in high school offerings in the sam e subject field. □ (c) Gifted high school students attending college-level classes part time do not tend to do eq u ally well in their continuing high school studies. □ (d) G ilted high school students earn college- m arks that do not e q u a l their high school m arks in the sam e subject field. [ j (u) Following graduation from high school, these gifted students perform a s well, or better, in the regular college program than they did in college-level courses prior to their grad uatio n from high school. □ (i) Such investigations h av e not b een m ade. □ (g) O ther ... _ ______ . ___________________________ _____ _________________ APPENDIX E FOLLOW-UP LETTER TO COLLEGES 342 2325 Caracas Street La Crescenta, California March 29, 1963 Dear Sir: Approximately one month ago I forwarded to you a check list questionnaire, "Programs Initiated by Institutions of Higher Learning for Gifted High School Students of California," and invited you to respond to the questions posed. I hope that you will have the time to answer this questionnaire. Since your institution represents an impor tant part of the system of higher education in this state, I am particularly interested in receiving your answers. The questionnaire will take approximately twenty minutes to fill out. Your cooperation in this endeavor is earnestly requested. If you are unable to fill out the questionnaire, perhaps one of your staff could do so. Thank you for participating in this study. I am certain that this doctoral study will be of benefit to educators working with programs for gifted high school students. Sincerely, Theodore G. Twitchell Student, School of Education University of Southern California APPENDIX F LETTER REQUESTING PARTICIPATION OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS 344 April 3, 1963 Dear Fellow Educator: I am currently enrolled as a doctoral student at the University of Southern California, where I am working on my dissertation, "Programs Initiated by Institutions of Higher Learning for Gifted High School Students of California. One phase of this dissertation is concerned with the comparison of students’ high school marks with their college-level marks in the advanced place ment program. To make this comparison, I must obtain the names, addresses, and marks of fifteen students from each of twenty school districts in the six southern counties of this state. I am concerned solely with students' marks for the 1961-1962 school year. Another phase of my dissertation is based upon a questionnaire, a student check list, the pur pose of which is to sample student opinion about college-level classes. A copy of this questionnaire is enclosed. Will you be kind enough to permit me to obtain the required information from your district? The anonymity of all students involved in this study will be maintained. Thank you for considering this request. I look forward to an early reply. Sincerely, Theodore G. Twitchell Student, School of Education University of Southern California APPENDIX G LETTER INDICATING INSTITUTIONAL STATUS OF THE STUDY UNIVERSITY OK SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA UNIVERSITY PARK LOS ANGELES ~ 7 . CALIFORNIA SCHOOL LF EDUCATION April 8, 1963 Dear Friend.: I am pleased to commend to yon Mr. Theodore G. Twitchell who is writing his dissertation for the doctorate under my direction at the University of Southern California. Mr. Twitchell is a careful and responsible student. You can be sure he will use whatever information you give him with complete responsibility. He is particularly aware of the absolute necessity of keeping or data from student records confidential and anonymous. Every care will be taken to see that this is done. X believe Mr. Twitchell’s study promises to make a significant contribution. I shall deeply appreciate any assistance you can give him. Sincerely yours, Professor of Higher Education EVP : Jab APPENDIX H LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL FOR STUDENT CHECK SHEET 348 May 24, 1963 Dear Student: The purpose of this letter is to invite you to participate in the state-wide doctoral study--"Programs Initiated by Institutions of Higher Learning for Gifted High School Students of California"--by filling out the questionnaire enclosed. This study is designed to obtain information which will assist educators of California in providing for the needs of gifted high school students. The sample for this study is being drawn from several counties of southern California. You were selected to participate in this phase of the study because you attended college-level classes part time before high school graduation. Therefore, you are well qualified to respond to the questionnaire, and your opinions will be of great value to this research project. One phase of the study is concerned with a compari son of boys1 and girls' responses. Please indicate on the back of the questionnaire whether you are a boy or a girl. This information has already been placed on some of the questionnaires. Will you be kind enough to respond to the question naire within the next two weeks? The estimated answering time is approximately fifteen minutes. A stamped, addressed envelope has been enclosed for returning the questionnaire. Thank you for participating in this study. Sincerely, Theodore G. Twitchell Instructor Burbank Unified School District APPENDIX I STUDENT CHECK SHEET 350 PROGRAMS INITIATED BY INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING FOR GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS OF CALIFORNIA A UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA DOCTORAL STUDY PURPOSE OF QUESTIONNAIRE The purpose of this questionnaire is to obtain answers to the questions posed from students who have attended college-level classes part time before high school gradua tion. The questions are structured to reveal the following types of information about students: 1. Information about Personal Adjustment 2. Information about Social Adjustment 3. Information about Reactions to Instruction 4. Information about Enrollment of Students The objective of this study is to provide educators with information about programs for gifted high school students of California. DIRECTION OF STUDY Research by Theodore G. Twitchell Instructor, Burbank Unified School District Committee Chairman: Dr. E. V. Pullias Professor of Higher Education University of Southern California GENERAL INFORMATION This investigation will be concerned solely with those programs for gifted high school students who attend insti tutions of higher learning part time before high school graduation. Most of the questions can be answered by checking the appropriate answer. However, the last three questions require the respondent to write short answers. The esti mated answering time for the questionnaire is approximately fifteen minutes. The investigator pledges to maintain the anonymity of the respondents and to treat all responses in a confidential manner. 351 Please return the completed questionnaire in the stamped envelope provided. A reply within the next TWO WEEKS will be greatly appreciated. Every reply is an important contribution to this study. A large number of responses will be necessary to place students' opinions in perspective. INSTRUCTIONS Your views concerning programs for gifted high school stu dents are of great importance to this study. 1. Please read each question carefully and check the appropriate response. 2. The last three questions require the respondent to write a brief answer. 3. If you wish to comment upon a question or to add something, please do so on the back of the questionnaire. STUDENT CHECK SHEET 1. How many courses did you take at a college or univer sity before you were graduated from high school? (Please check.) 1 4 Other 2 5 3 6 2. While you were enrolled in high school, were you able to take the college-level courses you wanted? yes no 3. Were you permitted to enroll in as many of these college-level courses as you wished to take? yes no 4. Do you feel that college-level courses for gifted high school students are worthwhile? yes no 5. Do you believe that greater numbers of students of superior ability should participate in these programs? yes no 352 6. At which of the following types of insti tutions were your college-level courses held? high school state college junior college university (Answer either question seven or question eight, depending upon which one is appli cable to your current status.) 7. Following high school graduation, do you intend to enroll in the college or univer sity which you attended part time before high school graduation? yes no 8. Following high school graduation, did you enroll in the college or university which you attended part time before high school graduation? yes no 9. Do you plan to be graduated from the college or university at which you enrolled before high school graduation? yes no 10. Did you participate in college-level co-curricular activities before your graduation from high school? yes no 11. Were your social contacts with high school students adequate when you were attending college-level classes part time before high school graduation? yes no 12. Do you feel that the teachers for your college-level classes were well quali fied to teach gifted high school students? yes no 13. Were you in classes with regular college students? (If the answer is affirmative, please answer question fourteen.) yes no 14. Did you enjoy being in classes with regular college students? yes no 15. Do you think college-level classes for gifted high school students help those students make a better adjust ment to full-time college work? yes no 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 2 2 . 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 353 Do you feel that your college-level courses gave you a chance to express your individuality? yes no Did the teachers of these college- level courses give enough individual attention to each student? yes no Do you feel that you had more freedom in college-level classes than you did in regular high school classes? yes no Did your college-level courses provide ample time for independent study? yes no Were your college-level courses more stimulating and challenging than your regular high school courses? yes no Do you feel that your college-level classes had less regimentation than your high school classes? yes no Was mixing with other pupils adequate in college-level classes? Do you feel that there was too much repetition of high school subject matter in your college-level courses? yes no Did you receive sufficient counseling while you were enrolled in college- level courses? yes no Were your classes taught by regular college instructors? yes no Were your classes taught by high school instructors hired by the college for these classes? yes no Did you notice a change in attitude of regular high school students towards students taking college- level courses? yes no Was transportation to and from college-level classes a problem to you? yes yes no no 354 29. Do you feel that you did as well in college-level courses as you did in regular high school courses? 30. Do you feel that selecting college- level courses in high school forces a student to determine his college major too soon? 31. Did you receive full college credit for your college-level courses? 32. Did you receive only high school credit for your college-level courses? 33. Did you receive both high school and college credit for these courses? 34. Did you finish the courses required for a high school diploma before you enrolled in college-level courses? 35. Did you encounter any major problems associated with your participation in this program? (Please list.) 36. What did you enjoy most about participating in college-level classes? yes no yes no yes no yes no yes no yes no 37. Do you have any suggestions for improving these programs ? APPENDIX J INFORMATION SHEET FOR OBTAINING NAMES, ADDRESSES, AND SUBJECT MARKS OF STUDENTS INFORMATION SHEET 356 NOTE: The purpose of this information sheet is to obtain the semester marks for those gifted high school seniors who attended college-level classes part time during 1961-1962 before they were graduated from high school. The anonymity of all students involved in this study will be maintained. Research by Theodore G. Twitchell, Instructor Burbank Unified School District Committee Chairman: Dr. E. V. Pullias Professor of Higher Education University of Southern California NAME OF STUDENT ADDRESS OF STUDENT_ CITY HIGH SCHOOL COURSE l._ 2. . 3._ 4._ 5._ 6. l._ 2 3 *. 4._ 5. GRADES COLLEGE COURSE FALL SEMESTER SPRING SEMESTER GRADES 5. 6. APPENDIX K EL CAMINO COLLEGE: ADVANCED PLACEMENT PROGRAM AND SUGGESTED COLLEGE PROCEDURES 358 EL CAMINO COLLEGE ADVANCED PLACEMENT PROGRAM SUGGESTED COLLEGE PROCEDURES 1. Provide necessary information to high schools-- catalogues, class schedules, instruction sheets, etc. 2. Accept applications from each school (including stu dent background sheets--two copies, one for instructor and one for students' cumulative records; and tran scripts as of date of application. 3. Request missing, or other, information necessary. 4. College counselor meet with student group and high school counselor at each high school for general orientation, and host an El Camino Campus tour at a later date. OR College counselor, and other college personnel, host students from all high schools and their counselors for general orientation and campus tour in the semes ter prior to anticipated enrollment. 5. Schedule individual counseling conferences with each student at the college, and put written report in the cumulative file. 6. Issue permit for registration to student at the coun seling conference, and send confirming copy to the high school. 7. Perhaps arrange a time for these students to register at one time? Particularly early in the schedule. 8. Have student return the permit to the college coun selor for program check after registration. 9. Enter pertineni; data in the Advanced Placement records. 10. Send background information sheet of each student to instructor concerned before class starts. 11. Compile participation report and send to college administrators concerned and high school administra tion . 359 12. Obtain progress reports from instructors, and send to the high school. (Mid-terra?) 13. Evaluation inquiry to each student for follow-up study. (At end of semester and one year later.) 14. Evaluation meeting of college and high school person nel at the end of each semester or year. Also when found to be necessary or desirable. 15. Send official transcripts of students' work, when com pleted, to the high school. 16. Report to the administration as requested. 17. Exchange final reports of participation and evaluation with the respective high schools. Problems Although the majority of the people concerned with this program have indicated that they have encountered few, if any, problems, there are some that need attention, the solution of which will help improve the program. 1. The name, Advanced Placement, is in conflict with the national program of the College Entrance Examination Board, and leads to some confusion. 2. Transportation presents a problem to some students since they are too young to have their own trans portation, and service to the college is limited. However, there seems to be fewer problems if the student has the responsibility, although this may eliminate some potential students. 3. Counseling, or the lack of it, at both the college and the high schools has been a problem since some of the students felt they hadn't taken the right classes; had the right instructors; hadn't taken placement tests; didn't know what to do, or where to go, at the college. 4. Some students taking too heavy a load has been a problem, and some of their work has suffered. This is probably a counseling problem for the high school, and a progress reporting responsibility of the college. 360 5. These students should not be forced upon instructors who are not favorable to the program. 6. A problem exists in the college registration process when some students do not follow the required procedures for this group, and they become "lost" as far as the college record system is concerned. 7. It has been reported that certain institutions to which these students have transferred have not accepted this credit. This should be corrected, if possible. 8. Some instructors indicate that some of these stu dents are too immature; and others have noted a change of attitude to the "superior” or "cocky" which should be carefully watched by instructors and counselors. 9. In some cases offerings are limited because of scheduling conflicts or required time blocks, notably vocational education. Several requests have been received for "something to be done about this." 10. Follow-up information about these students is unavailable, and seemingly difficult to obtain. Mechanics to obtain this information should be set up, since it is important to know what has happened to these students in order to judge the effectiveness of this program. APPENDIX L CHICO STATE COLLEGE: PROCEDURE FOR ADMISSION OF HIGH SCHOOL SENIORS 362 ADMISSION OF HIGH SCHOOL SENIORS TO CHICO STATE COLLEGE On January 4, 1961, the Office of the State Attorney General issued a memorandum authorizing the admission to State Colleges of gifted high school seniors who possess adequate preparation and give promise of being able to succeed in a college class. The Committee on Admission and Advanced Standing recommends to the President, the President's Cabinet, and the Faculty Council that we begin admitting for credit superior high school seniors in the fall, 1962 semester; and that we adopt the following proposals for a two-year period on an experimental basis and then evaluate the pro gram and procedure. 1. Students are to be recommended by the high school principal on the basis of intellectual and social maturity, and when this experience would appear to be a proper educational acceleration. A "B aver age for all work beyond the ninth grade would be a minimum requirement. 2. Approval of the parents will be required, and they should be informed of the penalty in case of poor accomplishment, as well as the reward for excel lent work. 3. The grades and units earned will carry college credit and will be applied on requirements for the bachelor1 s degree provided such units are not used on high school diploma requirements. 4. The College Personnel Tests will need to have been taken and the test results will be a factor in admitting a student. 5. The student's total program (high school and college) must be a reasonable one. The college program should be limited to one or two classes and should not exceed a total of six units in either semester or summer session. 6. Students who wish to participate in the accelerated program should consult with the Division Chairman or the appropriate subject Coordinator and the instructor of the course for counsel and assist ance in making class arrangements. 363 7. Enrollment should be in regular day classes in the fall and spring semesters, and not to the exclu sion of qualified college students. 8. Students will be graded on the same basis as all other members of the class and will be subject to all the usual college rules and regulations per taining to attendance, probation, disqualification, and the use of college facilities. 9. A satisfactory performance consisting of a minimum "C" grade will be necessary for admission to the second semester during the student's senior year in high school. 10. Eligibility for admission is to be determined by the Dean of Students, Associate Dean (Admissions and Records), and by the Committee on Admission and Advanced Standing. The Division Chairman, the Coordinator, or the instructor should inform the Admissions Office if there is any doubt or objec tion to admitting the student. STEPS TO BE FOLLOWED BY STUDENTS SEEKING ADMISSION 1. Regular application forms and procedures for matriculation should be followed. 2. A supplementary application form will need to be filed to include a signed statement by the parents, a recommendation by the high school prin cipal, and a signed statement of the student indicating that the conditions for enrolling are understood. 3. A transcript of high school record will need to be filed in the Admissions Office including a state ment of work in progress during the proposed semester of attendance at Chico State College. High School test records should be a part of the high school transcript. 4. A letter of recommendation to the program from the high school principal must be filed. 5. The student will take the College Personnel Tests before he is admitted. 364 6. He will register and pay fees at the established time as outlined in the college catalog and schedule of classes. CHICO STATE COLLEGE 365 Supplementary Application for Admission of High School Seniors NAME ______________________________ DATE_____ Last First Middle ADDRESS_______________________________________TELEPHONE No. Street City State HIGH SCHOOL OF ATTENDANCE PROPOSED DATE OF GRADUATION BIRTH DATE AGE Subjects to be taken No. _________ Title________________ Units if accepted: ________________________________________ Recommendation of the high school principal: YES NO REASONS: Signature of Principal I,________ _____parent (or guardian) of approve of the submission of this application. I realize that these courses are on the college level and that the grades will be assigned in competition with all members of the class. Also3 I realize that the units attempted and grade points earned become a part of the student s college permanent record. Signature of Parent or Guardian I,_________________ > understand the conditions (Student's Name) under which I am applying and if accepted to the college to take the proposed courses realize that the units attempted and grades earned become a part of my permanent college record. I also realize that I will be graded on the same basis as every other student in the class. Signature of the Student APPENDIX M UNIVERSITY OF REDLANDS: SPECIAL STUDENT PROGRAM 367 The University-High School Special Student Program University of Redlands Redlands, California 1. The purpose of this Program is to give enrichment and advanced standing in college to worthy students. 2. Candidates in this program will be specially chosen by a Redlands High School committee of staff members who are familiar with the students' work and capacities. The committee will recommend candidates who, they believe, are not only mature and capable of bending themselves to new situations, but who have demonstrated high intelligence, have definite aptitudes for learning, are sincerely interested in pursuing higher learning, have a sense of responsibility for educating themselves, and are already reasonably motivated toward intellectual goals. 3. Each student may take one course for which he is well qualified. We assume that freshmen courses will be chosen, but an extremely unusual student may be able to do higher level work. No special sections will be created for these students; they will be expected to do college-level work in regular classes. 4. Each person will be a regularly enrolled Special Stu dent at the University of Redlands. As such, his grades will become a part of his permanent college transcript; this must be made very clear to everyone participating. Students will receive college credit for each course in which they have passing marks. This credit may be applied toward graduation at the Univer sity of Redlands or may be transferred to another college or university. 5. The Co-ordinator of the Able Student Program at the University will act as liaison between the High School and the University, and he will act as adviser for these High School-University Special Students. They will be advised also by their Senior Counselors in high school. 6. Tuition will be charged at the rate of $30 per unit. Thus a three-unit course will cost $90 per semester. This is considerably below the regular rate of $42.50 per unit. This fee is payable at the time of enroll ment, or deferred payments may be arranged through the business office. 368 7. Students who receive passing grades in their courses will have advanced standing when they enter college as regular students. By receiving credits in this pro gram, passing Advanced Placement Tests, and attending summer sessions a student may start college approxi mately at the sophomore level. 8. These students will be issued regular library cards and will be invited to library orientation as are all freshmen. 9. Our Registrar suggests that we set up a special registration day for these students late in the summer when we know who will be taking what courses. 10. No scholarships will be available from the University at the present time for these students. We are apply ing for foundation aid for enlarging and intensifying the program and then may be able to offer scholar ships . APPENDIX N UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT BERKELEY GIFTED STUDENT PROGRAM 370 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Berkeley Campus THE ACCELERATED HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT PROGRAM Fall Semester, 1963 Objective of the Program The major objective of the program is to promote the academic advancement of promising students. The University has no interest in forcing or ’’ accelerating" in the tradi tional sense. Not only will the program enable selected high school students to extend their academic reach, but it will also provide such important advantages as a more sys tematic liaison between the University and the secondary schools and a greater integration of effort among the teachers of both. Background An experimental program was initiated at the Univer sity of California at Berkeley for the spring semester, 1960. Because the initial program was so successful, the experiment was continued during the fall semester, 1960, and spring semester, 1961. During those first three semesters 82 students from 13 high schools in the Bay Area participated. The results were rewarding for the Univer sity community and the participating high schools as well as for the students. The Program is now being continued on a more or less permanent basis. During the current spring 1963 semester 34 students from 9 high schools are regis tered in courses on the Berkeley campus. Students are given great freedom in selecting Univer sity courses. Certain departments, such as the mathematics and the language departments, give proficiency examinations to determine the level at which the students should begin University work. No special classes are organized for these students; they attend regular undergraduate classes. Participants are limited to not more than two courses with a maximum of six units of University credit per semester. The following list of courses selected by those who have participated in the program thus far will indicate the wide variety of interests which have been represented: 371 Course Number Total Enrolled Anthropology 2A 2 Anthropology 2B 2 Art 2A 1 Astronomy 1 3 Chemistry 1A 3 Classics 17B 2 Dramatic Art 20A 1 Economics 1A 1 English 1A 24 Entomology 100 1 French 1 2 French 2 1 French 3 1 French 4 2 French 39A 2 French 39B 1 French 109A 2 French 118A 1 French 118B 1 Geography 1 3 German 1 6 German 2 2 German 3 3 German 4 1 German 39D 1 German 101 1 Greek 1A 3 History 4A 6 History 4B 12 History 8A 1 History 8B 1 History 19A 1 History 19B 1 Italian 1 3 Italian 3 1 Italian 39A 1 Latin 1 1 Course Number Total Enrolled Linguistics 35 1 Mathematics 1A 12 Mathematics IB 9 Mathematics 1C 2 Mathematics 2A 1 Mathematics 2B 1 Mathematics 3A 16 Mathematics 3B 5 Mathematics 3H 1 Mathematics 4A 2 Mathematics 4B 2 Mathematics 4G 2 Mathematics 4H 1 Mathematics 113A 1 Mathematics 119 1 Paleontology 10 1 Philosophy 6A 21 Philosophy 6B 4 Philosophy 12A 6 Physical Education 12 2 Physics 10 5 Political Science 1 10 Political Science 2 1 Public Health 5A 2 Slavic 1 1 Slavic 2 1 Slavic 18A 1 Slavic 18B 1 Social Science IB 3 Sociology 1 5 Sociology 30 1 Spanish 4L 2 Speech 1A 1 Speech IB 1 Statistics 1 1 Statistics 2 1 Although none of the participants has attained a high school diploma, he is registered by the University as a regular student. The accelerated student differs from other regular students in that he takes one or two courses, not the usual four or five, and he may be deferred from meeting the requirement in Subject A. In other respects he is as fully responsible for course and program performance as are full-time students. Grades and units earned are part of the permanent college record. Many other colleges 372 and universities have agreed to award transfer credit for work done at the University of California to those partici pants who transfer to their institutions after high school graduation. Selection of Participants A joint selection of candidates for the Berkeley campus program will be made by the high school principal and the University. The procedure is as follows: 1. For each student whom the principal wishes to recommend, he should submit a separate letter of recommendation, plus an official transcript of the student's record. In the letter of recommenda tion, the following specific items should be covered: a. The student's academic ability: it is the experience of the University that whereas the applicant with a superior high school record normally has no difficulty in this program, the applicant with only the minimum grade point average required for admission to the University may achieve less than a C average in the courses undertaken and thus begin his University record with the handicap of being down grade points, b. The student's maturity, i.e., the principal's estimate of the student's ability to carry this extra program and to compete successfully in an academic environment characterized by older students and a high degree of anonymity. c. The approval of the applicant's parents: the principal is requested to discuss the program with the parents of the applicant so that they may learn what participation involves and give their consent. 2. The principal’s letter and accompanying student transcript should be mailed to the Admissions Office, 127 Sproul Hall, University of California, Berkeley 4. After the receipt of the letter of recommendation and transcript for each student, each student will be interviewed in the Admissions Office (127 Sproul Hall). The importance of the principal's letter of recommendation, and the significance of his comments concerning the specific items indicated above cannot be 373 overstressed. 3. It is important to understand that the final deci sion regarding admission rests in the hands of the Admissions Officer of the Berkeley Campus who acts for the University's Board of Admissions and Rela tions with Schools. A student admitted to this program is thereby admitted to the University, just as if he Had been admitted in the usual way, and does not have to apply again. Student Status in High School The Berkeley program is designed to avoid certain objections which have arisen in similar efforts. The stu dents spend at least four periods a day in the high school. This avoids budgetary problems related to average daily attendance. Students are restricted to a spectator's role in student activities at the University. They are expected to maintain their high school-centered social and other extra-curricular activities. Costs of Participation The student pays one-half of the regular incidental fee. This would be $37.50, at the present rate of $75.00 per semester, but the rate is subject to change. In return for this, participants are eligible for all services related to the incidental fee (certain expenses of students for laboratory costs, for athletic and gymnasium facilities and equipment, for counseling and placement) except the Student Health Service. Participants are also required to pay the $6.00 student union fee required of regular stu dents. Textbook expenditures are borne by the student. Transportation costs for those commuting to the Berkeley campus must be borne by the student or perhaps by the high school involved. Where financial hardship may prevent a student from participating in the program, assistance will be provided. All inquiries from students and their parents may be directed to the Admissions Office (THornwall 5-6000, exten sion 3871), 127 Sproul Hall, University of California, Berkeley 4. Admissions Office Berkeley, California April, 1963 APPENDIX 0 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS HIGH-POTENTIAL HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT PROGRAM 375 COPY OF LETTER SENT TO HIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPALS UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Dear ____________: The educational program for High Potential High School Stu dents will again be available at the University of California, Davis for the 1963 Spring Semester. You are invited to nominate applicants for this program. Each nomination should be based primarily on the student's readiness to undertake University work as evidenced by academic ability and maturity. We are hopeful that you will consult with the parents of nominees to assure that they understand the purpose of the program and approve of their son's or daughter s participation, if selected. The participants will be selected from those senior stu dents nominated by their high school principals. They will pay $37.50 (one-half of the University incidental fee) and the $2.50 Student Union Fee each semester of their enroll ment. In return they will be eligible for all services related to the incidental fee except the Student Health Service. Several copies of a memorandum describing the program in somewhat greater detail are enclosed. Additional copies are available. Perhaps you would like to distribute this memorandum to those qualified students whose nominations you are considering. Should you have any questions regard ing the program, please call us. Sincerely yours, HOWARD B. SHONTZ Registrar and Admissions Officer Enclosures 376 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS OFFICE OF ADMISSIONS HIGH-POTENTIAL HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT PROGRAM Objectives of the Program Opportunity to participate in the University's academic activities is now offered to very superior high school stu dents who live within commuting distance of one of the University campuses. These selected students may advance themselves academically during their last year in high school by enrolling in and obtaining full college credit for course work not ordinarily available at their high schools. Not only will the program enable selected high school students to broaden their academic horizons, but it will also help to provide a systematic liaison between the University and the secondary schools. General Plan Although none of the participants will have received a high school diploma, they will be registered in the University as regular students. They will differ from other regular students in that 1) they will be taking one or two courses, not the usual four or five; and 2) they may be deferred from meeting the requirements in Subject A. In other respects they are fully responsible for course and program performance. Grades and units earned are made a part of their permanent University record. As such, this work will apply toward the Bachelor s degree in the University of California. Students are to be given great freedom of choice in select ing University courses, and all classes they attend are organized for the regular college student. Participants who accept the invitation are restricted, however, to two courses with a maximum of 8 units of University credit per semester. The appended list of courses will indicate the selection available for Spring 1963. Because of definite limitations in staff and in classroom and laboratory facilities, the University may not always be able to enroll all high school students in the courses they request. Scheduling, too, may constitute a barrier. Many of the courses are offered at only one hour and may con flict with essential high school activity. Copies of the Schedule and Directory, used in preparing a class schedule, will be available at the ASUCD Store, approximately two weeks prior to the beginning of the semester. 377 The academic Deans will be the advisers for the partici pants in the program. Selection of Participants A joint selection of candidates will be made by the high school and the University. The procedure will be as follows: 1. For each student that the high school principal wishes to recommend, a separate letter of recommendation should be submitted along with an official transcript of the student's record. In the letter of recommenda tion, the following specific items should be covered: a. The student's academic ability. b. The student's maturity; i.e., the high school prin cipal's estimate of the student's ability to carry this extra program and to compete successfully in an academic environment composed of older students, c. A statement to the effect that the high school principal has discussed this program with the stu dent's parents and that they approve of their son's (daughter's) participation in the program, if selected. 2. The high school principal's recommendation and accom panying student transcript should be mailed to the Admissions Officer, University of California, Davis. After the receipt of the letter of recommendation, each student will be interviewed by the Admissions Officer at the University. The importance of the principal's letter of recommendation, and the significance of the several special items on which his comments are needed, cannot be overstressed. 3. In general each participant will be required to be a high school senior, meet the commonly accepted stand ards of a gifted or high-potential student (such as an IQ of 130 or better, upper five per cent of the high school graduating senior class, or a grade point aver age of 3.7 or better in the [a] to [fj requirements completed) and obtain superior scores in such college aptitude tests as may be required. 4. The services of the University Counseling Center may be utilized in addition to the testing for academic ability. 378 5. The final decision regarding admission rests in the hands of the Admissions Officer of the Davis Campus who acts for the University's Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools. Costs of Participation Costs of the program are $37.50 (one-half of the regular incidental fee) each semester. In return the participants are eligible for all services related to the incidental fee--that is, registration, physical examination, testing, certain expenses of students for laboratory costs, gym nasium facilities and equipment, and counseling and place ment. Services of the Student Health Service are not available, and are not included. Participants will pay the $2.50 Student Union Fee required of regular students. Textbook expenditures are borne by the student. Transpor tation costs are the responsibility of the student. Student Status in High School The program is not intended to interfere in any way with activities of the high school. While participants are enrolled in regular academic work in the University, they will be expected to maintain their high school-centered social and other extra-curricular activities. All inquiries from students and their parents should be directed to the Admissions Officer, University of Cali fornia, Davis. Spring Semester 1963 cc: High Schools concerned Academic Deans Academic Departments University Administration APPENDIX P UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES GIFTED STUDENT AND HONORS PROGRAMS 380 GIFTED STUDENT AND HONORS PROGRAMS AT UCLA I. Honors at Entrance Beginning in September 1957, each semester a number of entering freshmen have been designated as entitled to Honors at Entrance. The Admissions Office makes the initial selection based solely on academic performance of the students in high school. The College provides special counseling facilities for these students. At present about six hundred students who were selected for Honors at Entrance are in attendance at UCLA in the College of Letters and Science, College of Fine Arts, and College of Engineering. II. The Honors Program Since 1951 the College of Letters and Science has adminis tered an Honors Program for the benefit of its superior students. To be eligible for admission to this program, students must have completed at least one semester in resi dence at UCLA and must have earned a grade-point average of not less than 3.5 on all work undertaken in the University of California (all undergraduate campuses). Eligible stu dents apply for active participation in the Program. The chief purpose of the Honors Program is to release the exceptionally able student from the pace of study adapted to the average UCLA undergraduate. Participating students are given library stack privileges and are allowed to meet many of their general degree and major department require ments by: 1) taking courses more advanced than the usual ones, including graduate courses taken for undergraduate credit; 2) receiving credit for courses taken by examina tion without class attendance (credit by examination); 3) taking courses on a "passed - not passed" basis; 4) en gaging in independent study or research. At present there are about two hundred and fifty students participating in the Program. The Departments of English, History, Mathematics, Political Science, and Psychology now have special Honors budgetary support and have established departmental Honors programs which include small, seminar-type Honors classes. Lower division Honors or special sections and upper division Honors programs are also offered by Chemistry, Mathematics, Philosophy, Sociology, and Zoology. The School of Nursing initiated an Honors Program in the fall of 1960, and the College of Engineering is preparing a program. 381 Since 1960 there has been increasing emphasis on programs supported by the National Science Foundation. In 1962-63, financial awards for "Undergraduate Science Education Pro grams (Research Participation)" were received by the following departments: Chemistry, Geology, Mathematics, Psychology, and the College of Engineering. In addition to the above, Mathematics continues its NSF- supported "Summer Science Training Program for High-Ability Secondary School Students--Mathematics." III. Gifted Student Program Since the fall of 1958, all entering freshmen in the Col lege of Letters and Science and the College of Fine Arts have taken a battery of tests administered by the staff of the Student Counseling Center. Students have been selected for participation in the Gifted Student Program on the basis of their performance on tests of general scholastic aptitude. Those invited to participate in the Gifted Stu dent Program have been selected, in the groups so far worked with, on the basis of their receiving academic aptitude test scores which place them in the top five per cent of the UCLA entering freshman population. This is comparable to the "top one per cent of the general popula tion" definition used by Terman and others. Participants in the program are being followed closely to see what effect, if any, such a program might have on such things as grade point average, staying power in school, general adjustment to college, and the like. To date, it would appear that those who took the earliest and most com plete advantage of the program are generally the superior academic performers in the groups. Students in the program have benefited from counseling, from being given library stack passes, and from being given special privileges in course planning, on an individual basis, when aptitudes and achievement seem to warrant giv ing such privileges. Honors Program privileges are given to Gifted Student Program participants who maintain approx imately a B average. All work is done in close cooperation with academic counselors in the College of Letters and Science and the College of Fine Arts. In all phases of the program, the Student Counseling Center is playing an impor tant role in inaugurating experimental procedures and in acting in a service, consultant and research capacity to the College of Letters and Science and the College of Fine Arts. 382 IV. High School Special Program The High School Special Program, which allows selected high school seniors to take college work (a maximum of eight units per fall and spring semester) concurrently with their senior year in high school, was begun in the fall semester of 1958. Units thus earned are specifically not to be applied for credit for the high school diploma. This arrangement affords the gifted high school student a source of intellectual stimulation beyond that which the resources of his high school can afford and permits him, eventually, to attempt more advanced work in college. To date, about four hundred and fifty students have partic ipated with a cumulative grade point average of 3.27. One hundred and three new students from thirteen high schools are participating in 1962-63. There will be fourteen schools in the program in 1963-64. The number of high school students who chose to continue in the University as regular students has increased each year. From approximately 117„ in 1959, the number has grown to 60%--a remarkable growth in view of the number of scholar ship awards and college choices available to these superior high school seniors. 383 H.S. - U.C.L.A. HONORS PROGRAM Data from Study of 1961-62 Participants Average Scores for Suggested Indicators Program Participants for Selection 10th & 11th academic grade, H.S. - G.P.A. 3.7 To as low as 3.5 10th 6c 11th Iowa Test grade Test 1 27.8 25 or above preferred Test 3 26.3 25 or above preferred Test 4 28.6 25 or above preferred Composite 31.5 30 or above preferred Concept Mastery Test 94.5 90 or above preferred 70 to 90 on recommendation English Test 70.6 Cut-off score determined by U.C.L.A. English Department to satisfy Subject A requirement. 384 July, 1963 University of California, Los Angeles College of Letters and Science UCLA - HIGH SCHOOL SPECIAL PROGRAM, 1962-1963 Spring Semester,, 1963 There were 113 students (from program for Spring Semester 1963. grades the following statistics on available. 13 high schools) in the On the basis of final academic performance are TABLE I Final Grade-Point Averages Number of Grade-Point Students Average Combined High Schools 113 3.22 Men Women 55 58 3.26 3.18 Beverly Hills High School 20 3.17 Men Women 11 9 3.28 3.06 Culver City High School 4 3.00 Men Women 3 1 3.00 3.00 Fairfax High School 14 3.52 Men Women 7 7 3.55 3.48 Hamilton High School 17 3.08 Men Women 7 10 3.13 3.04 TABLE I (continued) Final Grade-Point Averages 385 Number of Grade-Point Students Average Hollywood High School 5 3.50 Men 2 3.66 Women 3 3.33 Hollywood Professional School 2 1.75 Men 1 1.50 Women 1 2.00 Los Angeles High School 1 3.00 Men 1 3.00 Women 0 Palisades High School 10 3.36 Men 5 3.53 Women 5 3.16 University High School 20 3.37 Men 7 3.41 Women 13 3.35 Van Nuys High School 8 2.81 Men 5 3.00 Women 3 2.57 Venice High School 7 2.94 Men 4 2.72 Women 3 3.30 Westchester High School 3 3.50 Men 2 3.75 Women 1 3.00 Westlake School for Girls 2 3.50 Men 0 Women 2 3.50 Spring 1963 TABLE II Grade-Point Averages Attained Grade-Point Average Number of Students 4.0 40 3.7 - 3.9 -- 3.4 - 3.6 11 3.0 - 3.3 31 2.7 - 2.9 2 2.4 - 2.6 12 2.0 - 2.3 16 Less than 2.0 1 Total 113 TABLE III Summary by Grades Attained Units of A 227 Units of B 173 Units of C 109 Units of D 3 Units of F 0 Total 512 Spring 1963 TABLE IV Schedule of Courses and Final Grades Earned by High School Students Spring Semester, 1963 Number of Enrollments Course Units by Final Grades Tot* A B £...ft" E F Anthropology 2 3 4 4 Art 5 2 2 4 6 Art 100B 2 1 4 5 Astronomy 100 3 1 1 Economics 1A 3 1 1 English 1A 3 2 1 3 English IB 3 2 2 1 3 English 30B 2 1 1 2 English 106C 2 1 1 English 106E 3 1 1 French 1 4 2 1 3 French 2 4 5 1 1 7 French 4 4 1 1 French 8A 1 4 4 French 8B 1 1 1 French 8C 1 1 1 Geography 1 3 2 2 1 5 Geology 2 3 3 3 German 1 4 2 2 German 2 4 4 1 5 History 1A 3 6 8 2 16 History 7B 3 1 4 5 History 174B 3 1 1 Humanities IB 3 6 6 9 21 Italian 1 4 1 1 Italian 2 4 1 1 2 Italian 102B 2 2 2 Latin 9B 2 1 1 Mathematics 1 2 1 2 3 Mathematics 3A 3 1 1 2 Mathematics 3B 3 1 1 2 Mathematics C 2 1 1 Mathematics 3H 3 4 1 5 Mathematics 4G 3 1 1 Mathematics 6A 3 1 1 388 Spring 1963 TABLE IV Course Units Music 30A 2 Music 40A 1 Music 40B 1 Music 126 3 Oriental Languages IB 4 Oriental Languages 32 2 Philosophy 31 3 Political Science 1 3 Political Science 101 2 Psychology 1A 3 Psychology IB 3 Psychology 143 3 Slavic Languages 2 4 Spanish 8A 1 Spanish 151 1 (continued) Number of Enrollments by Final Grades Total A B C 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 4 2 1 1 7 9 9 1 1 1 1 1 Total 79 62 37 1 179 389 February 1, 1963 University of California, Los Angeles College of Letters and Science UCLA - HIGH SCHOOL SPECIAL PROGRAM, 1962-1963 Fall Semester, 1962 There were 100 students (from 13 high schools) in the program for Fall Semester 1962. On the basis of final grades the following statistics on academic performance are available. TABLE I Final Grade-Point Averages Number of Grade-Point Students Average Combined High Schools 100 3.19 Men 54 3.23 Women 46 3.13 Beverly Hills High School 21 3.31 Men 12 3.40 Women 9 3.18 Culver City High School 4 2.81 Men 3 2.54 Women 1 4.00 Fairfax High School 18 3.24 Men 10 3.18 Women 8 3.32 Hamilton High School 9 3.00 Men 3 3.39 Women 6 2.73 390 Fall 1962 TABLE I (continued) Final Grade-Point Averages Hollywood High School Men Women Hollywood Professional School Men Women Los Angeles High School Men Women Palisades High School Men Women University High School Men Women Van Nuys High School Men Women Venice High School Men Women Westchester High School Men Women Number of Students 3 3 0 1 2 0 8 4 4 13 4 9 1 1 13 11 2 1 0 Grade-Point Average 3.22 3.20 3.25 2.00 2.00 3.64 3.64 3.44 3.29 3.58 3.10 3.48 2.91 2.75 3.00 2.50 3.13 3.09 3.33 3.00 3.00 391 Fall 1962 TABLE I (concluded) Final Grade-Point Averages Number of Grade-Point Students Average Westlake School for Girls 2 3o50 Men 0 Women 2 3.50 TABLE II Grade-Point Averages Attained Grade-Point Average Number of Students 4.0 23 3.7 - 3.9 1 3.4 - 3.6 16 3.0 - 3.3 38 2.7 - 2.9 1 2.4 - 2.6 7 2.0 - 2.3 13 Less than 2.0 1 Total 100 TABLE III Summary by Grades Attained Units of A 180 Units of B 245 Units of C 77 Units of D 0 Units of F 3 Total 505 392 Fall 1962 TABLE IV Schedule of Courses and Final Grades Earned by High School Students Fall Semester, 1963 Number of Enrollments Course Units by Final Grades H o i « t A B C D E F Anthropology 1 3 1 1 2 Anthropology 2 3 1 1 2 Art 5 2 1 1 2 Art 100A 2 1 1 Chemistry 1A 5 1 1 Economics 1A 3 1 1 English 1A 3 2 6 3 11 English 30A 2 2 2 English 30B 2 1 1 2 English 46B 3 1 1 French 1 4 2 3 1 6 French 3 4 4 1 1 6 French 5 4 2 2 French 8A 1 1 1 Geology 2 3 1 1 German 1 4 3 2 5 German 2 4 1 1 2 German 3 4 1 1 German 105 3 1 1 History IB 3 3 4 1 8 History 6A 3 2 1 3 History 7A 3 1 1 History 7B 3 1 1 History 174A 3 1 1 Humanities 1A 3 8 14 5 27 Integrated Arts 1A 3 1 1 Italian 1 4 1 1 2 Italian 102A 2 1 1 Latin 9A 2 1 1 Mathematics 1 2 1 1 Mathematics 3A 3 4 4 Mathematics 3B 3 2 2 Mathematics 3H 3 1 1 Mathematics 5A 5 1 1 Mathematics 41 1 3 3 Music 191E 2 2 2 Oriental Languages 1A 4 1 1 393 Fall 1962 TABLE IV (continued) Course Units Philosophy 6A 3 Philosophy 31 3 Physics 1A 3 Physics 10 3 Political Science 1 3 Psychology 1A 3 Psychology IB 3 Slavic Languages 1 4 Sociology 1 3 Speech 1 3 Number of Enrollments by Final Grades Total A B £ D E F 5 12 8 25 1 1 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 7 10 2 19 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 APPENDIX Q UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RESIDENT HONORS PROGRAM FOR HIGH SCHOOL SENIORS RESIDENT HONORS PROGRAM FOR HIGH SCHOOL SENIORS 395 P u rp ose of th e Program Numerous private rn]lcj>cs and mii\ci>iii< * > pro vide lor earlx :nlii]issi< )ii of exceptionally able stu dents who have m il graduated tnmi lu^h school. These students do not usually receive a Itiph school diploma. In 1%I, I lie I iiixersiry id Sniitheni Tali- Inniia, eooperatine xxutlt eighteen Calilorma luqli schools, established a program perimttinj; students who had complet'd then junior year m hiyjli school lii enter the Lmversity to lake a tear ot college studies including; those necrss.an tor the completion of requirements tor pradtialion trnin their respec- tite liiph schools. I his program is called the Resi dent Honors Program lor lliyh School Seniors. N om ination of S tu d e n ts Nominations lor participation in I he Resident Honors I’t'opram must he made h\ the principal or a counselor nt the student s hiph school and must be appinved In the .supcrmtemlept- ot the school district. Direct applications trom students cannot he accepted,. Nominations must he accompanied In a transcript ot the student s hipli school record, .nailable pertinent test scores, recommendations ot teacher, and school idiniaIs, and a personal data shod ; i a in i the student. 1 ' onus tor the recommenda tions and data sheet liras he obtained trom l)r. I hnnins la, 1 ,;issucl 1 . I nnersitr of Southern Tali forma, 1 ,os Anqrles /, Tali forma. A dm ission to th e University Students nonun,ated hr their school olhcials mil he inters 'etved hr othccr, ot the I nnersitr and mar he asked, to undcrpo additional testtnp. I hose select ed lor the proeram mil he recontmended to the Director ot A dmissions tor admission to treslunan standmp in theTollcpcot Letters, Arts, and Sciences, All students are required to take the Tolleye In - trance Lxamin.ilinn Hoard tests before , admittance to the I iiiicrsltv. P la c em en t Exam inations I'.ach student admitted to freslm iaii standing must takt an 1 .n.ujlisli placement examination to determine the lend ul studies which he is eligible to undertake to m eet the Tnixrrsitx's reqiurement lit l.nphsli. lie should also take an examination in lanpnapcs in which he has prnhcicncv to determine the appropriate lex cl ot studies which he is eligible to undertake in laiieiiapes, lie mar also take a placement test to determine his eliyphilitx for mathe matics ami chemistry courses. Credit by Exam ination (Jualilied students enterin'; trom hiplt school m ar establish subject and mm credit by examina tion. Advanced standing will be based either upon special examinations administered by the I tiivetsitr or upon the applicant's record in appropriate hiph school honors courses when continued hr the Ad- r am ed Placemen! Lxaiiiinations ot the Colleqe Irn- Iranee l.x,limitation Hoard. Am student who lots aclnercd a superior rcc- oi.l at the I. nnerstty m ay petition to attempt spe cial compieheiisire examinations in selected courses lor unit and subject credit. I lie petitions must be endorsed In the Honors Toordinators betore beinp presented to departmental chairmen tor apprntal, I he lollorviiiL! I'ourses aie axailable to students rrislunp to ipialtlx lor adxanccd stamlint: or lor a.'celeralion based on examination: A st loitom x all courses llactei lolnpt lim/. Introductoiy .Science: ILiclcti- ulopy Iholnpx 1 1 II l/. I nt inductor \ Science: Iholnpx H it' it/'/. (ieueral /.oolupx C hetilistt\ |tt|a h l. ( ieueral Tltemistrx : HD ahl. Inoryianic TlnnMrx and (Jnalitattxe Analysis; Jtin/. < Ju a m it ,n ix i An,il\sis; M h i b x y l . Or ganic Tliemistrx ; - I LLA I’hxsteal Thcmistrx I m ulish |ti| Written k onmmnication : h om ieiised y oiitsc I'oieiyn l.aitpuapes am course numbered bill or abox e (ieueral Slmhes 1 1 II In h Man and Tix ili/atmn: Jtt-I ah American ( ixili/uiion and ! 11 st 1 1111 ions (ieolojix llh/. I’hxsical (leulopx ; |tl(>/, llislmical ( ieologx ; jlT/, Maps and Aerial Pllutopraplb; Uithl. M liter,alopr Mathematics IPS Tnllcqe Alpebra; |ll> > Analytical (leotnetn: ID Mathematical Analysis I; l.’x Mathematical Analxsis II ; -IdM /i h'lindainental (.'oncepts ot Analysts Pin sics IP A ,/)/. (ieueral I'hisim A maximum ot hit units, cqimalcut to an academic rear of course work, mat be satisfied In adxanccd standing' or acceleration examinations, In addition, lower division students box m y; uutstandin;; records at the lmversity m ax take as main as Id upper dnision muts in either major or nonmajor fields and apply these units toward upper dix ism n requirements. H onors C ourses In addition to opportunities tor adxanccd place ment and acceleration, the I. nneisitx nt Southern (. aliform,a otter, a series ot selected honors courses tor qualified students, I her cuuiscx are ilcstpncd to ilex clop the lull intellectual capacitx ot participating students ihrouqh exteiMxe readinp,, xirnteii report,, small pinup discussions, and the stimulation of the |oi11r quest for knowledge with the instructor and with other outstandinj; students. Honors courses are small and are under the direction of selected tacultv members. Participation i, by invitation only. At the present time Honors couise, are available in the lolloxvtitn areas but the number ami xarietx ot these classes are coiistantlx bemj; increased. ILolnpx 1 (M x ahl. ( ieueral lirdoex L liem tstry Ins ahl, lunrpaiuv Thvinislrx and (jualitatixe Analysis (.lassies- -ft id Latin Literature in I ranslatnnr, 4M1 ( ireek I nterature in I raiislation Lnqlish |it| Written Ionmuimcation: Tumleiised I nurse; dtitt Irnphsh and American Literature since 11 ft ft1: dtil Knqlish Literature to ISltf); d!id Limllsh Literature lSDO-l'^d I' rench 1 1 II lab Llcmcntun I'fench ; dH U ah Inter- mediate I'rench (ieueral Studies 1 1 Hah Man and k nuli/alnui; IH d ab Man and Society ; diHah American Civili zation and Institutions; dim Human \ allies ill Modern Soctetx (Inman 1 1 II lab Llrmentarx (lerinan : dH H ab Inter mediate (un man 11 M o n -I'M 111 s|in x | lonors I olloqmmit I’hilnsophv dll, lutrodiictton to Philosophical 1 hinkmp: dSH Philosophy of Science Political Science d'Hab junior Honors Seminar; 4 * M ali Senior Honors Seminar I’sxchnlopx d'■ II Introduction to I’sxcholopx Spanish dill lab Intermediate Spanish Advisement A ll a d v i s e m e n t ot the s t u d e n ts e n ro lle d in the R e si d en t H o n o r s P r o g r a m will he do ne In o r u n d e r the supervision ot the D i re e to r, w h o will w o r k w ith e.'ieli s t u d e n t s lii^h school co un s el or to assure the satisfaction ot all re q u i re m e n t s tor g r a d u a t i o n f ro m his p a r t i c u l a r hijdi school. Special Requirements S t u d e n t s in the Re si den t H o n o r s P r o g r a m are re quired to live on c a m p u s in L niversitv housinjt. I hey are not p e r m i rt e d to pledg e or join social f ra ternities or sororities d u r i n g rheir tresliman vear. 1 acli st ude nt m u st be en rol led in ( i e u e r a l Studies 1 \)2tih ( M a n a n d Societ y), w h ic h is a "c ore ’ course tor the p r o g r a m , an d w hich meet s the gen eral e d u cation r e q u i r e m e n t tor ( ieueral Studies l<)( '>nh ( . M a n an d C i v i l i z a t i o n ) . In ad dition to the core course the st ud e nt will also be en ro lled in r e g u l a r L m v e r s i u classes o r H o n o r s classes, w i t h the total n u m b e r ot units c a n i n e t r o m I'* to IS. F o r o t h e r infor m at ion , see the c u r r e n t Pullet in tor the C ol le ge nt Letters. Arts, a n d Sciences. Costs A p p r o x i m a t e cost tor the t e a r : I u it ion $ 1, J ( )() A pp lic a tio n lee ll) I dentification c a r d 1 S t u d e n t 11 ealth Service J 4 S t u d e n t A c tiv ity Rook .hi Hooks a n d Supplies (id to |S(j R o o m and Ho ar d S7D to D-jO Scholarships A limited a m o u n t ot scholarsh ip a n d o r loan fu nds is available. I n l o r m a t i n n r e g a r d in g s c h o la r ships or loans will be given u p o n request. APPENDIX R CALIFORNIA STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION ATTENDANCE IN COLLEGE CLASSES BY HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS 397 CALIFORNIA STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Division of Instruction Sacramento 14, California GUIDELINES FOR ESTABLISHING AND EVALUATING PROGRAMS FOR MENTALLY GIFTED MINORS by Paul D. Plowman 4. Attendance in College Classes by High School Students Some of the criteria that might be suggested for this type of program are: 4,1 That the college instructors involved are favor ably disposed toward the program and that they are willing to provide extra guidance that may be necessary. 402 That students are able to leave their regular school of attendance, perhaps after a minimum day, in order to attend these classes. 4.3 That there is some indication that the student attending college will be able to do above average work, 4.4 That attendance in college courses will not jeopardize the student's chances to exert leadership at the high school level. 4.5 That the student is mature enough to take on the responsibilities of college work and association with adults at the college level. APPENDIX S CALIFORNIA EDUCATION CODE, TITLE V: PROVISIONS AFFECTING ADMINISTRATION OF PROGRAMS FOR MENTALLY GIFTED MINORS 398 CALIFORNIA EDUCATION CODE, TITLE V: PROVISIONS AFFECTING ADMINISTRATION OF PROGRAMS FOR MENTALLY GIFTED MINORS 199o10 General Provisions (a) This article applies only to special education programs for mentally gifted minors described in, and for which reimbursement for excess costs are claimed under, Article 14 (commencing with Section 6421) of Chapter 6 of Division 6 of the Education Code. (b) The terms used herein have the same meaning as in the article. 199.11 Identification of Mentally Gifted Minors (a) The responsibility for the identification of pupils as mentally gifted minors shall rest with the admin istrative head of the school district or an employee of the district designated by him. Such identification shall be based upon a study of all available evidence as to a pupil’s general intellectual capacity made by a committee consisting of the school principal, a classroom teacher who is familiar with the school work of the pupil, a school psychologist or other pupil personnel worker who is fully qualified to administer and interpret tests of mental ability, and any other person or persons designated by the district employee responsible for making the identifica tion. (b) Among the items of evidence available concern ing the general intellectual capacity of each pupil for whom an excess cost reimbursement is claimed under the provisions of Education Code Section 6425 shall be one of the following: (1) A score on an individual intelligence test, such as the Revised Stanford-Binet Scale, Form L-M, representing an intelligence quotient of 130 or above, administered by a person credentialed for this purpose by the State Board of Education. (2) A score at or above the 98th percentile, on a group test of mental ability and a score at or above the 98th percentile on a standardized test of reading achievement or arithmetic achievement, each test having been administered within a period of no more than 36 months of the date of identifi- 399 cation. Beginning July 1, 1963, the tests used for this purpose must be chosen from a list of tests approved by the State Board of Education under the provisions of Education Code Section 12821. (3) The judgments of teachers, psychologists, and school administrators and supervisors who are familiar with the demonstrated ability of the minors provided that not more than three (3) per cent of the pupils for whom an excess cost reim bursement is claimed shall be identified on such judgments alone. (c) The evidence described in paragraph (b) (1) above shall be required for all gifted minors enrolled in kindergarten and in grades 1 through 3. Beginning July 1, 1965, such evidence shall be required for all gifted minors enrolled in grades 4 through 6 except those who may be identified under paragraph (b) (3) above. 199.12 Minimum Standards for Programs for Mentally Gifted Minors (a) A pupil placed in the program shall be identi fied in accordance with the provisions of Section 199.11, and shall be assigned to a program suited to his abilities and needs as determined by the committee described in Section 199.11. (b) Individual case study records shall be main tained for all pupils placed in the program. (c) Consent of a parent, guardian, or other person having actual custody and control said minor shall be a prerequisite to participation in the program. (d) A written plan for the program shall be avail able for public inspection on the same basis as is the district course of study. The written plan shall describe (1) The purpose of the program including the general goals which pupils are expected to achieve (2) The special activities to be carried on as a part of the program. (3) The special facilities and special mate rials to be used in connection with the program. (4) The methods to be used in evaluating the 400 success of the program. (e) Programs shall be one or more of the following types: (1) Programs in which pupils remain in their regular classrooms but participate in additional educational activities planned to suit their special abilities and interests, use advanced materials, and/or receive special help directly or indirectly, through persons other than the regular classroom teacher. (2) Programs in which pupils are provided with instruction by the school of attendance either through correspondence courses specified in Educa tion Code Section 8301 and Section 101 of this title or by special tutoring. (3) Programs in which pupils are placed in grades or classes more advanced than those of their chronological age group and receive special instruction outside of the regular classroom in order to assist them in handling the advanced work. (4) Programs in which high school pupils for a part of the day attend classes conducted by a college or junior college. (5) Programs in which pupils participate regu larly on a planned basis in a special counseling or instructional activity carried on during or outside of the regular school day for the purpose of benefiting from additional educational oppor tunities not provided in the regular classroom. (6) Programs in which special classes are organized to provide advanced or enriched work for pupils with superior mental ability during the regular school year or during a summer session. Such special classes may be in single subjects or may include more than one subject. They may be scheduled for a part or all of a school day. (f) A program shall be maintained on a regular basis for at least 17 weeks of a semester or for at least 34 weeks of an annual school term. In a school which is not organized on the semester basis, one-half of the days the regular day schools are maintained shall be deemed the equivalent of a semester. 401 (g) A program provided as a part of an approved summer school meeting the time requirements set forth in Section 117 and which program is conducted for a minimum of 55 minutes for each day on which the summer school is maintained, shall be deemed to be the equivalent of a program conducted for a semester. A pupil participating in such a program in an approved summer school for a total of 20 days during a fiscal year may be counted as a partic ipating pupil. The Fourth of July may be counted as one of such days even though the school is not maintained on that day. 199.13 Approval of Programs (a) Programs for mentally gifted minors must be approved by the State Superintendent of Public Instruction. For any of the six types of programs specified in subsec tion (e) of Section 199.12, such approval will be given when the application for an apportionment under Education Code Section 6426 includes a certification by the chief administrative officer of the district that the program has been conducted in accordance with the provisions of Article 14, Chapter 6, Division 6, of the Education Code and that it has met the standards set forth in Section 199.12 above, (b) When a school district desires to provide a program for mentally gifted minors which does not fall into one of the types listed in subsection (e) of Section 199.12, an application for approval of the program shall be filed with the State Superintendent of Public Instruc tion at least 90 days prior to the opening date of the semester or the summer session during which the program will be given. The application shall include the informa tion listed in (d) of Section 199.12 above. 199.14 Excess Expense--Definition (a) "Excess expense" for special educational pro grams for mentally gifted minors is the current expense of Instruction," "Pupil Transportation," and "Fixed Charges," as defined in the October 1961 Bulletin of the California State Department of Education entitled California School Accounting Manual, incurred solely for providing" the special program. The expense shall be readily identifiable in the accounting records of the district. (b) The expense incurred shall be on account of and because of a transaction which can be verified as being directly related to pupils enrolled during the fiscal year in the special program and which would not have occurred 402 had the program not been initiated. (c) The expenses of "Instruction," "Pupil Trans portation," and "Fixed Charges," used as a basis for computing allowances shall be reported in compliance with instructions on forms prescribed and furnished by the Superintendent of Public Instruction and shall be subject to the approval of the Superintendent of Public Instruc tion. (d) Current expenses of "Instruction," as defined in this article, include expenses for the following pur poses: identification of pupils; individual counseling with pupils and/or parents; special consultant services; special instructional materials; special instructional services; in-service education for teachers; textbooks and other books; special tutoring service; other purposes as approved by the Superintendent of Public Instruction. Article 24. Advance Apportionments for the Educa tion of Mentally Gifted Minors. 199.20 Routing of Letter of Application. Application by the governing board of a school district for an advance apportionment, pursuant to Education Code Section 6428, for the purpose of defraying expenses incident to the initiation of a program for the education of mentally gifted minors, including the identification of minors eligible to participate in the program, shall be made to the Superintendent of Public Instruction through the coun try superintendent of schools as follows: (a) The governing board shall deliver or mail to the county superintendent of schools one copy of the letter of application. (b) The county superintendent shall review the application for completeness and accuracy of the data pre sented therein, and, if he approves the application, he shall indicate his approval on both the original and the copy of the letter of application. He shall, before August 15 of the fiscal year in which the program is or will be initiated, forward the original of the letter of application, so approved, to the State Department of Educa tion, Bureau of School Apportionments and Reports. 199.21 Contents of the Letter of Application. The letter of application shall clearly state: (a) That it is a request for an advance apportion ment under the provisions of Education Code Section 6428. 403 (b) The amount of the advanced apportionment requested. (c) The estimated number of pupils that will be participating in the program for the mentally gifted dur ing the year, identifying the number expected to partici pate for a semester only and the number expected to participate for the full year. (d) The purposes for which the advance apportion ment will be expended and the amount for each purpose. (e) That the district will expend the money only for the purposes stated in Section 6428, i.e., "defraying the expenses incident to the initiation of a program, including the identification of minors eligible to partic ipate in the program." A copy of the resolution of the governing board of the district authorizing application for an advance appor tionment shall be attached to or made a part of the letter of application. APPENDIX T PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA EDUCATION CODE AFFECTING PROGRAMS FOR MENTALLY GIFTED MINORS 405 PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA EDUCATION CODE 5706.5 The principal of any two-year junior col lege may admit to the junior college as a special part-time student any twelfth grade high school student whose admis sion is recommended by his high school principal. A prin cipal of a high school may recommend a twelfth grade high school student as a special part-time student pursuant to rules and regulations which may be adopted by the governing board of the district maintaining the high school. A prin cipal of a high school shall not recommend a number of twelfth grade high school students in excess of 5 per cent of the total number of twelfth grade students enrolled in the high school at the time of recommendation. The attendance of a student at junior college as a special part-time student pursuant to this section is authorized attendance and the student shall receive credit for junior college courses which he completes in the same manner as if he were a regularly enrolled junior college student. Each special part-time student shall attend high school classes for at least the minimum school day. 6401 The governing board of any district maintain ing a high school with grades 11 and 12 may determine which of the students in the twelfth grade of the high school would benefit from advanced scholastic work. The governing board may authorize such students to attend a junior col lege as special part-time students and to undertake one or more courses of instruction offered at the junior college level. The number of students so authorized shall not exceed 5 per cent of the number of students in the twelfth at the high school at any one time. 6402 Any student authorized to attend a junior college as a special part-time student pursuant to Section 6401 shall, nevertheless, be required to attend the high school for the minimum day and to undertake courses of instruction of a scope and duration sufficient to satisfy the requirements of law. 6403 For purposes of allowances and apportionments from the State School Fund, a junior college shall be credited with additional units of average daily attendance attributable to the attendance of twelfth grade high school students at the junior college as special part-time stu dents pursuant to this article, but in no case shall a junior college be credited with more than one-third unit of 406 average daily attendance on account of any such student. A district maintaining a high school whose twelfth grade students attend a junior college pursuant to this article, shall, for purposes of allowances and apportion ments from the State School Fund, continue to receive credit for attendance by such students computed in the manner prescribed by law, and a student's attendance at the high school for the minimum school day shall be deemed a day of attendance for purposes of making the computation. 6421 (a) "Mentally gifted minor," as used in this article, means a minor enrolled in a public primary or secondary school of this State who demonstrates such general intellectual capacity as to place him within the top 2 per cent of all students having achieved his school grade throughout the State. (b) "Program" means a special educational program for mentally gifted children, including the identification of such children, which meets the standards established pursuant to this article and which is approved by the Superintendent of Public Instruction. (c) "Participating pupil" means a pupil identified as a mentally gifted minor who for a school semester or a school year takes part in a program. 6422 For the purposes of this article, the general intellectual ability of a minor shall be evidenced by one or more of the following factors: (a) Achievement in school work. (b) Scores on tests measuring intellectual ability and aptitude. (c) The judgments of teachers and school adminis trators and supervisors who are familiar with the demon strated ability of the minor. 6423 The governing board of any school district may provide programs for mentally gifted minors living in the district who are enrolled in kindergarten or grades 1 through 12 in the schools of the district and who may be expected to benefit from a program suited to their abili ties. The governing board, subject to such terms and conditions as may be agreed upon may contract with another school district for furnishing programs for such minors or may so contract for the education of such minors including the furnishing of such programs. 407 6424 The governing board of a school district, in providing programs under this article, may enter into agreements with a county superintendent of schools for those appropriate services to districts authorized in Chapter 6 of Division 7 of this code and for conducting programs for gifted minors enrolled in the schools of the district. 6425 Whenever during any school year a school district maintains a program, the governing board of the school district may during the subsequent school year, apply to the Superintendent of Public Instruction on forms provided for that purpose for an apportionment to reimburse the district for the excess expense incurred by the school district in furnishing the program, 6426 The Superintendent of Public Instruction, if he approves, shall apportion to each applicant school dis trict an amount equal to the total excess expense incurred by the school district in providing a program, except that the amount apportioned shall not exceed forty dollars ($40) for each pupil participating in the program for one school year. 6427 There shall be appropriated from the General Fund of the State to the State School Fund each fiscal year, in addition to any other amounts appropriated, an amount sufficient to provide for the reimbursement of the excess expense to school districts incurred in providing programs. The appropriation shall not exceed the product of forty dollars ($40) and 0.02 (two per cent of the units of average daily attendance of pupils in kindergarten and grades 1 through 12 in all of the schools and classes main tained by school districts and county superintendents of schools during the preceding fiscal year). The first such appropriation shall be made for the 1962-63 fiscal year. 6428 Whenever any school district proposes to provide a program, the governing board of the school dis trict may apply to the superintendent of Public Instruction for an advance apportionment for the purpose of defraying expenses incident to the initiation of a program including the identification of minors eligible to participate in the program. The application shall be made prior to August 15 of a school year in the form and manner prescribed by the State Superintendent of Public Instruction and shall include an estimate of the number of participating pupils for that school year. The Superintendent of Public Instruction, if he approves, shall apportion on or before September 15 to each applicant school district from the State General Fund, as an advance against future 408 apportionments from the State School Fund to such district, an amount not to exceed forty dollars ($40) for each estimated participating pupil. 6429 The Superintendent of Public Instruction shall furnish an abstract of all advance apportionments made to school districts of any county under Section 6428 to the State Controller, the Department of Finance and to the county auditor, county treasurer and county superin tendent of schools of the county and shall certify such apportionments to the State Controller who shall thereupon draw his warrants on the State General Fund in favor of the county treasurer of each county for the amounts apportioned to the districts of the county. 6430 All moneys received by the treasurer of a county under Section 6428 shall be credited by the treas urer to the general fund of the school district of the county exactly as apportioned by the Superintendent of Public Instruction. 6431 During the next two fiscal years after the fiscal year in which such apportionment is advanced to a school district under Section 6428, the State Controller shall deduct from apportionments made to each such school district from the State School Fund an amount equal to the amount apportioned to such district under Section 6428 and pay the same into the State General Fund. 6432 The State Board of Education shall adopt rules and regulations which: (a) Prescribe the procedures, consistent with this article, by which a district shall identify pupils as mentally gifted minors for the purpose of this article, (b) Establish minimum standards for programs. 6433 The Superintendent of Public Instruction shall adopt rules and regulations which for the purposes of this article: (a) Define "excess expense." (b) Prescribe the form and manner of application for an advance apportionment. (c) Prescribe the form and manner of application for reimbursement of excess expense. 409 6434 The State Board of Education shall establish in the Department of Education a supervision and consultant service to assist and advise school districts in the estab lishment, development, and improvement of programs, and shall employ the necessary personnel who shall devote their entire time to the provision of such services. APPENDIX U LOS ANGELES COUNTY: DIRECTORY OF PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROGRAMS FOR THE GIFTED 411 Los Angeles County Superintendent of Schools Division of Research and Guidance PROGRAMS FOR THE GIFTED PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS FOR MENTALLY GIFTED MINORS AS OF FEBRUARY 13, 1963 Dr. Elmer Ensz Asst. Supt. of Instruction Miss Lucy Staples Principal, Park School Norton Nichols, Jr. Asst. Supt.-Educ. Serv. Harrison L. Wiltse Consultant, Spec. Serv. Ernest D. Schellenberg Coordinator, Spec. Serv. Mrs. Jeanne Wilson Director of Curriculum Elizabeth Tunison Director of Curriculum Dr. Margaret Louise Orear Deputy Superintendent Dr. Isabel W, Dible General Elementary Supervisor Dr. F. Willard Robinson Principal, Beverly Hills High School Joseph I. Deal Director of Curriculum Edward J. Muehlhausen Asst. Supt.-Educ. Serv. Corabelle Clark Director of Guidance K-12 Alhambra K-8 Alhambra 9-12 Antelope Valley Joint Union High K-12 Arcadia Unified K-12 Azusa Unified K-12 Baldwin Park Unified K-8 Bassett Unified K-12 Bellflower Unified K-8 Beverly Hills Unified 9-12 Beverly Hills Unified K-12 Charter Oak Unified K-12 Claremont Unified K-6 Compton City Dr. Carl J. Burk Asst. Supt. of Instruction Dr. Paul B. Salmon District Superintendent Mrs. Nancy Venuto Curriculum Lab0 Consultant Dr. Vincent Alexander Asst. Superintendent Doris Meacham Mentally Gifted Minors Psychometrist Samuel Abramson Psychologist Mr. John Tulley Coordinator, P. P. Serv. Mrs. Fredericka Evans Programs for Gifted Psychometrist Eleanor Manning Programs for Gifted Consultant Donald W. Jensen Director, Research & P, P. Services Dr. Gunnar L. Wahlquist Asst. Supt. of Instruction George D'Araico Curriculum Assistant Dr. Jean Wiener Director of Spec. Serv. Keith I. Martin Assistant Superintendent Mrs. Evelyn F. Kofahl Coordinator of Gifted Classes 412 7-12 Compton Union High K-12 Covina-Valley Unified K-12 Covina-Valley Unified K-12 Culver City Unified K-12 Culver City Unified Downey Unified K-12 Duarte Unified K-8 East Whittier City K-8 East Whittier City K-8 El Monte 9-12 El Monte Union High K-8 El Rancho Unified K-12 El Segundo Unified K-6 Enterprise City K-6 Glendale Unified 413 Vivian Young Consultant, Programs for the Gifted Sterling L. Fox Administrative Assistant Miss Ruth Price Director of Curriculum James R. Boston Principal, Pier Avenue School Henry L. Levy Psychologist Mrs. Fern Crain Director of Guidance J. E. Fant Principal Dr. Paul M. Smith District Superintendent Mrs. A. Jeanne Maus Director of Curriculum & Instruction Mrs. Catherine B. Bruch Programs for the Gifted School Psychologist Dwight P. Lewis Principal Mr. Fred Sander Director of Curriculum Dr. Gerald E. Dart District Superintendent James R. Clark Director, P. P. Services H. Sanford Williams Assistant Director of Instruction K-12 Glendale Unified K- 12 Glendora Unified K-8 Hawthorne K-8 Hermosa Beach City K-8 Hermosa Beach City K-8 Hudson K-8 Hughes-Elizabeth Lakes Union K-8 Keppel Union K-12 La Canada Unified K-8 Lancaster K-8 Las Virgenes Unified K-8 Lawndale K-8 Lennox K-8 Little Lake City K-12 Long Beach Unified Mrs. Helma B. Coffin Supervisor Mrs. Thelma M. Epley Consultant for the Gifted Dr. Donald Kincaid Supervisor Miss Marjorie E. Wolfe Admin. Coordination Budget Martha S. Hittinger Director of Curriculum George W. Huggins Associate Supt. of Instruction Mrs. Betty Chenney Curriculum Assistant Hyrura W. Loutensock Superintendent Mrs. Mona Marie Edwards Curriculum Consultant Walter Lauterbach Director of Guidance Center Dr. Norman 0. Taliman Associate Superintendent Virginia Komurka Supervisor of Instruction Kenneth Armstrong Asst. Supt. Educ. Herbert Dixton Director, Psychological Serv. Mr. Norman Frost Asst. Princ., Palos Verdes High School 414 7-12 Los Angeles Unified K-6 Los Angeles Unified K-6 Los Angeles Unified K-12 Los Angeles Unified K-6 Los Nietos K-8 Lowell Joint K-8 Lowell Joint K-12 Lynwood Unified K-8 Manhattan Beach City K-12 Monrovia Unified K-12 Montebello Unified K-8 Norwalk-La Mirada City K-8 Palmdale K-8 Palmdale 9-12 Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified Mr. David R. Miller Asst. Supt. of Instruction Mr. Theodore Neff Coordinator of Elem. Instruction Alton Safford Psychologist Dr. E. Howard Floyd Asst. Supt. of Instruction Mrs. Billie K. Press Programs for the Gifted Consultant Ruth P. Eames Coordinator Winston Nelson Asst. Supt.-Educ. Serv. James M. Gladhill Asst, Supt. of Instruction Mr. Otto Mueller Director of Guidance Dr. Elnora Schmadel Director of Research and Guidance Dr. William C. Higman Asst. Supt. for Instruc. Serv. Dr. Fred A. Zannon Asst. Supt. of Instruction Richard M„ Moore Asst. Supt. of Instruction Mrs. Fay M. Layne Asst. Supt. Educ. Donald K. Duncan Curriculum Consultant Dr. Dale Bjelland Director of Curriculum 415 K-12 Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified K-8 Palos Verdes Unified K-12 Palos Verdes Unified K-12 Pasadena Unified K-12 Pasadena Unified K-6 Pomona Unified K-12 Pomona Unified K-8 Redondo Beach City K-8 Rosemead K-8 San Gabriel K-12 San Marino Unified K-12 Santa Monica Unified K-12 South Pasadena Unified K-8 South Whittier K-12 Torrance Unified K-12 West Covina Unified Mrso Beth M. Perkins Curriculum Assistant Mrs. Itasca Lewis Asst, Supto Educ. Serv. Dr. William Clinkenbeard Curriculum Director Dr. Paul Plowman Consultant, Mentally Gifted Minors Dr. Joseph Rice Consultant, Mentally Gifted Minors Dr. Marcella R. Bonsall Consultant, Division of Research and Guidance K-8 Whittier City K-6 Willowbrook K-8 Wiseburn K-12 California State Dept of Education K-12 California State Dept of Education K-12 Los Angeles County Schools

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The Stability Of The Self-Concept In Junior College Students

PDF

Programed And Teacher Oriented Instruction In A Computer Programming Course

PDF

An Evaluation Of Orientation Programs In Seven Selected Small Liberal Arts Colleges, Using Student Satisfaction Criteria

PDF

The Effects Of Delay In Knowledge Of Results On The Amount Learned In Teaching Machine Programs Of Differing Cue Content

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

Predicting Students' Success In A Comprehensive Junior College

PDF

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

PDF

The Impact Of The College Experience On Students' Ability To Identify Certain Concepts Of Freedom

PDF

Major Areas Of Conflict In The Control Of College And University Student Daily Newspapers In The United States

PDF

Development And Analysis Of Some Tactual Measures Of Intelligence For Adolescent And Adult Blind

PDF

An Analysis Of Selected Conditional Admissions At The University Of Southern California

PDF

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

PDF

Criteria For Curriculum Development In The Public Universities And Colleges In California With Special Concern For The Religious Aspects Of The Cultural Heritage Of Man

PDF

A Critical Evaluation Of The Business Administrator-Superintendent Relationship In The Public Schools Of California

PDF

Non-Cognitive Factors Related To Achievement Which Can Be Ascertained From Freshman Autobiographies

PDF

Dissent And Agreement Regarding The High School Counselor'S Role

PDF

Factors Identified With Positive And Negative Attitudes Toward Physical Education

PDF

A Comparison Of Selected Characteristics Of Transfer And Terminal-Occupational Students In A California Junior College

PDF

Evaluation And Implementation Of The Conant Report On Education In The Junior High School Years

Asset Metadata

Creator Twitchell, Theodore Grant (author)

Core Title Programs Initiated By Institutions Of Higher Learning For Gifted High School Students Of California

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

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

Tag Education, general,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Pullias, Earl Vivon (committee chair), Lefever, David Welty (committee member), Wagner, Elmer E. (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-329631

Unique identifier UC11358937

Identifier 6409314.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-329631 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 6409314.pdf

Dmrecord 329631

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Twitchell, Theodore Grant

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