University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Ethnic Group Differences In Certain Personal, Intellectual, Achievement, And Motivational Characteristics

(USC Thesis Other)

Ethnic Group Differences In Certain Personal, Intellectual, Achievement, And Motivational Characteristics

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content This dissertation has been 64-13,500 microfilmed exactly as received JOHNSON, Henry Sioux, 1928- ETHNIC GROUP DIFFERENCES IN CERTAIN PERSONAL, INTELLECTUAL, ACHIEVEMENT, AND MOTIVATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS. University of Southern California, Ph.D., 1964 Education, psychology University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan ETHNIC GROUP DIFFERENCES IN CERTAIN PERSONAL, INTELLECTUAL, ACHIEVEMENT, AND MOTIVATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS by Henry Sioux Johnson A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Education) June 1964 UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY PARK LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 9 0 0 0 7 This dissertation, written by ....... HENRY..SIOUX. . JOHHSOH........ under the direction of h\a...Dissertation Com mittee, and approved by all its members, has been presented to and accepted by the Graduate School, in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of D O C T O R OF P H I L O S O P H Y a D ate 5 t a e . 19 .6 lj-.. Dean DISSERTATION COMMITTEE Chairmajf .C .. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES Page vii Chapter I. INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 1 The Problem Statement of the problem Questions to be answered The null hypotheses Hypotheses regarding ethnic group comparisons regardless of achieve ment level Hypotheses regarding ethnic group comparisons by achievement level Importance of the Study General Procedures Definitions of Terms Used Assumptions Limitations and Delimitations Limits imposed by the study sample Limits imposed by the selectivity sample Limits imposed by the instruments Organization of the Remaining Chapters Contemporary Viewpoints of Motivation One- or two-factor theories Multiple-factor theorists Indeterminate-factor theorists used II, REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 20 iii ir Chapter Page Contemporary Instruments for Measuring Hunan Motivation Non-projeetive tests Other related noa-projectiYe tests Projectivo tests Centenporary Studies of Mexican-American Children Summary III. PROCEDURES, SOURCES OP DATA, AMD INSTRUMENTS USED . ...................... 58 Description of the Setting of the Study Community Schools Description of the Sample Investigated The sample Previous school experience Description of Certain Variables Investi gated Socioeconomic status Citizenship marks Grade-point average Description of the Instruments Used Personal-social data Achievement test Intelligence test Motivation test Administration and Scoring Procedures Statistical Procedures Summary IV. COMPARISONS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN- AMERICAN EIGHTH GRADE PUPILS ON CERTAIN SCHOOL RELATED VARIABLES . . . . . » . . . 85 Ethnic Group Comparisons Regardless of Achievement Level Chapter | Personal traits Other related personal traits Intellectnal traits Achievement traits Motivational traits Summary Y. COMPARISONS OF THE LOV, MIDDLE, AND HIGH ACHIEVING ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN- AMERICAN EIGHTH GRADE PUPILS ON CERTAIN i SCHOOL RELATED VARIABLES.............. Ethnic Group Comparisons by Achievement Level Personal traits Other related personal traits Intellectual traits Achievement traits Motivational traits Summary VI. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary The problem The samples The instruments Statistical procedures Findings Question 1 Ethnic group comparisons regardless of achievement level Ethnic group comparisons by achieve ment level Question 2 Ethnic group comparisons regardless of achievement level Ethnic group comparisons by achieve ment level Page 116 162 Chapter Question 3 Ethnic group comparisons regardless of achievement level Ethnic group comparisons by achieve ment level Question 4 Ethnic group comparisons regardless of achievement level Ethnic group comparisons by achieve ment level Question 5 Conclusions Ethnic Group Comparisons Regardless of Achievement Level Hypothesis 1 | Hypothesis 2 Hypothesis 3 ! Hypothesis 4 Ethnic Group Comparisons by Achievement Level j Hypothesis 5 Hypothesis 6 i Hypothesis 7 Hypothesis 8 Hypothesis 9 Other Conclusions and Recommendations BIBLIOGRAPHY............ • , APPENDICES........................................., Appendix A Appendix B vi Page 196 210 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1• Underlying Reasons for the Exclusion of Certain Pupils from the Total Eighth Grade Sample.......... 17 2* Summary of Farquhar*s Factor Labels for All Four Tests for Each Sex •••••••• 31 3* Distribution of Eighth Grade Sample by Sex, Ethnic Group, and Achievement Level • • 61 4* Student Information Sheet .......... 68 3* Results of Simple Structure Rotation of Integrated and Unintegrated Dynamic Structures • 72 6. Intercorrelations of SMAT Integrated Traits for 438 Anglo-American and Mexican-Ameri can Eighth Grade Pupils... ................ • 77 7* Intercorrelations of SMAT Unintegrated Traits for 438 Anglo-American and Mexican-American Eighth Grade Pupils. . ....................... 78 8* Basic Statistical Model • •• » • • • • • • • 83 9* Means and Standard Deviations of the Means for the Personal Trait Scores of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Eighth Grade Pupils 87 10. A Comparison of the Eighth Grade Anglo- American and Mexican-American Groups on the Basis of the Country in ¥hich the Parents Were Born • • • • • • • « • • • • • 93 viii Table Page 11. A Comparison of the Eighth G-rade Anglo- American and Mexican-American Groups on the Basis of the Country in Vhich Parental Schooling Vas Completed ............. 94 12. A Comparison of the Eighth Grade Anglo- American and Mexican-American Groups on the Basis of the Parents1 Occupations Which Differ from the Occupations They Held Before Coming to the United States • • 96 13. A Comparison of the Eighth Grade Anglo- American and Mexican-American Groups on Language Spoken by the Pupil at Home • • • 97 14* Means and Standard Deviations of the Means for the Intelligence Test Scores of Anglo-American and Mexican-American Eighth Grade Groups • ••••••••••• 100 13* Means and Standard Deviations of the Means for the Achievement Test Scores of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Eighth Grade Groups • • • • • • ............... 104 16. Means and Standard Deviations of the Means for the Motivation Test Scares of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Eighth Grade Groups • ••• • • • • • • • • • • • 107 17* Means and Standard Deviations of the Means for the Integrated and Unintegrated Moti vational Trait Scores According to Ethni city and Sex Groupings ••»••••••• 108 18* Means and Standard Deviations of the Means for the Personal Trait Scores According to Ethnicity, Achievement, and Sex Groupings • 117 19* A Comparison of the Eighth Grade Anglo- American and Mexican-American Groups at the Three Achievement Levels on the Basis of the Country in Which the Parents Were Born • • • • • • * • • • • • • • • • « • • 127 20* A Comparison of the Eighth Grade Anglo- American and Mexican-American Groups at the Three Achievement Levels on the Basis of the Country in Which Parental Schooling Was Completed • • • • • • • « « • • • • • • 128 |Table 2 1. 22. i i 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. ! 29. r ! • ; ' ! f !;• A Comparison of the Eighth Grade Anglo- American and Mexican-American Groups at the Three Achievement Levels on the Basis of the Parents' Occupations Vhich Differ from the Occupations They Held Before Coming to the United States . . A Comparison of the Eighth Grade Anglo- American and Mexican-American Groups at the Three Achievement Levels on the Basis of the Language Spoken by the Pupil at Home ........... . • • • • Means and Standard Deviations of the Means for the Intelligence Test Scores Accord ing to Ethnicity, Achievement, and Sex Groupings ........ ••»••••*•»•• Means and Standard Deviations of the Means for the Achievement Test Seores According to Ethnicity, Achievement, and Sex Groupings ..... .................... • Means and Standard Deviations of the Means for the Motivation Test Scores According to Ethnicity, Achievement, and Sex Groupings ••••••••••••••••• Means and Standard Deviations ef the Means for the Integrated and Unintegrated Moti vational Trait Scores According to Ethni city, Achievement, and Sex Groupings • • • Means and Standard Deviations of the Means for the Integrated Motivational Trait Scores According to Ethnicity, Achieve ment. and Sex Groupings Means and Standard Deviations of the Means for the Unintegrated Motivational Trait Scores According to Ethnicity, Achieve ment, and Sex Groupings.................. Analysis of Variance for the Chronological Age Grade Placement Scores for Pupils of Anglo-American and Mexican-American Des cent with Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex .oo....ooo...o...... ix Page i ! ! i I 130 ! | I < ; i 131 | 134 139 ! 142 i i 144 147 i i i i 153 i I 212 X Table Page 30. Analysis of Variance for the Grade-Point Average Seores for Pupils of Anglo— American and Mexican—American Des cent with Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex ............ 213 31• Analysis of Variance for the Citizenship Marks for Pupils of Anglo-American and Mexican-American Descent vith Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex • •••<>»••• 214 32. Analysis of Variance for the Socioeconomic Status for Pupils of Anglo-American and Mexican-American Descent with Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex 213 33. Analysis of Variance for the Father's Level of Education for Pupils of Anglo-American and Mexican-American Descent vith Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex ..............216 34. Analysis of Variance for the Mother's Level of Education for Pupils of Anglo-American and Mexican-American Descent with Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex ••„•••••• 217 33. Analysis of Variance for the Language Intelli gence Test Seores for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex . . . 218 36. Analysis of Variance for the Non-Language Intelligence Test Scores for Pupils of Anglo-American and Mexican-American Descent vith Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex................................. 219 37* Analysis of Variance for the Total Intelli gence Test Scores for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex . . . 220 38. Analysis of Variance for the Reading Voca bulary Test Scores for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex • • • 221 |Table 39. : 40. 41. i | 42. 43. 44. i 45. 46. ! 47. Analysis of Variance for the Beading Compre hension Test Seores for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnic ity, GPA, and Sex . . „ Analysis of Variance for the Arithmetic Rea soning Test Scores for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex • • • Analysis of Variance for the Arithmetic Fundamentals Test Scores for Pupils of Anglo-American and Mexican-American Deseent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex • • • • • • • • • « • • • • • • Analysis of Variance for the Mechanics of English Test Scores for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex • . . Analysis of Variance for the Spelling Test Scores for Pupils of Anglo-American and Mexican-American Descent vith Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex Analysis of Variance for the Total Achieve ment Test Scores for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex • • . Analysis of Variance for the Total Integrated Motivation Test Scores for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex • • • • • Analysis of Variance for the Total Uninte grated Motivation Test Scores for Pupils of Anglo-American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex ............ ...................... Analysis of Variance for the Total Motivation Teat Scores for Pupils of Anglo-American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex • xi Page 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 Table 48. Analysis of Variance for the Integrated Asser tion Interest Faetor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex . . . 49. Analysis of Yariance for the Integrated Sensu ality Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex • • • • • 50. Analysis of Variance for the Integrated Sex Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex . . . 51• Analysis of Yariance for the Integrated Gre garious Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo-American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex.................. » • • 52. Analysis of Yariance for the Integrated Nar cissism Interest Factor for Pupils of Arngl o-American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex.............. .............. 53. Analysis of Yariance for the Integrated Con structive Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo-American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex •••••••.. .......... 54. Analysis of Yariance for the Integrated Pro tective Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo-American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex •••••••• ............ 55. Analysis of Yariance for the Integrated Curi osity Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex . « . . , 56. Analysis of Yariance for the Integrated Aggres sion Interest Faetor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex • • • • • xii Page 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 XI11 Table Page 57. Analysis of Variance for the Integrated Play Fantasy Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex . . . . * 240 58. Analysis of Variance for the Integrated Acqui sition Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex • • • • • 241 59* Analysis of Variance for the Integrated Self Sentiment Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex . . . . . 242 60. Analysis of Variance for the Integrated Super Ego Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex . • . . • 243 61. Analysis of Variance for the Integrated Reli gion Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex • • • • • 244 62. Analysis of Variance for the Integrated Patrit* otism Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex........ 245 63. Analysis of Variance for the Unintegrated Asser tion Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex • • • • • 246 64. Analysis of Variance for the Unintegrated Sensu ality Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex........ 247 65. Analysis of Variance for the Unintegrated Sex Interest Faetor for Pupils of Anglo-Ameri can and Mexican-American Descent vith Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex . • . • • 248 66. Analysis of Variance for the Unintegrated Gre garious Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex • • . • . 249 xiv Table Page 67* Analysis of Variance for the Unintegrated Nar cissism Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex . . . * * 250 68* Analysis of Variance for the Unintegrated Con structive Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo-American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex ......................... 251 69# Analysis of Variance for the Unintegrated Pro tective Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex • • • • • 252 70. Analysis of Variance for the Unintegrated Curio sity Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex . * . * . 253 71• Analysis of Variance for the Unintegrated Aggres sion Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex • • • • • 254 72. Analysis of Variance for the Unintegrated Play Fantasy Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex ••••• 253 73. Analysis of Variance for the Unintegrated Acqui sition Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex • • • • • 256 74. Analysis of Variance for the Unintegrated Self Sentiment Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex • • • • . 257 75. Analysis of Variance for the Unintegrated Super Ego Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- Ameriean and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex . . . . . 258 76. Analysis of Variance for the Unintegrated Beli- gion Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Begard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex . • . . . 259 Table Page 77. Analysis of Variance for the Unintegrated Patri etisn Interest Factor for Pupils of Anglo- American and Mexican-American Descent vith Regard to Ethnicity, GPA, and Sex * . * » • 260 78. Revised Scale for Rating Occupation ........ 262 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY The question as to vhat effect differences in moti vation may have on academic achievement is not a nev one* Educators, psychologists, sociologists, and anthropologists have expressed interest in this area for many years (White House Proceedings, 1960j Lindzey, 1961). Until recently, as seen from the literature, it has been usual to try to predict school achievement from the results of intelligence and standardized achievement tests* While this procedure has met vith some success, a large part of the variance in school achievement seems to be unaccount ed for in terms of these procedures* Authorities such as Cattell (1961), McKeachie (1961), Mayo (1961), and Parquhar (1963) have hypothesized that the remaining variance in school achievement may be due for the most part to indivi dual differences in motivation* In an earlier investiga tion, Prandsen (1937), in discussing the causes of under achievement, indicated quite definitively that the problems of achievement or lack of achievement stemmed not from 1 2 limited intelligence but from a lack of adequate motivation. j let, despite the fact that motivation holds promise of improving the prediction of school achievement, little veil-conducted experimental evaluation of interests as motives has been accomplished vith children as subjects and ! apparently none is in existence regarding ethnic minority i groups. In a recent article, Sheldon (1961) pointed out that in contrast to the numerous publications on the rela- j I tionship of ability and achievement of Anglo-American and i i Mexican-American pupils there is a marked paucity of scho- | larly literature comparing these tvo ethnic groups on cer tain non-intellectual factors. Demos (1959) and Cline j (1961) in their studies of Anglo-American and Mexican- I American pupils have also strongly recommended that an at- i tempt be made to explore the motivational structures of bothj ’ I ethnic groups. ; i 1. THE PROBLEM | i ! Statement of the problem The present study sought to identify some aspects of | i ! motivation that may account for the differences in academic : j ! | performance of Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils ini ! a public school setting. The purposes of this investigation! j vere tvofolds (1) to determine vhether certain personal, j i intellectual, achievement, and motivational characteristics . exist differentially betveen eighth grade pupils of Anglo- j 3 American and Mexican-American descent* and (2) to determine whether these differential personal, intellectual, achieve ment, and motivational characteristics exist between eighth grade low, middle, and high achievers for both ethnic groups when achievement status is determined by average teachers1 I marks for all subjects taken in the seventh and eighth grades. In this way it was hoped that a clear background for understanding and dealing with the Anglo-American pupil ; and his ethnic counterpart of low, middle, and high academic achievement might emerge. j ! ; i ;Questions to be answered ! | This study sought to explore answers to the follow- i i i ing questions: 1• Do differences exist between the Anglo-American group and the Mexican-American group, and between ! i i I the two ethnic groups when classified by achieve-j ment levels on each of the personal traits j measured? 2. Do differences exist between the Anglo-American group and the Mexican-American group, and between the two ethnic groups when classified by achieve ment levels on each of the tested intellectual abilities? i 3. Do differences exist between the Anglo-American I group and the Mexican-American group, and between the tvo ethnic groups when classified by achieve ment levels on each of the achievement test scores? 4. Do differences exist between the Anglo-American | group and the Mexican-American group, and betveen the tvo ethnic groups when classified by achieve ment levels on each of the motivation test I scores? j 5. Will certain of the motivational variables in- i vestigated vary as a function of ethnic group i membership, achievement status, and sex? The null hypotheses Prior to the collection and analysis of the data, the; following nine null hypotheses were formulated as guides to j the study: Hypotheses regarding ethnic group comparisons regard less of achievement level♦ — 1• There are no significant mean differences between! the Anglo-American group and the Mexican-American group on each of the folloving personal traits measured: chronological age, grade-point average, citizenship marks, socioeconomic status, and level of parental education. ! 2. There are no significant mean differences betveenj the Anglo-American group and the Mexican-American group on each of the following tested intellec tual abilities: language, non-language, and total IQ. 3. There are no significant mean differences betveen the Anglo-American group and the Mexican-American group on each of the following achievement traits: reading vocabulary and comprehension, arithmetic reasoning and fundamentals, mechanics of English, spelling, and total achievement test scores. 4. There are no significant mean differences between the Anglo-American group and the Mexican-American group on each of the following motivational traits: total motivation scores, integrated and unintegrated intrinsic and acquired interest factors. Hypotheses regarding ethnic group comparisons by achievement level*— 3. There are no significant mean differences between the Anglo-American group and the Mexican-American group vhen classified by achievement levels on each of the personal traits measured. 6. There are no significant mean differences between the Anglo-American group and the Mexican-American group vhen classified by achievement levels on each of the intellectual traits measured. 6 7. There are no significant mean differences betveen the Anglo-American group and the Mexican-American group vhen classified by achievement levels on each of the achievement traits measured. 8. There are no significant mean differences betveen the Anglo-American group and the Mexican-American group vhen classified by achievement levels on each of the motivational traits measured. 9. None of the motivational traits, as measured, vill vary significantly as a function of ethnic group membership, achievement level, and sex. II. IMPORTANCE OP THE STUDY Throughout the history of psychology, the general problem of motivation has been given much thought. In fact, according to Deese (1958), the discussion of the nature of human motivation has probably covered more paper than any other psychological topic. Lindsey (1961) further empha sized the magnitude of this problem vhen he pointed out that no area of psychology has been subjected to a more prolonged and less systematic scrutiny than has the domain of motivation. In general, it is evident that although there has been considerable interest in motivation, only in recent years has there been a serious effort to provide adequate means of measuring human motives. Yet, as Nitty (1960) points out, only a surprisingly fev comprehensive 7 studies of children's motivations are available. The regular classroom teacher has also long been avare that the child vith minimal motivation presents a serious problem because of his inability to learn effec tively. Furthermore, teachers have often noted that child ren of similar potentials (intelligence and temperament) often differ in performance. In a study by Kingsley (1961) it vas noted that teachers as a group, vhen asked to desig nate topics connected vith learning vhich they vish to study, invariably rank motivation and discipline high in importance. The author hypothesized that motivation is recognized as important to teachers because vithout it learning progresses slovly, vhereas poor discipline is im portant because it represents behavior motivated tovards goals other than those vhich the teacher has selected or deemed proper. Thus through attempting to ascertain vhich needs of the pupil are or are not being satisfied the teacher may be able to ascertain vhy the pupil does or does not direct his activities tovard the learning tasks. In short, the core of the problem for the individual teacher is hov he may channel the pupil's energy into activity that is both personally satisfying and educationally acceptable. Considering the faet that teachers regard motivation to be their most serious problem, it is astonishing that so little research on motivation in school learning has been conducted during the past decade. In general, the published research studies are limited in scope and contribute little to the solution of classroom problems of motivation. A note of concern vas indicated by Haggard (1957) vhen he con cluded from his longitudinal study that only very little more is knovn about motivation in school learning today than vas in existence ten years ago. In spite of Haggard*s conclusions, recent research studies by Cattell (1961), Frymier (1962), and Far^uhar (1963) have opened avenues for the objective measurement of motivation, vhich can be evaluated by appropriate instru ments to improve human relationships vithin the school sys tem. Such tests of motivation direct attention to the fact that the school is concerned vith factors other than the sheer mastery of subject matter. Furthermore, the appli cation of motivation measurement has also greatly aided methods of developing responsible citizenship in students in a democratic society. Educators are also finding motivational measurements useful in guidance. According to Hiller (1961), fev areas are more important to guidance than motivation. Similarly, Darley and Anderson (1961) have likevise included motivation among their list of seven significant measurements needed in the counseling process. Jordan (1961) may be said to sum marize the viewpoints of many vhen he stated that: (1) real happiness in life comes from doing veil vhat is en joyed, and (2) if an activity arouses interest it vill be 9 e pursued viih less friction and vith more likelihood of suc cess* In the final analysis, progress in human relations can come rapidly only as one learns more about the motiva tions of other people* The summation of recent literature thus suggests that there is a definite need to foster better understanding of the motivational factors that affect the achievement and intellectual performance of all pupils and particularly those of certain ethnic backgrounds* As indicated by one of his recommendations, Cline (1961) felt that the motiva tional structures applicable to ethnic groups vas an impor tant one and should be further measured and better con trolled to ascertain its full force as a cause of academic retardation in the Spanish-speaking groups. Demos * (1959) study on the attitudes of Mexicaii-Americans and Anglo- Americans appears to substantiate Cline's conclusions. It vas felt that the problem vas regarded as important because if it is possible to measure some of the facets of motiva tion and to learn vith some precision hov these variables affect learning then it may be possible for teachers and counselors to assist pupils of certain Spanish-speaking minority groups to perform more satisfactorily in their school vork. Thus, the ultimate objective of this study is to obtain an improved understanding of both the success ful and unsuccessful student in order to capitalize on the favorable qualities of the one and to counteract, if 10 possible, unfavorable characteristics of the other* In short, uncertainty and controversy in this area can be minimized by a veil-planned evaluation of the nature of the motivational picture of the high and lov achieving Mexican ine ri can and Anglo-American pupils studied. It is expected that this research should be useful, therefore, in deter mining the effect of motivation on the ethnic student: (1) in adding to the data concerning the relationship between motivation and school achievement, (2) in aiding in a greater understanding of the Mexican-American and Anglo- American ethnic groups, and (3) in assisting in evaluating the counseling process, particularly when specific motiva tional variables are identified. III. GENERAL PROCEDURES The total population for the study consisted of 620 eighth grade students. These students were enrolled for the school year 1962-63 in the two junior high schools serving a community of approximately 30,000 in the south central portion of the San Gabriel Valley* For purposes of this study, the grade-point average for the entire two years of junior high school was calcu lated for each student to provide low, middle, and high achievers* These students who were identified in this manner were then categorised on the basis of their surnames into respective Anglo-American or Mexican-American ethnic groups. Such a classification vas facilitated by informa- : i tien provided on the Student Information Sheet and verified j ! by each pupil during the personal interview. Three instruments, which are described in greater detail in Chapter III, were used for the measurement of ! variables within the areas of motivation, intelligence, and j i i achievement, ! Motivational scores were derived for each of the in trinsic and acquired interest characteristics as measured by the School Motivational Analysis Test (SMAT), Intelligence quotients were obtained by administering the California Test of Mental Maturity, Achievement in reading, arithmetic, and language art skills were secured by administering the California Achievement Tests, Socioeconomic level was determined by means of the occupation scale of the Revised Index of Status Character istics to the information available in the school files and checked against the pupil's responses on the student ques tionnaire, i Finally, comparison by ethnic groups on each of the variables described above was attempted. Means, standard ! deviations, analysis of variance, and F ratios were employed I as statistical tools in determining the degree of signifi cance among the various combinations of variables and in controlling certain of them, A more detailed description of the procedure, including the schematic of the basic 12 statistical model, is presented in Chapter 111* IV. DEFINITIONS OF TEEMS USED Throughout the study certain terms have been defined operationally to clarify their meanings. These definitions |and other related terms are reported in the following I paragraphs: | Acquired interest.— In this study the term acquired j interest is used to designate sentiment patterns. The ac- j i ' i iquired interest or sentiment is a learned pattern of atti tude integration, acquired through learning, under the in fluence of a particular social institution (Cattell, 1957). See erg below under intrinsic interest. Anglo-American.— The term refers to Americans of non- Spanish heritage. It is further restricted in this study to mean only those Americans who are members of the Cauca sian race and whose place of birth and residence is in the ! : i United States (Burma, 1954$ Demos, 1959). Low, middle, and high achiever.— A student whose ; ! grade-point average (UFA) for all classes taken in junior j | | high school, including physical education, shop, and home ' | I I economics, falls within the lowest twenty—six percentile { | range is referred to as a low achiever. A student who I | ranks in the top twenty-eight percentile range for the de- i • ! fined population is referred to in this study as a high i achiever. A student whose GPA score falls at or between the! 13 thirty-seventh and sixty-fourth percentile range on the same :criterion is defined as a middle achiever* _ _ _ _ _ _ : ! | Intrinsic interest*— For purposes of this study, the j term intrinsic interest is substituted for the vord erg* An erg or intrinsic interest is a pattern of factor loadings I among dynamic measurements of interest-attitude patterns* ! . j The term erg is derived from the Greek root vord meaning ; ; vork or energy, since the essential feature common to these j j |interest-attitude patterns is that they are sources of re- i i activity or vork (Cattell, 1957)* j ; i Mexican-American*— Despite the custom of many people I !to lump all Spanish-speaking persons indiscriminately into i the category of "Mexicans'* (Burma, 1954$ Demos, 1959), the j term is used in this study to refer to those pupils of j Mexican heritage, but vho by birth or naturalization possess IUnited States citizenship* I i Motivation.— The term is defined by Cattell (Cattell land Sveney, 1962) as j a complex of dynamic forces vithin the developing per- j soaality derived in part from inherited reaction pat terns vhieh become individuated through cognitive and satisfying experiences* I In this study the term motivation shall be used to desig nate those intrinsic and acquired interest factors vhich I j are found both at the conscious (integrated) and less con- i |scious (unintegrated) levels of the functioning organism* 14 Y. ASSUMPTIONS In this study four operational assumptions wore pre sumed to exist in the use and evaluation of the instruments and data of the research: 1* It was assumed that the total junior high school grade-point average, including physical education and other elective subjects, when used as the criterion of achievement in this study, represents a realistic index of the pupil*s academic performance* Without exception, prior comparative studies of Mexican-American and Anglo-American pupils by such people as Brown (1956), Demos (1959), Cline (1961), and Faught (1962) have used the standardised achievement test results as the criterion of academic accomplishment. Invariably their studies have shown quite indicatively that substantial disadvantages do exist when a Mexican-American pupil *s academic achievement is measured by a standardized test. It was assumed here that the use of teachers* marks would be less vulnerable to bias of the cultural disadvan tage than measured standardized achievement test scores in estimating the school performance of the Mexiean—American student. It vas further assumed that teaehers* marks were applicable with more nearly equal validity for the Anglo- American group studied. 2. It vas assumed that the Student Motivation Analysis Test (SMAT) is a valid measure of motivation for 15 both the Mexican-American and Anglo—American ethnic groups* Studies by Cattell, Connor, and Butcher (1962) have shovn eridence in favor of this assumption vhen different ethnic groups are studied. It vas beyond the scope of the study to validate the hypothetical constructs of motivation vhieh vere found to exist by the authors of the tests (Sveney and Cattell, 1962). 3. It vas assumed that the scores of students on each of the six tests of the California Achievement Test battery vere accurate scores and could be interpreted in this light for both the Anglo-American and Mexican-American student. 4. It vas assumed that the scale devised by Varner, Meeker, and Eells gave a valid determination of socio economic status for both ethnic groups. Furthermore, it vas assumed that the father's occupation based on informa tion in the cumulative record and verified from student reports at the time of the personal intervievs is a true description of the father's job classification. VI. LIMITATIONS AND DELIMITATIONS Limits imposed by the study sample 1. From the total sample of 620 eighth graders, 438 students, consisting of 214 subjects for the Anglo-American group and 224 subjects for the Mexican-American group, vas selected for further study. The sub-groupings according to 16 achievement level and ethnicity vas further reduced to samples ranging from 13 to 152 for each group. 2. It should be reiterated that the findings for one community or area are often not the same as for others. Consequently, the findings of the study should be inter preted vith this limitation in mind. Limits imposed by the selectivity factor Table i gives a breakdown of the underlying reasons imposed by the selection of designated pupils. Under the "absent** selectivity factor ten pupils vere dropped from the study because no data could be found for them. It vas assumed that they vere absent on both the initial and make up data-gathering sessions. Eighteen other students vere likevise left out because of incomplete data on any one of the four instruments used in the study. Since ethnic group membership vas restricted to pupils of Anglo-American and Mexican-American descent of United States citizenship, excluded by definition vere three Orientals, eleven Anglo-Americans, and four Latin- American pupils vhoae citizenship vas other than that of the United States. Excluded by the criterion vhich determined the cut off point for the grade-point average for the total sample vere those students (102) who vere not classified as either lov, middle, or high achievers. 17 TABLE I UNDERLYING REASONS FOR THE EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN PUPILS FROM THE TOTAL EIGHTH GRADE S/WPLE Reasons for Selectivity Factor Number of PupiIs Absent (reasons unknown) 10 New students 50 Data Incomplete 18 Physical or mental handicaps 4 Excluded by definition of ethnicity 18 Excluded by criterion of achievement level 102 Total excluded 182 Total remaining 438 Total Eighth Grade Sample 620 18 Finally, thirty other students vere omitted from the study because they lack the necessary resident requirement of at least seventeen consecutive months of previous school experience at one or both of the junior high schools vithin the district. Limits imposed by the insirumenis used 1. Since the measurement of motivation plays a major role in any study of this type, the obtained findings must necessarily be limited to the technical adequacy and rationale of the psychometric instrument employed. Details of the test validities and reliabilities are presented in Chapter 111. 2. It should also be pointed out that the study vas not designed to predict overt behavior. Neither does the measurement of the motivational characteristics described for each of the ethnic achievement groups investigated necessarily mean the prediction of the pupil’s future per formance. Only indirect inferences may be made in this regard. 711. ORGANIZATION OF THE REMAINING CHAPTERS Chapter II presents a reviev of the literature deal ing vith the nature of motivation and the contemporary viev of motivation. Research pertaining to the relationship of motivation to level of achievement of Anglo-American, 19 Mexican-American, and other minority groups is also dis cussed in this chapter,, Chapter 111 contains the basic design of the study, including descriptions of the community and schools, experi mental procedures utilized, and a detailed account of the instruments used, as veil as the other significant variables employed in this study. Chapter IV describes the ethnic group comparisons of Anglo-American and Mexican-American eighth grade pupils on certain school-related variables. Chapter V contains the data dealing vith ethnic group comparisons of low, middle, and high achieving Anglo-Ameri can and Mexican-American eighth grade pupils vith regard to certain pertinent variables defined in the study. Chapter VI presents the summary, conclusions, and recommendations resulting from the study. CHAPTER £1 REVIEW OP THE LITERATURE Since the present study seeks to delve into the area of theories of motivation, measurement of motives, and com parative ethnology, it is deemed advisable to offer separate presentations of the background literature and research. For this reason, the chapter is divided into three main sections. The first section is limited to a discussion of the contemporary vievpoints of motivation. Selected theoretical assumptions essential to an understanding of motivational concepts are included. The second section is devoted to a discussion of contemporary instruments of measuring motivation. Non- projective and projective tests of human motives are re ported. The third section is concerned with a selected re view of available studies of the personal, intellectual, achievement, and motivational traits of Spanish—speaking children and youth. 21 I. CONTEMPORARY VIEWPOINTS OF MOTIVATION This section is concerned vith a brief but searching analysis of the motivational constructs There is no intent to review the progressive details of the development of mo tives from any given theoretical framework. The reader in terested in a more comprehensive review of the theories of motivation is referred to Madsen (1961), Hall (1961), and Travers (1963). There are many differences and nuances in the uses of the term motivation. One of its nuclear meanings, prob ably acceptable to everyone, is that motivation may be con sidered as a hypothetical construct that ties together specified antecedent and consequent conditions. The many variants of usage are summarized by Madsen (1961) who tries to clarify some of the issues implied by the differences. Stacey and DeMartino (1958) give the following four reasons why motivation is perhaps one of the most difficult and complex concepts to deduces 1• Motivation is concerned with the "why" rather than with the nhown of human behavior; 2. it is always a total organism in a social environ ment that responds or reacts, not just one segment of it; 3. motives can only be inferred from behavior, they are not directly observable; 4. the ffwhy" of a specific act may be due primarily to physiological factors, or to social factors, or more often to the interaction of the two. Thus, it is not surprising that the concept of motivation 22 has not turned out to be particularly useful, since diverse meanings nay be attached to the tern by vriters using dif ferent theoretical orientations to describe notivated behav ior (Deese, 1958)* For example, notivated behavior has been frequently identified as interest, drives, rewards, needs, attitudes, values, conflicts, defense mechanisms, anxiety states, and a myriad of other social, emotional, and physiological de terminants of behavior (Young, 1961). Hunt (1963) indicated that the term motivation is derived from the medieval Latin vord "movere" meaning nto move" and vas defined by the Oxford Universal Dictionary as "that vhich tends to move a person to a course of action." Young (1961) pointed out that motivation is more than a description of the process of arousing behavior. He felt that knowledge of the motivational construct included a thorough scrutiny of the conditions vhich sustain activity and vhich regulate and direct its patterning. The views of Bindra (1959), Madsen (1961), and Yinacke (1962) are closely related to those of Young. The last writer, Yinacke, sees motivation as being concerned vith the conditions respon sible for variation in intensity, quality, and direction of on-going behavior (Yinacke, 1962). Geldard (1962) in revieving the literature in con temporary psychology, concluded that by and large the many 23 theorists in the area of motivation can he placed on a con tinuum vith the tvo ends of the series clearly discernible* At one end of the continuum such theorists as Freud and Hull may he found* At the other end of the series, Guthrie and prohahly Estes would he located* Between the two extremes McDougall, Murray, Thorndike, and others may he seen* The position of each theorist on the continuum is determined to a large extent on the number of cardinal instincts, needs, or drives the theorist advocated* For purposes of simplification, a brief account of certain leading contemporary theorists at each end of Gel- dard's continuum are discussed* Theorists who presumably fall at mid-scale are also included* To facilitate the discussion, this writer proposes to designate the theorists assigned to the various positions of Geldard's continuum under the following three categories: (1) one- or two- factor theories, (2) raultiple-factor theories, and (3) in- determinate-factor theories* One- er two—factor theories Freud*— One of Freud's contributions was his recog nition of the importance of unconscious motivation* Basic to Freud's whole theory was his concept of the libido* The libido was conceived as a sort of sexual energy from vhich all activities arose and through vhich they were maintained* Freud added first the notion of self-preservation (life instincts) and later that of self-destruction (death in stincts) to his original concept of libido in describing motivation. Hull.— The unitary theory of drive redaction postu- j lated by Hull and some of his contemporary neobehaviorists I (Miller, 1951; Spence, 1960), also fall in this extreme of | the continuum. According to Deese, Hull conceived of moti- ■ vation as consisting primarily of tvo basic components, the need state and the external stimulus. A drive is learned by being conditioned to the stimulus present vhen it is aroused. All drive factors are considered as a single, non-associative state vhich multiplies the habit or asso ciative factors to produce performance (Deese, 1958). McClelland.— McClelland (1955) recognized tvo kinds of motives, anxiety and appeiiiie. The anxiety motive vas characterized as an expectation of displeasure or pain and the appetite by the expectation of pleasure or satisfaction. McClelland, hovever, is better known for his investigation of n-Aehievement based on the imaginative protocols derived from Murray*s TAT cards. Section II of this chapter des cribes McClelland's test of motivation in greater detail. Movrer.— Another contemporary vriter, Movrer (1960), may also be classified in this category. Movrer has hypo thesized that there are tvo kinds of motives, anxiety and hope. Movrer*s concept of anxiety is somevhat different from that of McClelland. Anxiety and hope are drives vhich 25 are definitely learned. Like other drive states, the elim ination or ^reduction of the drive is reinforcing. The drive state also instigate action and gives impetus to behavior, Yinacke,— Deese had indicated that most contemporary vriters favor the explanation of motivation as a unitary aspect of behavior, Yinacke’s (1960) recent proposal for a drive-modification theory of human motivation agreed in part vith Deese9s contentions, Yinacke perceives motivation as a broad phenomenon covering all the energizing, instigating, and regulating processes of human behavior, Multiple-factor theorists McDougall,— Villiam McDougall (1932) regarded in stincts as innate driving forces vhich motivate the body to satisfy their demands. He emphasized the goal—seeking phase of each of his dozen or so instincts or propensities rather than their specific manner or means of expression. In this vay, a given mode of expression vas expected to vary vith the individual9s ability and his functioning en vironment but the specific innate psycho-physiological pro pensity predetermined the active response in directions in trinsic to the instinct, Cattell,— Madsen (1961) summarizes Cattell*s theory as follovs: • , , a rather systematic and exact theory • • • a the oretically and empirically fruitful synthesis of factor- analysis and dynamic psychology (Freud and McDougall), 26 A detailed presentation of Cattell*s theory is found in his book, Personality and Motivation Structure and Meas urement (1957)* In general, Cattell*s motivation theory is psychoanalytically oriented. His fifteen dynamic traits are classified as attitudes, sentiments, and ergs (basic biological drives). There is a hierarchical descending order to these dynamic traits. Attitudes tend to fall back to sentiments and sentiments to ergs. Cattell maintains that these dynamic traits are differentiated through mat uration from Freud’s tripartite system consisting of the id, ego, and super-ego components of unconscious and con scious behavior. His vhole theory is concentrated around seventeen hypotheses, nine of vhich can definitely be iden tified as motivation hypothesis, the other eight concerned vith the development of the personality structure and its dependence upon the biological and social context. Murray.— Another contemporary theorist vho stands at mid-scale is Murray (1951). His motivation theory is basically the systematic arrangement of needs rather than deductive in nature as is Cattell1s. Murray vas the first to use the vord "heed" as a synonym for "drive•" He divided his list of needs into tve broad categories: viscerogenic and psychogenic. Viscerogenic needs are those commonly related to bodily or physical satisfactions. Psychogenic needs pertain primarily to learned-reaction systems. The interaction of needs and press formed the underlying basis iof Murray’s personality theory* The term "press* is defined: I i j by Murray to mean a given stimulus—situation vhich has an I ■ i influence upon the individual’s immediate or future func- j i 5 !tioning* Murray devised the TAT cards later used by McClel-! land for the measurement of n-Achievement* Maslov.— According to Maslov (1954), all motivated i behavior is need-related. Behavior is usually determined by multiple needs. Only in its absence does a motivational j i need become an important determinant of behavior. Maslov’s six motivational needs are hierarchically arranged. Once i ! the physiological needs are gratified, the other five goal- directed behaviors emerge. Maslov's hierarchy of needs is arranged in the folloving order of prepotency: | . i 1. Physiological needs; 2* safety needs; ! 3. love and belonging needs; j 4. esteem needs; 5* self-actualization; 6. the desires to knov and understand. i i j ! Indeterminate-factor theorists Guthrie.— According to Geldard (1962), theorists such as Guthrie (1938), vho fall on this end of the con- ! tinuum, perceive an infinite number of motives in their ob- ; I ; servations of behavior* Each action is conceived as a specific motive. Under this kind of stimulus-response ’ ! j sequence Geldard (1962) indicated that: • • • the vhole range of human conduct, this viev con tends, defies analysis into a hierarchy of motives* 28 Guthrie stated that knovledge of antecedent activi ties and the conditions vhich direct that activity through associative learning is the best approach in understanding the concept of motivation. In short, Guthrie's stimulus- response vievs of motivation reflect the thinking of the classical and instrumental conditioned response theorists. Estes.— Estes (1958) utilized the principles under lying Guthrie's association theory to formulate a mathemat ical theoretical model. The mathematical properties of the model vere derived from existing experimental facts con cerning motivation. Estes' theory, as vas noted for Guthrie's, assigns all conditioning to the classical variety. Learning of nev motives rests in the establishment of a correlation betveen some novel stimulus as a response and that to vhich it has not previously evoked. This type of motivational learning is clearly exemplified by classical conditioning. The function of reinforcement, in Estes' theory, is simply the mechanical one of providing an end to the stimulus-response sequence. Estes' theory places great emphasis on the interaction of the individual vith his func tioning environment in the development of motives. II. CONTEMPORARY INSTRUMENTS POR MEASURING HUMAN MOTIVATION The subject of this section is restricted to the deseripiion of selected motivation tests that have been used 29 in the educational setting vithin the past fifteen years. It is important to stress that this section does not repre sent a coverage of all the tests currently available on the motivation of school—age children and youth. ¥hat has been attempted is a survey of the different kinds of instruments commonly used. In addition, an attempt will bo made to des cribe each test and to illustrate its characteristic strengths and weaknesses. For purposes of clarification the various techniques of measuring human motivation are divided into tvo cate gories: (1) non-projective and (2) projeetive tests. Non-projective tests Michigan M-Scales.— The most promising non-projective motivation test vas produced in 1961 by Farquhar and his associates at Michigan State University. The Michigan State M-Scales (Farquhar, 1963) vere developed as an ob jective paper-and-pencil rae&sure of academic motivation vhich purports to increase precision in predicting high school grade-point average. The M-Scale is an extension of McClelland*s theory of academic motivation. It assumes that long-term involve ment, unique accomplishment, and competition vith a standard of excellence vill characterize the individual vith high n-achievement; while short-term involvement, common accom plishment, and competition vith a minimal standard of ex- 30 cellenee vill characterize the student vith lev n-achieve- ment. Lov and high motivation, as measured, is thus vieved as a drive consisting of an interaction of a complex set of psychological variables vhich initiates, directs, and sus tains behavior tovard an academic goal. The M-Scales vere validated and cross-validated on 4200 students. Significant mean differences in motivational test scores betveen the over- and under-achievers vere ob tained. In addition, all four of the M-Scale tests vere subjected to factor analysis to determine whether the test items vill yield an interpretable structure supportive of McClelland's theory of academic motivation. The principal axis solution vas used to factor the correlation matrices. Factors identified vere rotated by the quartimax method. One hundred eleventh grade boys and girls vere selected for the study. The thirty-one factors presently isolated by Farquhar (1963) are summarized in Table 2. Original polar adaptation of McClelland's theory provided the necessary rationale in labeling the factors derived from the factor analytic techniques. Farquhar interpreted the results of the factorial study to indicate that the M-Scales had met the test of theory value. Earlier validation studies by Farquhar also gave some evidence of the utility of the M- Scales in the prediction of high school grade-point average. Further explorations of the validity of the M-Scales vere undertaken by Guthrie (1962) and Payne and Farquhar 31 TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF FARQUHAR'S FACTOR LABELS FOR ALL FOUR TESTS FOR EACH SEX Test I Factor Labels Factor Males Factor Females Word 1 Academician 1 Academician Rating II EducatIona11y res 1stIve 11 Emotionality List 111 Conformity IV UnreliablIIty Human 1 Agitation 1 Academic compufsivity Trait II Academic compute!vity 11 Fantasy Inventory III Academic negativism III Conservatism IV Purpose1essness IV Social distance V Success drive V Emotional instability VI Norm Iessness Generalized 1 Unique versus common 1 Long term versus short Situational accomplIshment term educational In Choice II Immediate versus long volvement Inventory term gratlfleaf ion ii High versus low task III Competition with versus cooml tment ease of meeting a in Unique versus common standard accontp 11 shment IV Independence versus dependence in problem solving Preferred 1 High versus low Job I Unique accompli shment Job Charao- involvement versus avoidance of terlsties II Long term versus short education Sea Ye term Job Involvement ii Long term versus short III Unique accomplishment term Job involvement versus avoidance of in High versus low Job education Interests 32 (1962). They compared, groups of eleventh grade under- and over-achievers on each of the factors assessed by the M- Scale. The relationship betveen grade-point average and differences in motivational level vere also investigated. In Guthrie*s study no significant mean score differences on the total M-Scales vere found betveen the over-achievers and motivational level, but many significant findings vere ob tained betveen the under- and over—achievers and the lov and high motivation groups. Payne, on the other hand, con cluded that several relatively independent and interpretable dimensions of motivation are associated vith achievement status and level of motivation. In summary, the vork of Farquhar and those of the tvo preceding studies present rather consistent positive evidence for the validity of the M-Scales. Hovever, the number of studies are comparatively limited and the samples have dealt predominantly vith eleventh grade students. Further studies should be conducted on a more general popu lation. Junior Index of Motivation (JIM).— Another promising non-projective group test vas produced in 1961 by Frymier in Orlando, Florida. JIM is a Likert-type instrument de veloped specifically for assessing a junior high school student's motivation to perform successfully in his academie vork. The underlying rationale of the JIM scale vas 33 basically operational in nature. It vas assumed by the author that the test items based on the opinions of experts vould suffice to corroborate the validity of the instrument itself. Frymier*s concept of motivation vas thus based on the premise that motivation vas something that represented an internalized state of being vhich manifested itself out- vardly through an individuals personality, attitudinal, and value structures. The nature of motivation vas thus perceived by Frymier as the sum of the individual*s re sponses to particular items of the test in a particular vay. In short, it vas assumed that there vas something contained vithin the items vhich either directly or indirectly re flected information concerning the nature of motivation it self (Frymier, 1961). The JIM scale vas originally validated on 3,000 pupils ranging in age from 11 to 16 (Frymier, 1961). In a later study (Frymier, 1962) the author attempted a cross- validation of his JIM scale vith a group of 1216 fifth graders from 13 elementary schools. Frymier concluded from his studies that the JIM scale has some general validity in differentiating the successful from the unsuccessful pupils. He hypothesized that grouping children according to motiva tional level should be more effective than straight ability grouping. He recommended, hovever, that the JIM scale should be used only for research purposes at the present time. 34 Confirmatory research is lacking other than those studies reported by Frymier to establish concurrent or pre dictive validity of the JIM seale• School Motivation Analysis Test (SMAT).— The most comprehensive non-projective test concerning the dimensions of children*s motivation to appear to date is that devised by Sveney and his associates at the University of Illinois* Sveney and Cattell in 1961 vere able to replicate to some extent the motivational factor structures in school-age children that vere highly consistent vith those dynamic factors first reported for adults in an earlier study by Cattell, Maxwellf et al. (1949)* In the preceding section on motivation theories, it vas indicated that Cattell*s theory vas essentially an empirical synthesis of factor-analysis and dynamic psycho logy* Although Sveney is the senior author of SMAT, the basic assumptions of the test are those of Cattell* The hypothetical constructs of McDougall, Murray, and Freud are solidly embedded in SMAT terminology of dynamic traits* SMAT is basically a multivariate-analytical study of children*s motivation* It vas developed primarily as an objective measurement of the structural dimensions of psycho-dynamic traits. Thus, the empirically established factors recurring in the SMAT factorial studies are basi cally psyehoanalytieally oriented. It should be noted that there are tvo divisions of factors that nay occur in any interest factor measured by SMAT. Drives and sentiment (interest) factors are desig nated as dynamic structure factors. These dynamic factors cut across seven motivational-component factors. By their loadings these seven oblique motivational—component factors correspond to modified psychoanalytic concepts of id, ego, super-ego, and repressed complex components of interest, plus a component of purely physiological interest response (Cattell and Sveney, 1960). The seven motivational-component factors described by the author (Sveney, 1959) are reported belov: Alpha factor.— Conscious id or degree of satisfaction achieved. This Alpha or id component is by far the most dominant and consistently loaded faetor. An alternative hypothesis has defined the Alpha factor as "hedonic energy." In general, this factor is characterised by autism, i.e., believing that vhat one vants is true or practicable. It lacks all but a slight cognitive content. It also lacks any physiological associations to threat against the interests. Beta factor.— Ego component, or established senti ment factor ingredient. Sveney indicates that the Beta component is somevhat more depressed in children than in adults. Its most con sistent variable has been information concerning the means for satisfying the interest. This Beta factor has the 36 characteristic of all sentiment factors of an integrated nature that is strongest in habituated interests vhich hare adjusted to super-ego and reality demands* Gamma factor,— Ideal self, super-ego, or aspired sentiment factor ingredient* The identification of the Gamma component rested largely upon vord association and choice to explain tests. Since the development of the super-ego results from the incorporation of external requirements and restrictions, this factor vould suggest that the child's super ego is still largely conscious. Delta factor*— Physiological need component* This factor is considered as being both skeletal and autonomic in nature. It is the least likely of the seven identified factors to lend itself to group testing because of its heavy stresses on decision time and related psycho galvanic facilitation* Cattell (1957) points out that many theorists, including Skinner, have used the Delta concept or its facsimile to be a function of motivation strength* Although Skinner dees not use the motivation concept, his operant-conditioning curves correspond very closely to those obtained for the Alpha factor* Epsilon factor*-'— Motivation tied to unconscious memories* Conscious preference plays a limited role in this factor* The Epsilon factor represents primarily the effects 37 of incomplete repressed complexes. It could also be inter preted as an aberration of memory functions systematically related to interest. The reversed loadings on memory and the Zeigarnik effect results suggest the action of an un conscious factor. Zeta factor.— Constitutional need or urgency. Cattell and Sveney (1960) claim that this factor is associated vith a selective readiness or impulsiveness in the quality of interest. It also measures the forcefulness of motor expression vith vhich the interest is expressed. Eta factor.— Differential persistency. This factor seems to be related to fatigue and sym bolic satisfaction of drives. It may also be defined as differential pervasiveness of interest in the face of ob struction. The pioneer experiments of Cattell and Sveney clearly demonstrated the fact that the intensity of interest in a given course action does not stem from a single intensity factor, but falls into seven motivational—component factors vhich can be approximately measured by SMAT. In another investigation, Sveney (1962) attempted to replicate his earlier factorial findings. He administered 60 interest-attitude tests to 33Q sixth graders. The ob tained data vere correlated, factored, and rotated for simple structure. Sveney stated that the factors revealed in his study substantiated the presence of the drive 38 syndromes reported in the SMAT manual* In short, he vas able to identify the fifteen dynamic integrated and unin tegrated dynamic interest factors measured by SMAT* He further indicated that the findings did not seem to support the hypothesis that the eleven ergs and four sentiment in terest factors are predominantly related to culturally de termined channels for expression of need. Also in 1962, Cattell reported his findings relative to the prediction of school achievement through the use of a modified form of the SMAT. His cross-validation of the SMAT shoved essentially identical dynamic interest factors. He therefore concluded that Sveney*s interest factors may be considered stable and replicable. The most impressive finding of Cattell*s study of 89 eighth grade pupils vas his conclusion that personality and motivation measurements at the junior high school level can contribute more than the general ability measurement to the prediction of achievement. In 1961, Shotvell attempted to ascertain vhether the Cattell and Sveney findings vere congruent vith clinical observations. Her subject vas a 15 year old Negro female mentally defective patient at the Pacific State Hospital. Along vith the SMAT, the subject vas rated on various traits by school teachers, vard technician, and by herself. Shotvell used the P-technique to factor-analyze her data* Her results revealed substantially the same factors as those described by Cattell and Sveney. In another study in 1961, Connor administered the SMAT and the Stanford Achievement test battery to 277 eighth and ninth graders* He assigned pupils to the top and bottom twentieth percentile range according to their ranking on the standardized achievement test results* He attempted to determine whether significant mean score differences on the SMAT sub-test would be found between the top from the bottom achievers* His conclusions were that the SMAT permitted an evaluation of changes in motivation over time in relation to changes in school achievement* Connor recommended that more longitudinal studies should be used to measure these changes over a period of time* Little research vith the SMAT has been conducted* All available evidence points to the general adequacy of SMAT in measuring the dynamie interest pattern of sehool- age children* Until more conclusive validation and relia bility data are forthcoming, SMAT should be primarily limited to use as a research instrument* Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale (CMAS)*— One of the most commonly employed paper-and-pencil techniques in the study of motivation is the use of a self-report inven tory known as the Children*s Manifest Anxiety Scale (CMAS)• The CMAS is an adaption of Taylor's Manifest Anxiety Scale (Taylor, 1933) primarily for the use of elementary and secondary pupils (Castaneda, McCandless, and Palermo, 1936)* 40 The theory behind this inventory is that the items in it tap an emotional responsiveness that is related to drive or motivational level vhich vill have some bearing on behavior and performance. The CMAS is, in many vays, associated vith the theoretical drive variable in Hull's behavior theory reported in an earlier section of the chapter. A high or lov score on the CMAS is indicative of high or lov drive. These manifest symptoms of internal anxiety are assumed to act as generalized motivators to behavior. To validate the CMAS as a measure of motivation, the authors (Castaneda, Palermo, and McCandless, 1956) compared 36 fourth grade children vith high and lov anxiety scores on a multiple choice motor learning light box. The high anxiety children, as measured, did poorly on the psycho motor task, but vere superior on the less difficult ones. The authors concluded that the CMAS vas an effective measure of motivational level. In another investigation in 1956 (McCandless and Castaneda) a factorial study of the CMAS vith 387 fourth, fifth, and sixth graders as the population sample vas made. The folloving five factors vere produced* 1• Chronic anxiety or vorry 2. Increased physiological reactivity 3. Sleep disturbances associated vith inner strain 4. Sense of personal inadequacy 3. Motor tension In addition to the factors, the study found no sig nificant correlations betveen test anxiety and school j achievement for the fourth or fifth grade hoys. Moderate | to high correlations vere fonnd for the fourth grade girls i • ■ ■ ! land for the sixth grade students. j i In Feldhusen's study (1962) 120 children vere divided' 1 • ! I into three ability groups. The lov group ranged in VISC ; i IQ of 56 to 81, the average group ranged from IQ 90 to 110, j | ' ! and the high group ranged from IQ 120 to 146. Significant- ! ’ i I I ly greater mean CMAS scores vere found in the lov IQ group than in the average or high. The mean differences hetveen !the average and high groups vere not significant. Feld husen's findings, in part, support the underlying rationale i of the CMAS. He concluded that lov achievers are highly ; _ i anxious pupils. In a learning situation their greater anxiety vas conceived to be debilitating, and an inter- j ference vith the learning process. In a recent doctoral study, Ahlem (1962) reported that the CMAS mean scores vere not related to achievement, ability, or socioeconomic status. He concluded that the i CMAS vas a useful addition to the repertoire of research instruments. Vithin the last tvo years, a number of investigators ; I ; have employed the CMAS vith children in the primary as veil j as in the junior high grade levels. Phillips (1962) i ; adapted the CMAS to a sample of 759 seventh grade pupils. i i He reported that subjects vith lov anxiety scores had I higher achievement ox^ the California Achievement Tests and 42 on the Sequential Test of Educational Progress than subjects vith high anxiety scores. Sex differences in level of anxiety vere also found. Males had lover anxiety scores than females. In short, his findings indicated that lov I achievement vas associated vith high anxiety females. Crandall (1962) employed the CMAS vith a group of jfirst, second, and third graders. He found fev significant I sex differences on the CMAS. In addition, his results j ! ( shoved that the CMAS did not predict the children's achievement performances in any of the four achievement situations studied. Erickson (1963) administered the CMAS to 135 seventh grade Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils. His re- ! suits revealed no significant mean score differences betveen ! I the tvo ethnic groups. Erickson also found no significant mean differences betveen the CMAS and socioeconomic status or achievement test scores. Generally speaking, there has been some question re garding the use of the manifest anxiety concept as an indi cator of motivation. I . I Doubt remains as to vhether the CMAS primarily re- ; I fleets properties ordinarily associated vith emotional or motivational behavior. The relationship of these tvo j variables are so intertvined that it is nearly impossible | i to predict that lover motivation means poor achievement. j Such confusion leads to the conclusion that the CMAS does, 43 to soie extent, Measure motivation. However, it seems clear that either the CMAS is a very crude measure of emotions, or, vhat is more likely, it is an inadequate measure of the complex motivational phenomena. Other related non-projective tests Geist Picture Interest Inventory (GPII).— This inven tory (Geist, 1959) is used primarily for voaetional planning or other related guidance activities. The GPU is purported to study patterns of motivational forces related to inter ests as veil as the interests themselves. It consists of 44 triads of drawings depicting various representative occupations and hobbies. It may also be administered to junior and senior high school pupils both for screening and instructional purposes. Geist (1961), in an attempt to cross-validate his GPU, gave the inventory to 160 eleventh and tvelfth graders. Positive but lov correlations vere found betveen teachers* marks in given subjects and scores on comparable scales of the inventory. The results sug gested that the GPU might be better used as a supplement to other kinds of objective tests. The newness of the GPU is attested to by the fact that research on the instrument is relatively limited. The sociological implications of the GPII are enormous. Cross- cultural utility of the inventory is made possible by the standardization of the inventory vith Spanish-speaking 44 pupils in Puerto Rico and vith the fact that the drawings of the occupations are represented pietorially rather than verbally. Lane Inspired Motivation Level Indicator.— This test is used primarily vith high school, college, and adult popu lations. It vas purported by the author (Lane, 1961) to measure nine psychological needs. The test consists of 84 groups of three statements describing the activity or posi tion students prefer most and the activity or position they like least. The theoretical perspective of the test vas evolved from the psychological need theories of Maslov, Murray, and Rath. The basic need theory assumes that each individual possesses certain psychological needs vhich can motivate his behavior. Such needs correspond to tension states vithin the individual's cognitive domain. These states of tension are reduced vhen the individual selects a given course of action. Lane stated that vith the use of his test an individual may obtain adequate psychological - need reduction vhen he is directed into a course of action that is in line vith his ability. In his investigation, Lane (1961) found significant relationships betveen need satisfaction and occupational choice. His sample consisted of 486 freshmen at the Uni versity of Bridgeport. Other than this one study, there has been no confirmatory research to establish the relia bility or validity of Lane tests over any given period of tine. In view of the comparatively recent development of the testy extreme caution concerning the use of Lane's test is indicated. Projective tests McClelland's Test of Achievement Motivation.— McClel— land and associates (1953)f Atkinson (1958)y and their co- vorkers have published a sizable body of literature dealing vith the assessment of human motivation. These vorkers have challenged the doctrine of functionally equivalent motives that vary only in intensity. They have attempted to demonstrate that knowledge of one type of motivation allows accurate prediction of goal—directed behavior that is not predictable from a knowledge of other types of motivation. In an early study, Atkinson and McClelland (1948) dealt with the establishment of valid principles for inter preting projective protocols and the development of an ob jective method of estimating the strength of motivation from a set of Murray's Thematic Apperception Test Cards (1943). They tested the theory that the intensity of moti vation influences imaginative productions. As a result of their earlier experimental work, McClelland and his associates (1953) devised a very prom ising technique for measuring achievement motivation that involves an analysis of the content of imaginative picture- interpretation stories for scoring elements or categories. 46 Scoring the cards for n—achievement is accomplished by treating the story for each TAT card as a unit and noting the presence or absence of an identification of an achieve** ment goal, the mode of attack to adjustment and solution, the goal status and outcomes, anticipation goal reaction, environmental and personal barriers and supports, and thema. Further refinements of McClelland*s methods of measuring motivation vere reported by Atkinson (1958) five years later. Since 1953 there has been an abundance of literature concerning McClelland's technique of assessing motivation. The majority of the experimental vork has centered around the measurement of achievement motivation by means of achievement imagery and its correlation vith academic per formance. McClelland and associates (1953) have developed a theoretical framevork vhich portrays achievement motiva tion as: (1) competition vith a standard of excellence, (2) unique accomplishment, and (3) long term involvement. Similar characteristics vere adopted by Farquhar (1963) to assist in developing the underlying rationale for his M— Scales. Prior to 1957, a total of approximately ninety investigators utilized McClelland's technique in one vay or another (Atkinson, 1958). Since 1957, about tvelve additional research papers reporting the use of McClelland's n-achievement motive vere cited by Anklam (1962). Following her comprehensive review of the literature, Anklam concluded that McClelland*s Test of Achievement Motivation shows definite promise of being reliable and valid for assessing the achievement motives of school-age children* | Recently, Christie and Lindauer (1963), in their | discussion of McClelland*s n-achievement motive, stated I that in view of the existing contradictions among research | reports, a great deal more research employing better con- | trol measures is required on the relationship between i achievement imagery and academic achievement. In another report, London and Rosenhan (1964) ex- i pressed the concern over the fact that past studies of achievement motivation have been limited primarily to male i i groups. The authors indicated that more research with I i j female samples was warranted, since the findings from j available studies vere, for the most part, ambiguous and inconclusive, | | Sinee most of the studies of n-achievement have j dealt almost exclusively vith male college students and i | adults, more studies of McClelland*s Test of Achievement Motivation with school-age children of both sexes are in dicated, This conclusion was based partly on the fact that from 1962 to the present, investigations of n-aehievement vith elementary and secondary students have been almost non-existent. Even prior to 1962, very few available 48 studies have been reported. III. CONTEMPORARY STUDIES OP MEXICAN-AMERICAN CHILDREN AND YOUTH In this section attention is given to research studies bearing directly on the comparisons betveen Anglo- American and Mexican—American pupils in each of the follov- ing areas: personal traits, intelligence, achievement, and motivation. The literature reviewed is also confined to studies reported vithin the last five years. Summary of earlier investigations may be found in the rather extensive revievs of the literature by Arsenian (1945), Brown (1956), Demos (1959), and Cline (1961). Since Brown's (1956) comprehensive investigation, there has been a noticeable shift of emphasis in recent research studies reported. From the pioneer study of Shel don (1924) to Brown's (1956), most of the studies have dealt vith the comparative performance of Anglo-American and Spanish-speaking pupils on group and individual achieve ment and intelligence tests. With few exceptions, the re sults of the survey of literature have demonstrated a con sistent superiority of Anglo-American subjects on most of the measures of intelligence and achievement. On the other hand, Demos (1959) reported considerable inconsistency in his literature of Mexiean-American attitudes compared to those of Anglo-American subjects. There vere indications that the cultural environment as veil as those of a conative nature may have direct influence in any measurement of in telligence and achievement. The assumption that there may be a positive relationship betveen certain cultural vari ables and achievement vas examined by Cline (1961). How ever, much of the literature concerning the non-intellectual characteristics of Mexican-American subjects have only re cently been systematically explored. Since Brown*s study (1956) there have been approxi mately fourteen empirical comparative investigations of the cognitive and non-cognitive aspects of Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils. The literature for this given period is revieved in chronological sequence vith samplings from as many different areas as are pertinent to this study. Demos (1959) developed and validated an attitude seale for the measurement of certain defined issues tovard education. He administered the scale to a stratified sample of 210 Anglo-American and 105 Mexican-American boys and girls in seventh to twelfth grades. One of his significant findings shoved the presence of more agreement than dis agreement in the investigated attitudes betveen the Anglo- American and Mexican-American subjects. He also reported the fact that there appeared to be an abrupt change in the direction of less desirable attitudes at the ninth and tenth grade levels for both ethnic groups. 50 Six significant differences of attitude vere found that could be attributed to membership in the Mexican- American ethnic group* These vere: 1* The importance of an elementary school education 2* The staff*s concern about students 3* The desirability of dropping out of school 4. The value of a college education 5* The desirability of a gang 6. The importance of good attendance Demos' results also shoved that increases in intelli gence or achievement test scores likevise brought about cor responding significant increases in desirable attitudes to ward education* In one of his recommendationst Demos strongly sug gested the use of attitude scales in group guidance or orientation course activities in the school setting* Spanish and English versions of the Wechsler Intelli gence Test for Children vere attempted by Holland (1960) vith 36 Spanish-speaking children in grades one through five. The special Spanish-English adaptation of the V1SC yielded a significant mean IQ 10*0 higher than the English version in the first grade and gradually decreased to a non-significant mean IQ 1*7 higher in the fifth grade* Holland concluded that the language barrier vas the primary reason for the lover scores in the first grade* He indi cated that added schooling vould decrease the effects of the language handicap* He attributed the language barrier to the lack of acculturation due to lov verbal development in both Spanish and English* i j An interesting investigation vas carried out by i ! : t Jensen (1960). He examined the attendance record and the I ! teachers' marks of 243 ninth grade pupils for the three | ; | preceding school years. Ninety-four per cent of his 243 |subjects vere of Mexican-American descent and the remaining j I six per cent consisted of Orientals and Negroes. Jensen • i : !found that high attendance vas related to high grades. | ! ;Girls outnumbered the boys three to one in the top B-plus achievement groups. Boys dominated the middle and lover achievement groups. The typical grade-point average vas C : i for the sample studied. Jensen concluded that lov achievers; tended not only to fare poorly in school, but vere also likely to have the highest truancy records. Marcoux (1961), in examining the individual case ; histories of 73 non-Mexican and Mexican pupils in Yentura County, found that the pupils of Mexiean descent vere 1.7 years older than their ethnic counterpart. The parents of : the Mexiean pupils tended also to concentrate in the lover socioeconomic strata of the community. On both the ¥1SC : i : I | and Bimet, the Mexican pupils obtained lover mean IQ's than the non-Mexicans. The differences in mean IQ tended j to disappear vhen Mexican pupils vere equated vith nom- i ! Mexican pupils on a socioeconomic basis. Marcoux found | no physiological data vhich could distinguish the Mexiean from the non-Mexican pupils. One of Marcoux's conclusions ! 52 ! ;dealt vith the tremendous challenge vhich the obvious i socioeconomic and psychological handicaps pose for the Mexican child as veil as for society* Using 127 Spanish-speaking pupils vith average ages of 10*2 and 8*3, and Anglo-American pupils vith an average age of 9*4, Stablein, Villey, and Thomson (1961) adminis tered the Davis-Eells (culture-fair) test, the Metropolitan Achievement test, and a fifty-word vocabulary test* They found that the Spanish-American pupils scored significantly lover than the Anglo-American pupils on all three of the measures investigated* Cline (1961) administered the Otis and the Stanford Achievement tests to 157 Anglo-American and 197 Spanish- I American pupils vho had been previously classified into three groups according to their fathers' socioeconomic ; ratings* The Anglo-American group vas superior in all variables vhen the total groups vere compared. Cline also found that in the lov socioeconomic level fev significant differences existed betveen the tvo ethnic groups* In the middle and high socioeconomic levels, significant mean differences vere found in practically all the variables measured* Cline concluded in this study that socioeconomic status functions greatly in sehool achievement* He recom mended that more adequate tests and teaching materials be ! procured for pupils of varying socioeconomic levels, es- : pecially if they are members of the Spanish-speaking ; I !Minority group. j | Sheldon published a report in 1961 dealing primarily i j vith the early school leaver of Mexican-American descent. ! ! I Using the pupils of three Los Angeles City senior high i i schools as his subjects, Sheldon found that Mexican-American i ' i ! pupils are more likely to drop out of school than are stu- j i ! i ' i i dents of other ethnic groups. Hovever, he discovered that j • ' ! Mexican-American pupils are more likely to stay in school if ; i I | other ethnic groups are in a majority. Ho also found that : areas of lov socioeconomic levels furnished a dispropor- : ! tionate number of drop-outs. In addition, Sheldon noted that there vere no significant differences in the drop—out 1 i rate betveen the Anglo-American and Mexican-American senior high school boys and girls. Also, in 1961 Jensen reported a study vherein he tested the hypothesis that Anglo-American and Mexican-American fourth and sixth graders equated on the CTMM total IQ vould perform equally as veil on three direct measures of learning ability (serial learning, immediate recall, and paired-associate learning tasks). The most significant finding is that on the particular learning tasks : i used in the study, Mexican-American pupils vith lov IQ's I I performed significantly better than Anglo-American pupils | of comparable ability. In fact, he found the lov IQ Mexican-American subjects performing as veil as the high IQ I i j pupils in both the Anglo-American and Mexican-American j groups. Jensen concluded that the IQ in the Anglo-American i w t | group is a Talid index of learning potential but is more | i . ! |than likely to discriminate against the Mexican-American pupil. 1 i Peck and Galliani (1962) administered the CTMM and j a "Guess Who" device to 1217 seventh graders. They found that Anglo-American pupils, regardless of IQ level, vere i ; i i i significantly more socially visible than their Spanish speaking counterparts. They also found that seventh graders, regardless of ethnic background, of above average intelligence vere significantly more socially visible than those vith belov average intelligence. ' ' | An unique and veil-controlled approach to achievement! i I * ' test differences betveen 21 Anglo-American and 33 Mexican- i American seventh grade pupils vas made by Faught (1962). Students vere selected and matched on CTMM total IQ, i ! chronological age, four or more years of residence in school district, sex, and socioeconomic status. No signi ficant mean score differences on each of the six CAT achievement sub-tests vere found betveen the Anglo-American ; and Mexican-American boys and girls. i ' Among the more fruitful of recent studies utilizing iindividual intelligence tests vas conducted by Corvin (1962). She administered the W1SC, the Peabody Picture ! : . i Vocabulary Test (PPVT), and the Columbia Mental Maturity Scale to three groups of 34 fourth, fifth, and sixth grade : pupils of Anglo-American and Mexican-American descent. All 55 the groups vere matched on age, grade, and CTMM total IQ* Mo significant mean score differences vere found betveen the tvo ethnic groups on the Columbia and VXSC Performance tests, but very significant mean differences vere found on the V1SC Verbal and Peabody Picture Vocabulary tests. On the basis of her findings, Corwin concluded that perfor mance type intelligence tests give a better estimate of a Mexican-American pupil's potential ability than verbal or language type intelligence tests* G-ill and Spilka (1962) used the California Psycho logical Inventory, the Siegel Manifest Hostility Scale, the Jevel Anxiety Adaptation Scale, and a modification of Shoben's Parent Attitude Survey Test in a study of 30 achieving and 30 under-achieving Mexican-^American junior and senior high school students* All the groups vere matched on age, sex, grade, courses taken, and Otis IQ* Achievement level vas determined by grade—point average scores* Significant mean differences betveen the tvo GrPA groups in anxiety vere found— under-aehievers expressed more anxiety and less display of socially acceptable means of coping vith anxiety than achievers* No significant differences betveen the sexes vere found on the manifest anxiety test* In general, achievers expressed less hos tility, more social maturity, intellectual efficiency, and conformity to rules* In 1963 Helmstadter et al, reported an investigation r ........ ■ " ' ..~~ 56 i | of the test performance of first and second grade children ! i i | of Spanish-American and Indian bilingual home backgrounds. ' They found definite indications of academic and intellectual^ : | | retardation on all six of the tests administered. The j i ; ; authors concluded from their findings that test performance ; ! ! i vas associated directly vith socioeconomic level and j i • ! i eurvilinearly vith the bilingual factor. I I ! Erickson (1963) in a recent study compared the per formance of 137 Mexican-American and vhite seventh grade pupils on the Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale (CMAS). ^ The author failed to define the term "vhites" in his study. i He found no significant differences betveen CMAS means for the vhites and Mexican-American groups. He also found no ; significant mean score differences on the total CAT battery | ;betveen the tvo ethnic groups investigated. IV. SUMMARY ; The reviev of the literature in this chapter served as background material for the present study. Clarifica- i ■ | tion of the many complex concepts of motivation vas attempted from the frame of reference of each theorist.' j examined. The need for a unifying concept of motivation i vhich might facilitate greater comprehension of man's con structive and long range behavior vas indicated. The literature also indicated the existence of a ilimited number of projective and non-projactive instruments ; 57 for assessing the motives of school-age children and youth Each instrument vas described vith particular attention to its applicability vith children and youth. Of all the mo tivation instruments describedt Sveney and Cattell*s moti vation test appeared to hold out promise as the best singl indirect measure of a pre-adolescent's latent interests. The present chapter has likevise reviewed the liter ature bearing on the personal traits and comparative achievement and intelligence of the tvo ethnic groups em ployed in this study. Special emphasis vas given to inves tigations completed vithin the last five years. In the research literature cited, the vriter could find no study vhich dealt specifically vith the motivation of Mexican- American pupils. CHAPTER III PROCEDURES, SOURCES OF DATA, AND INSTRUMENTS USED From the reviev of the literature on motivation, it vas evident that none of the studies reported attempted to make any direct comparison of motivation betveen pupils of Mexican-American and Anglo-American descent. In most cases, there vas no mention of the motivational variables that may account for the significant differences in standardized achievement test scores betveen the tvo ethnic groups in vestigated. The present study represents an effort to con trol or account for these motivation and achievement vari ables. The general procedures folloved in the study vere briefly described in Chapter I. This chapter presents more specific information on the instruments used, together vith additional data relating to the school and community back ground of the sample. Descriptions of certain variables investigated along vith that of the sample selected are also included. Finally, presented in this chapter are the 58 59 considerations relating to the administration procedures, followed by a brief account of the method used in the statistical treatment of the data* I. DESCRIPTION OP THE SETTING OF THE STUDY Community At the time of the study the pupil population in the unified school district vas 8225* An estimated population of 29,849 (U*S* Census, 1960) lived vithin that portion of the city in vhich the school district vas located* The designated community vas considered to be a prime location for residential growth* It lay vithin the labor market encompassing East Los Angeles and Vhittier* Employment characteristics of this labor market vere ranked in the vholesale and retail trades (Pico Rivera Digest. 1961)* Schools There were nine schools in the unified school dis trict* One vas a primary school consisting of grades from kindergarten to third. Five vere elementary schools housing grades from kindergarten to sixth* Tvo inter mediate schools served as feeder schools to the district's lone high school, vhich consisted of grades from nine to twelve* One of the tvo intermediate schools had only seventh and eighth grade pupils* The other had three classes of sixth grade pupils in addition* The sample for 60 the study was drawn from all eighteen eighth grade classes from the two intermediate schools* 11. DESCRIPTION OF THE SIMPLE INVESTIGATED The sample Table 3 shows the distribution of the sample vith respect to sex, ethnic group, and achievement level* For the total sample, regardless of ethnic grouping, there were 22 more boys than girls* Although there were equal numbers of Anglo-American boys and girls, there were also 22 more girls than boys in the Mexican-American group. In the total sample there were 10 more Mexican-American than Anglo- American pupils* It is also evident from Table 3 that there were twice as many Mexican-American low achievers as Anglo- American* In contrast to this finding, in the high achiev ing group the ratio is three to two in favor of the Anglo- American sample* In the middle achieving group the ratio of pupils from the ethnic groups was similar* Regardless of ethnic group membership, girls out numbered the boys in the high achieving group by a tatio of about three to two* In the low achieving group there were 12 more boys than girls* In the middle achieving group the boys exceeded the girls by 6* ¥hen the ethnic factor is considered, the Anglo- American girls outnumbered the Mexican-American girls in 61 TABLE 3 DISTRIBUTION OF EIGHTH GRADE SAMPLE BY SEX, ETHNIC GROUP, AND ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL Ethnic Group Sex Low Achievement Middle Level High Total Boys 27 47 33 107 Anglo- Girls 13 33 61 107 American Both 40 80 94 214 Bdys 48 30 23 101 Mexican- Girls 50 38 35 123 American Both 98 68 58 224 Total 138 148 152 438 62 ike high achieving group by almost two to one. In the low achieving group the Mexican-American girls outnumbered the Anglo-American girls by almost four to one. In the middle achieving group there were five more Mexican-American girls than Anglo-American. The numerical differences of Anglo-American and Mexi can-American boys in the middle and high achieving groups were not as large as for the girls. However, there were still more pupils of Anglo-American than Mexican-American descent in the middle and high achievement levels. As in the case of the girls, the Mexican-American boys exceeded the Anglo-American boys in the low achieving group by almost tvo to one. Previous school experience For the study, the pupils selected must have re ceived their seventh grade schooling the previous year in the district. This was done in an attempt to obtain the first and second semester seventh grade teachers* marks and citizenship marks in all the subjects taken for all the pupils in the selected sample, in addition to their eighth grade teachers* marks and citizenship marks. It was judged that such a restriction would increase the validity of teachers* marks when the total of three semesters of teachers* marks was used as the criterion of academic achievement. III. DESCRIPTION OF CERTAIN VARIABLES INVESTIGATED j I ! : I ; !Socioeconomic status ! i Since past studies hare shown that differences in cultural experiences hare been found to affect a pupil's ; I attitude toward certain educational issues (Demos, 1959) land his school achievement (Cline, 1961), this investigator j ! ! selected as his measure of socioeconomic status the Varner, Meeker, and Eells Revised Occupation Seale (1949). The particular instrument was chosen because it has been used very successfully to assess the socioeconomic level : i of the ethnic minority group investigated in this study (Brown, 1956; Demos, 1959; Cline, 1962). Table 73 presents the Revised Scale for Rating Occupation. . ! Citizenship marks According to Martinson and Smallenburg (1959), edu cation in the academic areas is not the only purpose of edu-| i cation. Unquestionably, academic learnings are still highly | i , important, but more important is the constructive and co- ioperative use of those learnings. In short, the teacher :should be vitally concerned with the kind of attitudes j | pupils develop toward themselves and others. j i ; Other investigators such as White and Harris (1961) i j have observed that pupils who do better are apt to adjust themselves better in school than those who are not. Simi larly, Ahman and Glock (1959) have also noted that the 64 teacher1s judgement of a pupil*a success or failure in class tends to influence the teacher's evaluations of the pupil's behavior traits. They found that teachers invariably asso ciated lov achievement vith deviant behavior. Einally, Biessman (1962) in his discussion of the culturally deprived child, concluded that teacher's marks are definitely related to the pupil's classroom adjustment. Since the pupil's personal-social adjustment is con sidered an effective barometer of successful school achieve ment , this study used the semester's citizenship marks re ceived by the pupil from each of his teachers as the cri terion of general deportment in the class. The citizenship marks vere converted from the report cards as follovs: 2 points for a semester rating of outstanding, 1 point for satisfactory, and 0 for needs to improve. The total points accumulated for the three semesters vere divided by the total number of courses taken. In this vay the average of the citizenship marks could be used as the best estimate of the pupil's degree of conformity, adjustment, and maturity • ^ in the school environment. Grade-point average The grade-point averages (GFA.) vere computed from the total of all teachers' marks for the three designated semesters. The point scale used vas 4 points for a semester grade of A; 3 points for a B, 2 points for a C, 1 point for 65 a D, and 0 for an F. To obtain the pupil’s grade-point average for this study, total points accumulated vere divi ded by the total number of courses taken. Although a number of methods are employed in identi fying pupils in terms of their achievement level, according to Pippert (1963) only tvo approaches are generally used. He stated that one common procedure is to employ an achieve-, i ' I ment test score as the criterion of school achievement and j j | I the second is to employ a grade-point average for the | | ! achievement criterion. The second criterion of achievement (GPA) vas used in this study in preference to an achievement test score for the reasons stated below; First, authors such as Pippert (1963), guinn and |Szuberla (1963), Walter (1962), Cosgrove (1962), Hackett | |(1961), and Bloom and Peters (1961) have steadfastly stated j |that in spite of the deficiencies of GFA as the criterion ! of achievement, the grade-point average is still the best i indicator of classroom performance. In his review of the !literature, Hackett (1961) pointed out that critics such ; as Russell (1955) and Carter (1952) have over-emphasized ! the weaknesses of teachers' marks. Bloom and Peters' study (1961) of the reliability of the GPA have supported i Hackett'a position rather well. Their findings have shown ! that reliability coefficients as high as .85 are not un- |usual. They concluded that teachers* marks are valid and |meaningful and if properly used cam have far-reaching 66 effects on academic motivation* Berkshire (1961) gives support to the second reason underlying the use of the GPA in this study when he pointed out the fact that certain minority groups will do better in school than their test scores predict* He concluded that test data used to determine level of achievement often in dicated under-measurement (problem of measurement). lates and Pidgeon (1957) in their study of various ethnic groups also found teachers' marks to be the best single predictors of secondary school achievement surpassing in superiority all the standardised tests used in their investigation* Finally, Grill and Spilka (1962) in a study of some of the non-intellectual correlates of academic achievement of lover-class achieving and under-achieving Mexican-Ameri- ean secondary school students equated their sample by the use of the GPA as the criterion of achievement* To this investigator's knowledge, Gill and Spilka are the first to use the criterion of achievement in studying the non-intel lectual correlates of academic achievement of Mexican-Amer ican pupils. No studies yet available have attempted to validate achievement test scores against teachers' marks with pupils of Mexican-American descent* Frager's study (1961) of the academic achievement of whites and American Indians is perhaps the only other study that compared a pupil from a given ethnic minority group with his ethnic counterpart from an existing dominant group0 It is worthy of note that Frager also used the GPA as his criterion of achievement. In a recent doctoral study, Walter (1962) summarized the findings of many regarding the usefulness of teachers1 marks when he pointed out the fact that the junior high school GrPA vas the best indicator of high school success (•845) and that the GPA factor had represented 88 per cent of the total multiple correlation of all variables used in his study. IV. DESCRIPTION OF THE INSTRUMENTS USED Personal-social data The Student Information Sheet vas first designed by the investigator and then submitted for try-out and criti cism of wording to a number of individuals representing the viewpoints of students, teachers, counselors, and adminis trators. The assistance of a local lay committee of mem bers of Mexican-American descent was also solicited in re vising the Student Information Sheet. The over-all reac tion of both groups regarding its usability was favorable. Suggestions for clarifying the wording of a few items were incorporated in the final form. A copy of the form appears in Table 4. At the top of the form, beneath the identification data, appeared a brief explanation of the purpose of the form. As may be seen by this statement, altruistic motives 68 TABLE 4 EL RANCHO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 6ufdance A Research Department STUDENT INFORMATION SHEET Name _ _ School Directions: To bring your student records up-to-date before your reg istration for high school next year* will you please fill in the information requested below as completely as pos sible. I. School attended in the seventh grade: (circle one) Mary Atelier. North Park Other 2. Check with an (x) the language, other than English, that you (not your parents) speak at home. ___ French ___ German Greek ___ I ta I i an ___ Japanese Russian ___ Spanish None Other 3. Check with an (x) the frequency with which you use the above language at home. Always More than half the time ___ Half the time ___ Less than half the time Never 4. fATttSB mother Birthplace (What country?) e.g. U.S.A.; Canada; Mexico; etc. 5. Present occupation (type of work) __________________ 6. Previous occupation before coming to U.S.A. (if any) . _ _ _ _ 7. Circle highest grade attended in (Elementary) school by parent 123436 123456 (Secondary) 7 8 9 10 II 12 7 8 9 10 it 12 (College) 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 8. In what country was the highest grade completed? (e.g. U.S.A.; Canada; Mexico; etc.) ______________ 69 and anonymity vere not appealed to for cooperation* Data on the information sheet vas obtained for each eighth grade pupil enrolled in the tvo intermediate schools* The infor mation sheet vas completed by the pupil under the direction of each core teacher during the month of April, 1963* The amount of previous school experience vas determined by the pupil's response to question 1, vherein he vas asked to circle the school attended in the seventh grade* This in formation regarding the pupil's enrollment in the seventh grade during the previous year vas also used for cross validating the residence requirement and the availability of teachers' marks for each pupil in selecting the sample for the study* The item calling for the language spoken in the home vas structured so that each pupil of Mexican-American des cent vould indicate by a checkmark the relative amount of Spanish and English spoken in his home by the pupil and not by his siblings, parents, relatives, or friends* The bi lingual schedule stated above describing the language spoken in the home is similar to that used by Brovn (1956) and Esparza (1955)* Five other factors in addition to the degree of bi lingualism vere also requested on the Student Information Sheet* These factors vere: the birthplace of both parents, their present occupation, previous occupation if foreign- born, level of education, and country in vhich the 70 schooling vas completed. Achievement test The California Achievement Test (CAT), Form V, Junior High Level, 1957 Edition, vas the instrument used to measure achievement. The authors claim high content validity for this test, hut give no supporting evidence. Construct vali-j dity is reported in terms of correlation coefficients of the California tests ranging from .56 to .94, vith corresponding tests of other achievement batteries. Kuder-Richardson for mula 21 reliability coefficients ranged from .83 to .95* i In addition to a total score, vhich can be recorded as a grade equivalent score, the California Achievement Tests provide nine other scores: reading vocabulary, reading i ; comprehension, and total reading; arithmetic reasoning, | arithmetic fundamentals, and total arithmetic; and mechanics i | of English and grammar, spelling, and total language. i Intelligence test The California Test of Mental Maturity (CTMM), Junior High Level, Short Form, 1957 Edition, vas the in telligence test used. This test yields a language, non language, and a total IQ. The general purpose of the test is for the prognosis of scholastic ability. To substantiate i this purpose the manual presents validity coefficients vith individual and other group intelligence tests ranging from •50 to .99* Reliability coefficients range from •72 to .95 j 71 by the split-half and test-retest methods. Motivation test The School Motivation Analysis Test Research Edition (SMAT) is the most recent development in the objective measurement of motivation by Sveney and Cattell in 1961. SMAT (1961) is published by the Institute for Personality and Ability Testing, Champaign, Illinois. It is described as a paper-and-pencil motivation test that may be used vith equal effectiveness in group or individual situations. SMAT combines in a single instrument fifteen interest traits of adolescent motivation that had been previously identified by factor analytic procedures over the past ten years. The total set of fifteen interest traits is intended to provide a comprehensive survey of current drive strength levels, attitudes, interest attachments, and specific moti vations of subjects ranging in ages from eleven to sixteen years. Table 5 lists the names of the SMAT interest factors, accompanied by representative items to describe the kind of motivational behavior each interest factor vas designed to reflect. Each of the interest factors is assessed on four measurement devices containing a total of 364 test items, namely (SMAT Manual, 1961): Hov Much and Hov Many— measures degree of orientation (73 items) tovard successful attainment of goals (the person desiring a certain end tends to believe vhat helps that vorks). , TABLE 5 72 RESULTS OF SIMPLE STRUCTURE ROTATION OF INTEGRATED AND UN INTEGRATED DYNAMIC STRUCTURES (CATTELL, 1961I Motivational Variables Motivational Factor Components Integrated Unintegrated Associated Interest Items Intrinsic Interests I* Assertion 2« SensualI fry 3. Sex 4. Gregarious 5. Narcissism 6. Constructive 7# Protective 8® Curiosity 9. Aggression 10® Play fantasy II® Acquisition Acquired Interests 12® Self Sentiment 13® Super Ego 14® Religion 15® Patriotism .30 .32 •46 •44 .35 •46 .34 .34 .37 •38 •25 .54 .47 .33 .45 •41 .54 .34 •29 .37 •42 •31 .27 •26 •41 •28 •42 •40 •37 •39 •51 Read adventure comics ,04 seek class office •26 Have more holidays •26 Eat good food •19 Time with friend •35 Go to parties in couples •19 Games In groups •21 Time with my friends •26 Sexy clothing •40 Have handsome face and figure •21 Make projects •33 Take things apart •29 Manage siblings •12 I care for pets •20 Paint pictures •46 Learn about the world •12 I fight other kids •28 U.S. beat enemies •34 See science fiction •19 Have possessions •35 Save money •08 Have nice clothes •20 Be popular •16 Have a good reputation •21 I show self control •08 Respect father •38 Go to church •33 Pray to God •22 U.S« protect small coun tries •27 My team to win 73 Memory (130 items) — measures degree of reoall of eue vords related to goals (the per son attends to and remembers vhat most interests him)« Information (73 items)— measures degree of successful attainment of means-ends acti vities (the person consistently interested in a field knovs more about it), Vord Association — measures degree of choice of cue (64 items) vords (spontaneous associations are in the direction of inter ests) . Two of the SMAT test devices, Information and ¥ord Association, are presumed by the author to measure con scious, deliberate interest while the other two, Memory and Hov Much and Hov Many, are intended to measure unconscious contributions to interest. It should be noted that each interest factor has tvo scores, the integrated score (con scious, or more conscious) and the unintegrated score (un conscious, or less conscious). Verification of the presence of these tvo large fac tors (integrated and unintegrated) have been achieved by factor analysis (Sveney, Cattell, 1962; Radeliffe, Sveney, 1960). Although the SMAT usually requires about ninety minutes to administer, no time limit is enforced on three of the four devices. The fourth device, the Memory test, is the only section which requires careful timing. Four lay-over keys are used in hand-scoring both sides of the answer sheet. The rav score for each of the fifteen 74 interest traits for both the integrated and unintegrated scores is ipsatized* Ipsatization of the four tests thus reduces the raw scores to the same metric* The SMAT manual (1961) describes the purpose of ipsative scores as follovs: • • • raw scores are ipsatized to correct for the dif ference between subjects resulting from either abilities or other systematic test behavior extraneous to the mo tivation to be measured * * * ipsatization has as its goal comparability of different subject soores despite the factors of intelligence, memory, and other factors not directly related to the drives in question* A total score is formed by the summation of the in tegrated and unintegrated scores* The combined single total score, integrated and unintegrated, represents the totality of the individual's motivational strength (con scious and unconscious) in a given course of action* Pupils scoring high on the test are purported to be highly moti vated; those scoring low are judged to be relatively in adequately motivated* SMAT validity*— Table 5 shows the results of the simple structure rotations for each dimension of motivation obtained by the factor analytic technique* Face validity, the careful inspection of test items, further supports the meaningfulness of the interest factors* The manual reports only one empirical validity study* This was completed by Connor (1961)* A comparison was made of the top 10 per cent of the seventh and eighth grade achievers with the bottom 10 per cent* Connor's findings based on 153 pupils showed the interest factor, super ego, to be correlated substan 75 tially vith high achievement and the gregarious and aggres sion factors vith poor achievers. The other tvelve interest factors revealed only chance relationships vith achievement level. A reviev of the literature revealed the fact that Shotvell (1961) used the objective P-technique to ascertain the degree of congruency of SMAT results vith clinical im pressions. Her subject vas a fifteen year old Negro female mentally defective patient. Shotvell concluded that the factor patterns revealed in her study vere similar to those reported by Cattell and Sveney (1961). She further indi cated that the derived motivational structures appeared in most aspects to be related to the subject*s observed func tional pattern of operation. A factorial study by Sveney (1962) vith 300 sixth grade pupils from several large and small urban areas in the Midvest uncovered the same factor structures as those described in the SMAT manual. Tvo cross-cultural comparisons of the SMAT vere attempted by Cattell, Sveney, and fiadcliffe (1960) in England and Cattell and Butcher (1964) in Australia. Both their studies substantiated the earlier findings obtained by Sveney (1961). As a further verification of the SMAT's construct validity, intercorrelations for each integrated and unin tegrated interest trait vere attempted by this investigator. The intercorrelation coefficients were derived from the test responses for the total sample of 438 Anglo-American and Mexican-American eighth grade pupils. Tables 6 and 7 pre sent the intercorrelations for the integrated and uninte— grated traits respectively. The obtained Pearson product- moment correlations were substantially the same as those obtained by Cattell (1961). The coefficients for the inte grated traits ranged from a —.26 to a .17. Only 21 out of 122 coefficients were significant at the .01 level of con fidence. The coefficients fcr the unintegrated traits ranged from a -.17 to a .14. Only 4 out of 122 coefficients were significant at the .01 level of confidence. In general, the SMAT intercorrelations for each interest factor measured were principally of a low negative or low positive nature and for the most part statistically non-significant. This is a desirable finding since it indicates that a pupil's response to each interest item plays a negligible role in influencing his response on other interest items. Since the preceding paragraphs merely touched upon the validity of SMAT8 s intrinsic and acquired interest fac tors , the reader interested in a more complete account of the validity of each motive is referred to the bibliography contained in the SMAT manual (1961). SMAT reliability.— According to Cattell (1964) there is a clear need for a redefinition and restructuring of the concept of reliability. His recent article, Validity and TABLE 6 INTERCORRELATIONS OF SMAT INTEGRATED TRAITS FOR 438 ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN EIGHTH GRADE PUPILS Motivational Variables * 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 Intrinsic Interests f. Assertion 1.00 -15 -03 -03 -09 -08 -19 -II -04 -Oi -03 00 -02 -01 -05 2. Sensuality 1.00 07 —06 03 -13 -03 —03 -19 -04 -03 02 03 01 -II 3. Sex 1.00 -09 16 -18 -01 -14 05 -21 15 -03 04 -07 -16 4. Gregarious 1.00 -17 03 -26 07 -07 02 -19 -15 -06 01 02 5. Narcissism 1.00 -18 05 -22 04 -15 09 -07 -09 -09 -II 6. Constructive 1.00 -16 06 -07 17 -12 -05 -01 -II -07 7. Protective 1.00 -12 -05 -15 -09 02 -02 -01 -Of 8. Curiosity 1.00 -II 09 -14 -04 -05 -02 -02 9. Aggression 1.00 -12 04 -17 -13 -14 03 10. Play Fantasy 1.00 -06 -02 -08 04 -08 II. Acquisition 1.00 04 -14 —06 -08 Acquired Interests 12. Self Sentiment 1.00 -06 08 -09 13. Super Ego 1.00 -08 01 14. Religion 1.00 -II 15. Patriotism 1.00 *Decimal points omitted. TABLE 7 INTERCQRRELATIONS OF SMAT UNINTEGRATED TRAITS FOR 438 ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN EIGHTH GRADE PUPILS Motivational Variables ' 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 Intrinsic Interests 1. Assertion 1.00 -08 -06 —09 -07 -04 00 -07 05 II -08 04 -08 00 -04 2. Sensuality 1.00 02 10 02 -06 -04 -12 —06 -12 02 -01 -09 -15 -04 3. Sex 1.00 09 H -07 -il -07 -06 -09 -01 -12 -13 -*2 02 4. Gregarious 1.00 —06 -17 -04 -07 —09 -II -10 -10 -06 00 -01 5. Narcissism 1.00 -05 -03 04 01 -10 01 00 -10 -06 -07 8. Constructive 1.00 -07 01 -06 02 -03 -02 08 -01 -06 7. Protective 1.00 03 -01 -II -01 01 -01 -08 -03 8. Curiosity 1.00 —08 -06 -05 13 06 04 -07 9. Aggression 1.00 08 -03 02 -04 -08 14 10. Play Fantasy 1.00 -04 -II -03 -02 -04 II. Acquisition 1.00 02 00 -04 -13 Acquired Interests 12. Self Sentiment I.00 -14 03 -13 13. Super Ego I.00 -01 -15 14. Religion I. 00 -12 15. Patriot I an 1.00 ■^Decimal points omitted. 79 Reliability: A Proposed More Basic Set of Concepts, re- ritalizes some of the basic issues of test consistency* Cattell advocates the notion that the total constancy of a test may be comprised of three logically and largely cor- relationally independent coefficients: reliability, homo geneity, and transferability. He emphasized the proposition that reliability is dependent more on the stability of the trait than on the test or battery. This concept of reliability integrates consistency more closely with validity measurement. The correlation coefficients reported in Tables 5 and 6 are examples of Cattell*s reliability concept. Likewise, Sveney*s study (1962) described in the previous discussion of validity is another example of the stability coefficient. Cattell*s homogeneity coefficient is dependent upon the sampling of test elements or items and people. This type of coefficient is customarily derived by the familiar random split-half, symmetrical, and equivalence techniques. The third coefficient, transferability, is dependent upon the adequate sampling of people from various cultures and occasions. Examples of the transferability phenomena are seen in Cattell, Sveney, and Radcliffe*s (i960) and Cattell and Butcher*s (1964) studies reported in the pre vious section on validity. It is thus not surprising that the SMAT*s authors (1961), Sveney and Cattell, provided only a brief statement 80 of the consistency aspect of the motivation test on page 8 of the manual* Other than this short sentence, "the relia bilities are the usual split—half and test-retest measures," additional confirmatory (quantitative) data relative to the homogeneity form of consistency vas lacking0 Reliability and transferability coefficients vere primarily the tvo types of consistency measures described repeatedly in the SMAT manual* Results of these tvo kinds of coefficients, reliability and transferability, vere cited in this section as veil as in the previous one on validity* To obtain a more recent operational estimate of Cat- tell*s reliability coefficient, this investigator re-admin— istered the SMAT seven months later to six of the original eighteen eighth grade classes* The sample consisted of a total of 175 pupils (87 boys and 88 girls)* The obtained Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient vas *371* This rather lov but significant coefficient (P <.01) is believed to reflect not only the effects of error variance but also in large part the effects of differing rates of maturation among adolescents during the seven months betveen testings * At the time this study vas initiated, no experimental vork regarding the homogeneity phase of the SMAT had been reported. Until this type of consistency coefficient be comes available, interpretations of results must be con sidered tentative* Hovever, the use of SMAT in this study 81 as a measure of motivation can be justified on the basis of its factorial validity described in the proceeding section* Furthermore, its use may also be justified by the absence of a better instrument* V. ADMINISTRATION AND SCORING- PROCEDURES The achievement, intelligence, and motivation tests vere administered in the eighth grade during the veek of October 22, 1962. All the tests vere administered by each eighth grade core teacher* Prior to the test administra tion each core teacher vas given an intensive in-service education program in testing so that the results obtained vould be as dependable as possible. In all instances testing vas conducted under the direct supervision of the guidance personnel at each school. The ansver sheets for the achievement and intelligence tests vere machine-scored by the Los Angeles County data processing department. The ansver sheets for the motivation tests vere hand-scored at the district guidance office. Grade equivalent scores for the achievement tests, intelligence quotients for the intelligence tests, and ipsative scores for the motivation tests for each pupil in the sample vere key punched on IBM cards• VI. STATISTICAL PROCEDURES Means, standard deviations, analysis of variance, 82 and F ratios vere the statistical tools in this study. In calculating the sampling and descriptive statistics for each of the criterion variables on Table 8, the BIMD 7 and the BIMD 14 programs vere employed on the 7094 computer of the Western Data Processing Laboratory, University of California, Los Angeles. The BIMD 14 program vas essentially a 2 x 3 x 2 general linear factorial design as described in the basic statistical model shovn in Table 8. The three factors vere: (1) ethnic group— Anglo-American and Mexican-American, (2) achievement level (GrPA)— low, middle, and high, and (3) sex— boy and girl. In an effort to test the homogeneity of variance vithin each cell, Bartlett's test as described by Guilford (1936) vas employed. Whenever the F test rejected the homogeneity hypo thesis, Kramer's (1936) multiple range test procedures for comparing individual means vith unequal number of replica tions vas used to determine vhich means vere yielding sig nificant differences. VII. SUMMARY The discussion of this chapter centered about the description of the sample, instruments used, and treatment of the data. Four different instruments used to collect the data vere cited and described: (1) the CAT and CTMM vhich investigated the standardized achievement and intel- 83 I 1 ! ANALYSIS OF VARIANCES A 2 x 3 x 2 Factorial Design I Independent Variables: Dependent Variables (cont'd.) Ethnicity ' Anglo-American Mexican-American Achievement Level CGPA) Lew achIever Middle achiever High achiever Sex f Boys Girls |Dependent Variables: Personal Traits | Age Grade-point average Citizenship marks Socio-economic status Parental education | Intellectual Traits j Language IQ Non-language IQ Total IQ Achievement Traits Reading vocabulary Reading comprehension Arithmetic reasoning Arithmetic fundamentals Mechanics of English SpelIing Total test Motivational Traits Total motivational test j Total Integrated i Total unintegrated | Intrinsic interests Acquired interests Assertion SensuaIi ty Sex Gregarious Narcissism Constructive Protect Jve Curlosi ty Aggression Play fantasy Acquisition Self sentiment Super ego Religion Patriotism A C H I E V E M E N T G R 0 U P S Low Middle High TABLE 8 BASIC STATISTICAL MODEL Boys Anglo- Mex.- Amer* Amer, Is Ethnic Groups 84 leetu&l aspects of the sample, (2) the SMAT vhich probed the fifteen integrated and unintegrated dimensions of motivation, and (3) the Student Information Sheet vhich provided certain pertinent personal and social data for each pupil. The analysis of variance technique vas utilized to facilitate the comparison of means scores and the F ratio to determine the significance of differences betveen means of groups of lov, middle, and high achievers for both ethnic groups, and to seek for interaction among factors. CHAPTER IT : i ! _ j COMPARISONS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN EIGHTH GRADE PUPILS ON CERTAIN SCHOOL RELATED VARIABLES | This chapter deals with those variables vhich are j directly or indirectly related to answering the questions ofj i Jthe study or in testing the hypotheses stated in Chapter I. ! | j j Ethnic group comparisons of the Anglo-American and Mexican- i j American samples on such personal traits as chronological !age, grade-point average, citizenship marks, socioeconomic i ; level, and parental education are presented. Also seen in this chapter are the mean score differences between the two !ethnic groups in intellectual and achievement characteris- 1 i ; |tics. The motivational traits for both ethnic groups are reported as the final important considerations of the • chapter. I. ETHNIC GROUP COMPARISONS REGARDLESS OF ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL j Personal traits Chronological age.— Frequently in ethnic minority |group studies the effect on academic performance of being 86 over-age or under-age is explored* In this study the re sults are reported in terms of chronological age grade placement (CAGF) scores* For purposes of simplification, Bistov's table (1962) for concerting CAGP scores to age in years and months is used. As seen in Table 9, the average age for both ethnic groups is 13 years and 6 months. The F ratio of 1.27 derived from the analysis of variance as shown in Table 29 for the Chronological Age Grade Placement scores is not significant at the five per cent level. Table 9 also shows the means and standard deviations for the chronological age scores for the Anglo-American and Mexican-American boys and girls. The non-significant F ratio of 0.03 indicates that none of the mean sex differ ences in chronological age scores between the two ethnic groups is significant beyond the five per cent level. The extent of the interaction effect between the ethnic and sex factors as shown in Table 29 is significant at the five per cent level. Further analysis by the Kramer's multiple range test (Kramer, 1936) shows inter group significant differences in mean chronological age scores between the Mexican-American girls and boys but none between the two ethnic groups. Thus it appears that the significant interaction variance for the age factor varies as a function of ethnicity and sex specifically for the Mexican-American group only. The present findings indicate that the chronological 87 TABLE 9 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE MEANS FOR THE PERSONAL TRAIT SCORES OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN EIGHTH GRADE GROUPS Sex Persona 1 Trait Scores Anglo-American Mexican-American Mean s.D. Mean S.D* Level of Signi ficance (N=1071 1 =1011 Boys: Chronological Agea 8.25 0.41 8.34 0.53 nsc Grade-point Average 2.54 0.55 2.31 0.59 ns Citizenship Marks 0.89 0.20 0.92 0.17 ns Socioeconomic Statusb 4.68 1.21 5.26 1.08 .01 Father's Education 11.61 3.11 9.91 2.67 .05 Mother9s Education 11.79 3.24 9.76 2.78 .01 <N=1071 (N<= 1231 Girls: Chronological Age® 8.31 0.42 8.21 0.41 ns Grade-point Average 2.88 0.59 2.41 0.61 ns Citizenship Marks 0.94 0.16 0.92 0.17 ns Socioeconomic Status^ 4.73 1.19 5.02 1.41 ns Father's Education 11.28 3.27 9.59 3.46 .01 Mother's Education 11.83 1.83 10.01 2.68 .01 (N=2141 CN=2241 Both: Chronological Age® 8.28 0.41 8.27 0.47 nsd Grade-point Average 2.71 0.60 2.36 0.61 ns Citizenship Marks 0.92 0.18 0.92 0.17 ns Socioeconomic Statusb 4.71 1.20 5.13 1.(2 .01 Father's Education 11.22 3.19 9.73 3.13 ns /Mother's Education 11.81 2.59 9.90 2.73 .01 i^Chronological age scores in terms of grade placement units :bSoci©economic status computed by the Warner, Meeker, and Eel Is Revised Scale for Rating Occupation ;cBased on the modified t ratios computed by Kramer's analysis test for the difference between means . dBased on the F ratios computed also for the difference between means i 88 age of the population sample falls within the normal eighth grade range of 12-9 to 13-8 proposed by Garlock (1960)* It is interesting to note that studies of Spanish speaking pupils (Tireman* 1951; Sorenson* 1954; Brown* 1956; Cline* 1961) as a group vere generally significantly older than their Anglo-American counterparts in contrast to the findings of this study* Grade-point average,— Table 9 presents the figures relating to the means and standard deviations of the grade- point averages for both the Anglo-American and Mexiean- I American pupils. There is a slight tendency for the Anglo- ' American pupils to receive higher mean grade-point average scores than the Mexican-American pupils* but the F ratio of 2,29 as shown on Table 30 is not significant at the five per cent level. Mean sex differences in grade-point averages between the two ethnic groups are also not significant at the five per cent level. The findings indicate that teachers' marks* as measured* do not differentiate the Anglo-American pupil from his ethnic counterpart. The results of this study agree in part with Knapp's (1960) and Jensen's (1960) findings with Mexican-American pupils as reviewed in Chapter II* but are at variance with the studies of Anastasi (1958)* Cosgrove (1960)* Klausmeier (1961)* Phillips (1962)* and Thorndike (1963)* all of whom found that girls received significantly higher total acade- mic grades than boys. | Citizenship marks.—-The citizenship marks of the two {ethnic gronps as depicted in Table 9 are notably similar. ! |The analysis of variance for the ethnicity effect as seen !in Table 31 shows an F ratio of 0.27, which did not reach |the necessary level of significance. i The over-all F ratio of 2.79 as shown in the same Table 31 for the sex effect is also not significant. The results therefore indicate that teachers' judgments of !classroom behavior of Anglo-American and Mexican-American |eighth grade pupils do not differ significantly. There are no available studies wherein present findings may be com- i pared. Socioeconomic status.— An examination of Table 9 !indicates that the over-all mean soeioeconomie ratings for :the Anglo-American group tend to be higher than that for i |the Mexican-American group. The very significant F ratio I of 9.28 as seen in Table 32 obtained from a comparison of !the two mean socioeconomic status ratings indicates that !the mean difference between the two ethnic groups is a real : | j one. Although the F ratio of 0.21 for the socioeconomic j • ! :status ratings between the Anglo-American and the Mexican- j ; ! American boys and girls is not significant, the results of j i i j the Kramer's range analysis test show significant mean differences at the One per cent level between the Mexican- American boys and the Anglo-American boys and girls respec- ! i j tively, but none between the Mexican-American girls and Anglo-American boys and girls. In general, the obtained results support the conclu sions of Manuel (1935), Brown (1956), Marcoux (1961), Cline i (1961), and Helmstadter (1963), all of whom found that sig nificant differences in socioeconomic status ratings I existed between the Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils. Anastasi (1958) pointed out the fact that to a certain extent differences in socioeconomie status also t ;represented the degree of assimilation of the minority ! |groups into the prevailing contemporary American culture. Father's level of education.— Table 9 summarizes the means and standard deviations for the father's level of i education for both ethnic groups. The over-all analysis of i variance in Table 33 shows an F ratio of 2.61,-which is not significant at the five per cent level. The results show that the mean of 11.22 years of schooling obtained for the i !fathers of the Anglo-American pupils do not differ signi- i :ficantly from the mean of 9*72 years of schooling for the !fathers of the Mexican-American pupils. It is interesting to note that very significant mean i I sex differences in father's level of education are found I jbetween the Anglo-American and Mexican-American boys and igirls in favor of the Anglo-American group by the Kramer's i •range test beyond the one per cent level. 91 Recent findings by Montez (1961), Marcoux (1961), and Saaora (1963) tended to differ vith the over-all findings of this study, but strongly support those obtained betveen the Anglo-American and the Mexican-American boys and girls. The three authors found that Mexican-American parents, as a group, have significantly lover mean level of education than the Anglo-American parents. Mother*s level of education.— Table 9 also shovs the means and standard deviations for the mother's level of edu cation for both ethnic groups. The over-all analysis of variance computed for the mean difference betveen the tvo ethnic groups in Table 34 shovs an F of 36.92 vhich is very significant beyond the one per cent level. Highly significant mean sex differences beyond the one per cent level also emerge from the comparisons of the Anglo-American group relative to the variable for the mother's level of education. Recent studies discussed in the preceding section on father's level of education are also applicable to the findings for the mother's level of education. Other related personal traits In the present section comparisons betveen the tvo ethnic groups are attempted for each of the personal traits obtained from the pupil responses to the Student Information Sheet vith respect to parental birthplace, place of parental 92 schooling, type of parental occupation held before coming to the United States, and the language spoken by the pupil at home. Parental birthplace.— Table 10 presents the findings relative to the country in vhich the parents of the Anglo- American and Mexican-American groups were born. For com parative purposes the investigator adapted Brovn’s (1956) approach to determine indirectly the generation status of the pupil population. The data shov that approximately six per cent of both parents in the Mexican-American group were born outside the country compared vith none for the Anglo- American group. In short, fev pupils in the tvo groups have parents vho are immigrants. The majority appears to hold at least second generation status. Comparisons be tveen the ethnic groups for the sexes reveal similar findings. Place of parental schooling.— Table 11 gives the findings regarding the country in vhich parental schooling vas completed. The results shov that less than five per cent of both parents in the Mexican-American group had com pleted their schooling outstide the United States, compared vith a little less than tvo per cent for the Anglo-American group. Eleven per cent of the Mexican-American group re ported that one parent had completed school outside the United States, vhereas one per cent of the Anglo-American group so reported. Countries outside the United States TABLE H> 93 A COMPARISON OF THE EIGHTH GRADE ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN GROUPS ON THE BASIS OF THE COUNTRY IN WHICH THE PARENTS WERE BORN Parental Ang!o-Amerlean Maxlean-American Birthplace* Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Boys: Beth parents United States IN* 1071 104 97*2 IN-101) 83 82.1 One parent outside the United States ~~ 2 1.9 13 12.9 Both parents outside the United States 0 0 4 4.0 Unknown 1 0.9 t 1.0 Total 107 100.0 lot 100.0 Girls: Both parents United States IN-1071 96 89.8 IN-123) 94 76.5 One parent outside the United States 8 7.4 19 15.4 Both parents outside the United States 0 0 9 7.3 Unknown 3 2.8 1 0.8 Total 107 100.0 123 100.0 Both: Both parents United States IN-2141 200 93.6 IN-224) 177 79.3 One parent outside the United States 10 4.6 32 14.) Both parents outside the United States 0 0 11 • 9.7 Unknown 4 1.8 2 0.9 Total 214 100.0 224 100.0 #The format for this table was adopted, in part, from Brown's study 119561. TABLE fl 94 A COMPARISON OF THE EIGHTH GRADE ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN- AMERICAN GROUPS ON THE BASIS OF THE COUNTRY IN WHICH PARENTAL SCHOOLING WAS COMPLETED Sex Place of Parental Education8 Anglo-American Number Per Cent Mexican-American Number Per Cent Boys: Both parents United States (N= 103 107) 96.4 (H= 37 ion 86.0 One parent outside the United States 1 0.9 7 7.0 Both parents outside the United States 0 0 5 5.0 Unknown 3 2.7 2 2.0 Total 107 100.0 101 100.0 Girts: Both parents United States (N= 100 1071 93.7 IN” 95 123) 77.6 One parent outside the United States I 0.9 18 14.4 Both parents outside the United States 3 2.7 5 4.0 Unknown 3 2.7 5 4.0 Total 107 100.0 123 100.0 Both: Both parents United States (N= 203 214) 95.5 (N= 182 224) 81.2 One parent outside the United States 2 0.9 25 11.2 Both parents outside the United States 3 1.2 10 4.5 Unknown 6 2.4 7 3.1 Total 214 100.0 224 100.0 a The format for this table was adopted? in part? from Brown's study (19561. 95 mentioned by the Anglo-American group were Australia and England. Mexico and South America were the two countries listed by the Mexican-American group. Thus, no real dif ference exists with respect to the country in which parental schooling was completed by the majority of pupils between the ethnic groups. However, some apparent differences are reported with respect to the place of parental schooling completed for one parent of the family. Comparisons between the ethnic groups for the sexes reveal almost similar pat terns. Prior parental occupations (if foreign born)•— Table 12 shows the data concerning the parents1 occupations which differ from the occupations they held before coming to the United States. In general, about five per cent of the parents in both ethnic groups are reported to have held oc cupations prior to entering the country which differed from their present occupations. In short, no real difference in parental occupations (if foreign born) exists with respect to the occupations held now and before coming to this country. Further comparisons for the two sexes also reveal similar findings. Language spoken by the pupil at home.— Table 13 pre sents the findings with respect to the language spoken by the pupil at home. The data show that while one hundred per cent of the Anglo-American group used English only at home~7 about thirty-five per cent of the Mexican-American 96 TABLE 12 A COMPARISON OF THE EIGHTH GRADE ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN GROUPS ON THE BASIS OF THE PARENTS* OCCUPATIONS WHICH OIFFER FROM THE OCCUPATIONS THEY HELD BEFORE COMING TO THE UNITED STATES Sex Parental Involvement Anglo-Amerlcan Number Per Cent Mexican-American Number Per Cent Boys: One parent 1 IN-1071 0.9 3 IN-IOI) 3.0 Both parents 0 0 1 1.0 None 106 99.1 97 96.0 Total 107 100.0 101 100.0 Girls: One parent 2 IN-107) 1.9 4 IN-123) 3.3 Both parents 0 0 1 0.8 None 105 98.1 118 95.9 Total 107 100.0 123 100.0 Both: One parent 3 IN-214) 1.4 7 IN-224) 3.1 Both parents 0 0 2 0.9 None 211 98.6 215 96.0 Total 214 100.0 224 100.0 97 TABLE 13 A COMPARISON OF THE EIGHTH GRADE ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN GROUPS ON LANGUAGE SPOKEN BY THE PUPIL AT HOME Sex Language Factor8 Anglo-American Number Per Cent MexIcan-Amer1can Number Per Cent Boys: English only IN*I071 107 100.0 <N» 35 101) 34.7 Spanish spoken by pupil Always 0 0 2 2.0 More than half 0 0 8 7.9 Half the time 0 0 12 11.8 Less than half 0 0 42 41.6 Never 0 0 2 2.0 Total 107 100.0 101 100.0 Girls: English only (N=|07) 107 100.0 (N= 43 123) 35.0 Spanish spoken by pupil Always 0 0 7 5.7 More than half 0 0 8 6.5 Half the time 0 0 18 14.6 Less than half 0 0 39 31.7 Never 0 0 8 6.5 Total 107 100.0 123 100.0 Both: English only <N=2I4) 214 100.0 <N«224) 78 34.5 Spanish spoken by pupil Always 0 0 9 4.1 More than half 0 0 16 7.1 Half the time 0 0 30 13.5 Less than half 0 0 81 36.4 Never 0 0 10 4.4 Total 214 100.0 224 100.0 •Tfte format for this table was adopted, In part, from Brown's study (1956) 98 group did so. Of the Mexican-American group only about eleven per cent used Spanish either alvays or more than half the time. Fifty per cent of the Mexican-American group used Spanish either half the time or occasionally. Compari sons betveen the ethnic groups for the sexes shov similar results. Esparza (1936) vas the first to use an objective measurement of bilingualism. His findings vere similar to those obtained for this study. He also found that the majority of the Mexican-American pupils spoke Spanish. Brovn's (1956) results differed somevhat from this study. He indicated that only three per cent of his Mexican-Ameri can group spoke English exclusively compared vith about thirty-five per cent revealed in this investigation. Yithin the last eleven years, this vriter could find only six research studies regarding the bilingual status of Mexican-American pupils. Studies relating to parental birthplace, place of parental schooling and contrasting occupations are apparently lacking. Yith this one excep tion, Brovn's (1956) study shoved that a real difference existed betveen the tvo eighth grade ethnic groups vith respect to the country in vhich the parents had attended school in contrast vith the present findings in vhich no apparent difference vas found. Intellectual traits Language IQ.— An examination of the means and 99 standard deviations shovn on Table 14 for the Anglo-American group reveals an IQ of 104*59 compared to that of 96*12 for the Mexican-American group* The over-all analysis of vari ance results as seen in Table 35 produced an F ratio of 4*39j vhich is significant at the five per cent level* The F ratio of 7*62 for the sex variation effect also seen in Table 35 is significant beyond the one per cent level* Kramer's test results indicate that the significant mean sex difference in language IQ scores betveen the Anglo- American boys (IQ 102.65) and the Mexican-American boys (IQ 97*62) are veil beyond the one per cent level* Comparisons of the mean language IQ scores betveen the Anglo-American girls (IQ 106*53) and the Mexican-Ameri- i can girls (IQ 94*88) also shov a mean difference that is i significant beyond the one per cent level. j Non-language 10*— Table 14 shovs a non-language IQ I | of 109*43 for the Anglo-American group and an IQ of 103*94 ! | for the Mexican-American group* The analysis of variance seen in Table 36 for the ethnic source reveals a non-signi- | ficant F ratio of 3.40, A significant F ratio of 7*10 beyond the one per cent level is also seen for the sex variance effect in Table i 36* Kramer's range test comparisons indicate that mean sex differences in non-language IQ scores betveen the Anglo- American girls ^IQ 110.31) and the Mexican-American girls (IQ 103.94) are significant beyond the one per cent level* j 100 TABLE 14 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE MEANS FOR THE INTELLIGENCE TEST SCORES OF ANGLO-AMERI CAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN EIGHTH GRADE GROUPS Sex Intelligence Test Scores® Anglo-American Mean S.D. Mexican-American Mean S.D. Level of Sign!ficance IN-I07I (N-IOI) Boys: Language IQ 102*65 16.51 97.62 17.31 .0ib Non-language IQ 108.54 15.12 105.94 13.21 ns Total IQ 105.74 13.72 101.90 13.81 .05 (N=I07) (N=|23l Girls: Language IQ 106.53 16.84 94.88 14.82 •01 Non-language IQ 110.31 15.37 102.29 12.61 .01 Total IQ 108.54 14.06 98.73 11.52 .01 <N=2I4I <N~224) Both: Language IQ 104.59 16.70 96.12 16.01 •05® Non-language IQ 109.43 15.21 103.94 12.99 ns Total IQ 107.14 13.87 100.16 12.27 .05 alntelligence test scores were derived from the CTMM 1957 edition* bBased on the modified t ratios competed by Kramer's analysis test for the difference between means* cBased on the F ratios computed also for the difference between means* 101 A comparison of the non—language variable betveen the Anglo-American boys (IQ 108.54) and the Mexican-American boys (IQ 105.94) shovs a mean difference that is not signi ficant at the five per cent level. Kramer*s test results also shov no significant mean differences in non-language IQ betveen the Mexican-American boys and the Anglo-American boys and girls, but reveal very significant findings at the one per cent level betveen the Anglo-American boys (IQ 108.54) and the Mexican-American girls (IQ 102.29). Total test IQ.— Table 14 shovs the mean IQ for the Anglo-American group to be 107.14 as compared to that of 100.16 for the Mexican-American group. From Table 37t the over—all analysis of variance for the differences betveen the tvo means produced an F ratio of 5.53 that is statisti cally significant beyond the five per cent level. In Table 37, a significant F ratio of 10.87 beyond the one per cent level for the sex effect is also reported. Kramer*s range tests indicate that the mean sex difference in total test IQ is significant at the one per cent level betveen the Anglo-American girls (IQ 108.54) and the Mexi can-American boys (IQ 101.90) and girls (IQ 98.73). There is no significant mean sex difference betveen the mean total test IQ for the Anglo-American boys (IQ 106.74) and their ethnic counterpart (IQ 101.90), but the mean difference in total test IQ betveen the Anglo-American boys and Mexican- American girls is significant at the one per cent level. 102 Vhen ranked in a numerical sequence, the Mexican-American girls tend to have the lowest total test IQ. Mussen (1960), Klineberg (1963), and Bernardoni (1964) are in agreement that current over—all significant findings betveen the Anglo-American and Mexican-American groups on tests of intelligence are expected. They main tained that it was unrealistic to expect an intelligence test to be "fair" to all cultures. Conant (1961), Birggs (1962), and Magary (1960) further confirm the fact that measures of intelligence not only reflect the over-all cul ture of the community at large, but also those of the immediate family. Operating under similar assumptions, Boca (1963) in recent years constructed a general ability test for Spanish-speaking pupils in the elementary and secondary schools. Studies by Corwin (1962) and Kennedy (1963) tend to agree with this study*s results regarding the greater simi larities than differences on the non-verbal or non—language aspects of the intelligence test between Anglo-American and Mexican-American groups. However, Brown (1936), who also used the CTMM in his comparisons of Anglo-American and Mexican-American eighth grade pupils, revealed results which indicated that significant mean differences persist in favor of the Anglo-American group on the non-language portions of the test. 103 Achievement traits Achievement test results.— Table 15 gives the resalts of the means and standard deviations for the achievement tes't on the total test battery and its six sub-tests for the tvo ethnic groups* Examination of the results indicates that the Anglo-American group have higher over-all mean achieve ment scores than the Mexican-American group in almost all instances, except for the spelling sub-tests, by margins vhich yielded F ratios for the ethnicity effect (Tables 38 to 44) that are significant beyond the one per cent level* If the actual grade level of 8.1 at the time of testing is used as the criterion of comparison, the results in Table 15 shov that the mean achievement scores for the Mexican-American group tend to be belov grade level by three to six months in all sub-tests except Mechanics of English* The Anglo-American group, on the other hand, tends to have mean achievement scores that are above grade level by four to eleven months, except for the spelling sub—test vhere it is tvo months belov grade level* Table 15 also contains the data on mean achievement scores on the total achievement test battery and its six sub-tests for the boys and girls for both ethnic groups* The F ratios shovn in Tables 38 to 44 for the sex treatment effect indicate that group sex differences in mean achievement scores exist beyond the one per cent level on four of the six sub-tests* Kramer's range analysis test TABLE 15 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE MEANS FOR THE ACHIEVEMENT TEST SCORES OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN EIGHTH GRADE GROUPS Achievement Anglo-American Mexican-American Level of Test Scores0 Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Significance j 1 Boys: Read i ng (N=1071 (N=101) i j Vocabulary 8.69 1.90 7.75 1.97 .0|b i i Comprehension Arlthmetic 8.64 2.04 7.90 2.13 .01 i i ReasonIng 8.52 1.54 7.99 1.57 •01 Fundamentals Language Arts Mechanics of 8.38 1.95 7.90 1.81 1.80 .05 Eng 11 sh 8.80 1.83 7.92 •01 Spel1ing 7.56 2.03 6.77 1.99 •01 Total Test 8.46 1.68 7.73 1.67 •01 {Girls: Reading (N=1071 (N=123) ' Vocabulary 9.02 1.85 7.73 1.68 •01 Comprehension Arlthmetic 9.37 2.33 7.66 1.65 •01 Reason i ng 9.24 1.47 7.73 1.28 •01 t Fundamentals Language Arts Mechanics of 8.63 2.00 7.41 1.53 .01 i Eng 1 i sh 9.78 1.93 8.43 1.82 •01 ! Spelling 8.28 1.85 7.64 1.93 •01 Total Test 9.09 1.71 7.74 1.44 .01 Both: Reading (N=214) (N=224) Vocabu1ary 8.85 1.88 7.74 1.82 .01° Comprehensi on Arithmetic 9.00 2.22 7.77 1.88 .01 ReasonIng 8.88 1.51 7.84 1.43 •01 1 Fundamentals Language Arts Mechanics of 8.50 2.00 7.63 1.66 .05 Engl ish Spel1ing 9.29 1.94 8.20 1.82 •01 7.92 1.97 7.25 1.99 ns Total Test 8.77 1.72 7.76 1.94 •01 ! aAchlevement test scores were derived from the CAT, 1957 edition. l bBased on the modified t ratios computed by Kramer’s analysis test | for the difference between means. ; cBased on the F ratios computed for the difference between means. 105 results shov that Anglo-American girls earn significantly higher mean achievement scores beyond the one per cent level in all instances than the Mexican-American boys and girls. Except for the spelling sub-tests, the Anglo-American boys also exceed the Mexican-American boys and girls in mean achievement scores on five of the six sub—tests. The mean differences are significant beyond the one per cent level in every instance. In spelling, the Anglo-American boys are not significantly different in mean achievement scores vhen compared to Mexican-American boys. Aside from the exceptions noted, the results shov that Anglo-American boys and girls, as a group, earn signi ficantly higher mean achievement scores than the Mexican- American boys and girls on the total achievement test bat tery and its five sub-tests beyond the one per cent level. As indicated in Chapter II, the review of recent literature (Brown, 1956$ Kaplan, 1959$ and Cline, 1961) shoved rather conclusively that the Anglo-American pupil as a group vas expected to score significantly higher than the Mexican-American group on standardized tests of achievement. Faught (1962) vas the only study to take exception to this conclusion. His findings shoved that no significant mean differences existed betveen the tvo ethnic groups on the six sub—tests of the achievement test. In short, the ob tained results in this study strongly support the accepted assumption that significant mean differences in achievement 106 test scores do exist vhen over-all comparisons are made betveen the Anglo-American and Mexican-American pre-adoles- eent pupils. Motivational traits Gross motivation test scores.— Table 16 reveals the data on the means and standard deviations for the total motivation test scores and its total integrated and total unintegrated components. The obtained P ratios of 0.25, 0.09, and 1.70 for the ethnicity main effects, as shovn in Tables 45, 46, and 47, respectively, indicate that the mean score differences betveen the Anglo-American and Mexican-American groups on the three over-all motivation test variables— total inte grated, total unintegrated, and total test— are not signi ficant at the five per cent level. Comparisons of the mean sex differences in motiva tion test scores by Kramer*s technique betveen the boys and girls in both ethnic groups also reveal the fact that the Anglo-American boys and girls do not differ significantly in motivation test scores from their Mexican-American counterparts. The over-all non-significant P ratios for the sex factors as shovn in Tables 45, 46, and 47 further substantiate these results. Integrated motivation test scores.— In Table 17, the integrated interest factors are presented under tvo 107 TABLE 16 MEANS AMD STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE MEANS FOR THE MOTIVATION TEST SCORES OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN EIGHTH GRADE GROUPS s#x Motivation Test Scores® Anglo-AmerIcan Mean S.D. Mex1can-Amer1 can Mean S.D. Level of Sign!ficance Boys: IN=I071 IN-101) Total Integrated 121.79 5.72 121.95 4.20 nsb Total Unintegrated 120.46 3.50 120.41 3.27 ns Total SMAT 242.25 6.62 242.36 5.32 ns Girls: (N=|07l (NSI23) Total Integrated 121.93 3.35 121.80 5.29 ns Total Un Integrated 120.93 4.01 120.26 3.43 ns Total SMAT 242.86 5.62 242.06 6.05 ns Both: IN«2|4) (N«224) Total Integrated 121.86 4.68 121.87 4.82 nsc Total Unintegrated 120.59 3.75 120.33 3.35 ns Total SMAT 242.45 6.13 242.20 5.72 ns aMot!vation lest scores were derived from the SMAT Research edition, 1961. bBased on the modified t ratios computed by Kramer's analysis test for the difference between means. °Based on the F ratios computed also for the difference between means. I TABLE 17 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE MEANS FOR THE INTEGRAT! SCORES ACCORDING TO ETHNICITY AND i Motivational Trait Scores® Boys AAb Mean S.D. MAb Mean S.D. Level of Sign!ficancec AAb Mean S.D. Integrated Intrinsic Interests (N== 1071 IN1=1011 (N=107) Assertion 7.08 2.13 6.69 2.56 ns 7.10 2.31 Sensuali ty 9.40 2.05 9.13 2.35 ns 9.54 2.05 Sex 8.19 2.24 8.38 2.46 ns 9.59 2.10 Gregarious 7.99 2.50 8.41 2.45 ns 6.79 1.99 Narcissism 8.52 2.40 8.71 2.65 ns 10.68 2.21 Constructive 8.63 2.49 8.65 2.63 ns 7.12 2.20 Protective 7.50 2.39 7.17 2.32 ns 8.08 2.41 Curiosity 8.86 2.52 9.16 2.61 ns 7.53 2.01 Aggression 7.76 2.49 8.18 2.37 ns 7.99 2.11 Play Fantasy 10.47 2.38 10.17 2.29 ns 9.25 2.03 Acquisition 6.23 2.22 6.61 2.44 ns 7.92 2.14 Acquired Interests Self Sentiment 8.04 2.12 8.22 2.48 ns 8.62 2.02 Super Ego 8.36 2.47 8.70 2.65 ns 7.25 2.15 Religion 7.57 2.48 7.08 2.76 ns 7.99 2.44 Patriotism 7.06 2.35 6.56 2.75 ns 6.45 1.74 UnIntegrated Intrinsic Interests (N=1071 (N= 101) (N=107) Assertion 7.38 1.31 7.98 1.50 .01 7.65 1.30 Sensua1i ty 9.17 1.26 8.88 1.45 ns 8.99 1.15 Sex 8.68 1.39 8.62 1.33 ns 9.21 1.23 Gregarious 8.11 1.71 8.20 1.48 ns 8.31 1.41 Narcissism 9.11 1.28 9.21 1.31 ns 9.70 1.08 Constructive 7.51 1.48 7.64 1.40 ns 7.25 1.21 Protective 7.79 1.32 7.75 1.37 ns 8.18 1.15 Cur lost ty 7.33 1.46 6.97 1.45 ns 7.41 1.39 Aggression 7.79 1.27 7.86 1.33 ns 7.53 1.37 Play Fantasy 8.06 1.55 7.83 1.56 ns 7.52 1.58 Acqu i s i t i on 7.91 1.28 7.87 1.32 ns 7.71 1.41 Acquired Interests Self Sentiment 7.79 1.23 7.51 1.40 ns 7.67 1.29 Super Ego 7.69 1.44 7.72 1.35 ns 7.42 1.27 Religlon 7.93 1.45 8.14 1.60 ns 7.99 1.19 Patriotism 8.20 1.53 8.20 1.54 ns 8.00 1.35 ®Motlvation test scores were drived from the SMAT Research Edition, 1961 bAA and MA are abbreviations forthe terms Anglo-American and Mexican-American. cBased on the modified t ratios computed by Kramer's analysis test for the difference between n TABLE 17 MEANS FOR THE INTEGRATED AND UNINTEGRATED MOTIVATIONAL TRAIT DING TO ETHNICITY AND SEX GROUPINGS Girls Both AAb MAb Level of AAb MAb Level of ice0 Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Significance0 Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Significance0 <N=107) (N=123) 7.10 2.31 6.50 2.54 ns 9.54 2.05 9.95 2.40 ns 9.59 2.10 9.66 2.81 ns 6.79 1.99 7.15 2.56 ns 10.68 2.21 10.67 2.75 ns 7.12 2.20 7.30 2.55 ns 8.08 2.41 8.42 2.69 ns 7.53 2.01 7.72 2.57 ns 7.99 2.11 7.89 2.53 ns 9.25 2.03 8.75 2.61 ns 7.92 2.14 7.46 2.95 ns 8.62 2.02 9.02 2.79 ns 7.25 2.15 7.64 2.65 ns 7.99 2.44 7.59 2.94 ns 6.45 1.74 5.98 2.84 ns (N=107) IN=123) 7.65 1.30 7.69 1.20 ns 8.99 1.15 8.51 1.18 .01 9.21 1.23 9.18 1.30 ns 8.31 1.41 8.33 1.46 ns 9.70 1.08 9.45 1.19 ns 7.25 1.21 7.41 1.28 ns 8.18 1.15 7.79 1.13 ns 7.41 1.39 7.46 1.13 ns 7.53 1.37 7.63 1.48 ns 7.52 1.58 7.49 1.22 ns 7.71 1.41 7.78 1.18 ns 7.67 1.29 7.63 1.31 ns 7.42 1.27 7.52 1.13 ns 7.99 1.19 8.29 1.29 .01 8.00 1.35 8.06 1.24 ns IN=214) (N=224) 7.09 2.21 6.58 2.55 ns 9.47 2.05 9.57 2.40 ns 8.89 2.28 9.08 2.73 ns 7.39 2.34 7.72 2.58 ns 9.60 2.54 9.79 2.87 ns 7.87 2.46 7.91 2.67 ns 7.79 2.41 7.86 2.60 ns 8.20 2.37 8.37 2.66 ns 7.87 2.30 8.02 2.46 ns 9.86 2.29 9.39 2.57 ns 7.07 2.33 7.08 2.76 ns 8.33 2.08 8.66 2.68 ns 7.80 2.37 8.12 2.70 ns 7.78 2.46 7.36 2.86 ns 6.75 2.09 6.25 2.81 ns IN==214) IN=224) 7.52 2.31 7.82 1.34 .05 9.06 1.21 8.68 1.32 .01 8.94 1.28 8.93 1.34 ns 8.21 1.56 8.27 1.47 ns 9.41 1.22 9.34 1.26 ns 7.38 1.36 7.51 1.50 ns 7.98 1.25 7.77 1.24 ns 7.36 1.33 7.24 1.30 ns 7.66 1.39 7.73 1.42 ns 7.79 1.59 7.64 1.39 ns 7.80 1.34 7.82 1.24 ns 7.73 1.26 7.58 1.35 ns 7.55 1.36 7.61 1.23 ns 7.96 1.32 8.22 1.32 .01 8.10 1.44 8.12 1.43 ns rlcan. he difference between means 109 categories. The first category has eleven intrinsic inter est factors and the second has four acquired interest factors. A low mean score indicates a lov level of inter est. As the mean score increases quantitatively, the strength of the interest is presumed to increase also. Scores for each measured interest ranged from a lov of 0 to a high of 14. In all instances the over-all mean dif ferences in interest scores for both the intrinsic and ac quired interests at the integrated level between the two ethnic groups reveal F ratios for the ethnicity variance effects that are not significant at the five per cent level. (See Tables 48 to 62.) In addition, comparisons of the over-all mean sex differences for each of the eleven intrinsic and four ac quired interest factors at the integrated level betveen the two ethnic groups by the Kramer's test also reveal the fact that none of the obtained mean differences are significant at the five per cent level. Kramer's multiple range analysis test shovs more significant mean sex differences for each of the interest factors betveen the Anglo-American and Mexican—American girls and the Anglo-American and Mexican-American boys than there are betveen the two ethnic groups. For example, in the following interest factors usually associated vith the female sex: narcissism, protective, sex, and acquisition, the Anglo-American and Mexican-American girls earned signi— 110 ficantly higher mean scores than the Anglo-American and Mexican-American boys. Anglo-American and Mexican-American boys earned significantly higher mean scores than the Anglo- and Mexican-American girls in the folloving interest factors: gregarious, constructive, curiosity, play fantasy, and super ego. Kramer's multiple range analysis also shoved significant mean sex differences at the one per cent level in favor of the Anglo-American group vhen the Anglo-American boys and Mexican-American girls vere compared on the patri otism interest. On the other hand, the Mexican-American girls earned significantly higher mean interest scores at the one per cent level on the self-sentiment interest fac tor than Anglo-American boys. On the remaining four inter est factors: assertion, sensuality, religion, and aggres sion, no significant mean sex differences are found betveen the tvo ethnic groups compared. Unintegrated motivation test scores.— In Table 17 the unintegrated motivation test scores are also categorized in respective intrinsic and acquired interest factors. Identical quantitative units as those described for the in tegrated traits in the preceding section are employed. In nine of the eleven intrinsic interest factors at the unintegrated level, the over-all mean score differences betveen the tvo ethnic groups are not significant at the five per cent level. In one of the remaining tvo intrinsic interest factors, the Mexican-American pupils earned signi- 111 ficantly higher over-all mean scores on the assertion in terest than the Anglo-American pupils. In the other in trinsic interest, the Anglo-American pupils earned signi ficantly higher over-all mean scores on the sensuality fac tor than the Mexican-American pupils. In the acquired in terest factors, no significant over—all mean scores betveen the tvo ethnic groups are found in three of the four fac tors. In the fourth factor, religion, the Mexican-American pupils earned significantly higher over-all mean scores than the Anglo-American pupils. In Tables 63 to 77, the F ratios for the ethnicity variance effects are shovn. Similar comparisons of the over—all mean sex dif ferences for each of the eleven intrinsic and four acquired interest factors at the unintegrated level shov no signifi cant over-all mean scores betveen the tvo ethnie groups on fourteen of the fifteen interest factors. In the one ex ception, assertion, the Mexican-American boys earned signi ficantly higher over-all mean scores than the Anglo-American boys. Comparisons betveen the Anglo-American and Mexican- American girls shov no significant mean score differences in thirteen of the fifteen interest factors at the uninte grated level. In one of the tvo instances, sensuality, the Anglo-American girls earned significantly higher over-all mean scores than the Mexican-American girls. In the other interest factor, religion, the Mexican-American girls 112 earned a significantly higher over-all mean score than the Anglo-American girls. Kramer*s multiple range analysis test again shows more significant mean sex differences for each of the unin tegrated interest factors between the Anglo-American and Mexican-American girls and the Anglo-American and Mexican- American boys than there are between the total ethnic groups. In the following unintegrated interest factors, nar cissism and sex, the Anglo-American and Mexican-American girls earned significantly higher mean scores than the Anglo-American and Mexican-American boys. The Anglo-American boys earned significantly higher mean scores than the Mexican-American girls on each of the following unintegrated interest factors: play fantasy and religion. The Anglo-American girls earned significantly higher mean scores than the Mexican-American boys on the protective and curiosity interest factors. On the remaining seven unintegrated interest factors, acquisition, constructive, aggression, gregarious, self sentiment, super-ego, and patriotism, no significant mean sex differences are found between the two ethnic groups. It is interesting to note that three of a possible four un integrated acquired interest factors: self-sentiment, super ego, and patriotism, shov no significant sex or ethnie group 113 differences. Tables 63 to 77 also present the figures relating to the interaction variances betveen the ethnic and sex main effects. Only in one instance vas the presence of a signi ficant interaction variance obtained. In this case, the F ratio vas significant at the five per cent level on the assertion interest. Examination of Table 17 indicated that the Mexican-American group performance on the assertion in terest could be a function of the combined main effects of the ethnic and sex factors rather than an independent mea sure of variability. As noted in Chapter 11, available research dealing vith the motivational characteristics of Mexican-American pupils is extremely scanty. The concept of motivation is often subsumed in studies of anxiety, attitudes, and in terests. Within the last five years, studies of Mexican- American pupils under this broad category of motivation have been reported. In a very recent study, Erickson (1963) found results similar to those in this study. He obtained data vhich strongly supports the conclusion that no significant differences exist betveen CMAS means for Anglo-Americans and Mexican-Americans. Peak's (1962) and Eemmers' (1962) studies of certain non-intellectual cor relates of achievement among Spanish-speaking pupils also revealed similar, non-significant findings betveen the tvo ethnic groups. 114 Demos (1959) , i - n approaching the problem of motiva tion from the attitudinal point of view, concluded that there were very few significant differences of attitude to ward certain educational issues betveen the Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils. Earlier studies of attitudes and interests by Hildreth (1958), Dutchover (1958), and Shaftel (1953) are generally in agreement that the mean differences betveen the Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils are negligible in nature. Reported comparisons of mean sex differences in mo tivation (anxiety, interests, and attitudes) of Spanish speaking pupils are non-existent. However, recent studies by Evens (1963), Bledsoe (1963), Keller (1962), and Cran dall et al. (1962) support the findings of this study to the effect that certain significant sex differences in mo tivation traits, as measured and defined, existed between the two sexes studied. SUMMARY In this chapter, ethnic group comparisons of Anglo- American and Mexican-American pupils on each of the four major trait areas, personal, intellectual, achievement, and motivation, were investigated. No significant over-all mean differences between the tvo ethnic groups were found on four of the following six personal traits: chronological age, citizenship marks, r ...... ......... .....“' n 5 I ! Jgrade-point arerage, and father*s education* On the re- maining tvo personal traits, socioeconomic status and : mother*s level of education, very significant mean differ ences in favor of the Anglo-American groups vere revealed. |In general, no significant over-all mean differences be tveen the tvo ethnic groups vere found on the non-language i ! |section of the CTMM, but very significant mean differences I in favor of the Anglo-American groups vere shovn in language and total CTMM scores* On the achievement traits measured, the Anglo-Ameri can broup earned significantly higher mean scores on all six of the achievement sub-tests, including the total achievement test battery* Lastly, none of the over-all mean motivational traits examined revealed significant mean differences on the moti- * vation test betveen the Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils* The findings also shoved fev significant mean dif ferences betveen the tvo ethnic groups on both the inte grated and unintegrated intrinsic and acquired interest factors. Folloving the findings for each of the major traits studied, an attempt vas made to relate the present findings ;to those reported in the available literature in Chapter 11* CHAPTER V COMPARISONS OP THE LOW, MIDDLE, AND HIGH ACHIEVING ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN EIGHTH GRADE PUPILS ON CERTAIN SCHOOL RELATED VARIABLES This chapter depicts the extent to which ethnic group differences on certain personal, intellectual, achievement, and motivational characteristics may be attributed to vary ing degrees of achievement, when achievement status is de fined by teachers* marks. Ethnic group comparisons of low, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American boys and girls on each of the four major characteristics, as measured, are also explored through the findings of this study. ETHNIC GROUP COMPARISONS BX ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL Personal traits Table 18 contains the means and standard deviations for each of the personal traits according to ethnic grouping and achievement level. 116 TABLE 18 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE MEANS FOR THE PI ACCORDING TO ETHNICITY, ACHIEVEMENT, AND SEJ s Personal Trait Scores Low Achievers Middle AA Mean S.D. MAa Mean S.D. Level of Significance1 5 AA Mean S.D. MAa Mean Boys: (N=27) (N=48) (N==471 (N=3' Chronological Age0 8.34 0.58 8.45 0.58 ns 8.24 0.36 8.31 Grade-point Average 1.81 0.31 1.78 0.25 ns 2.54 0.13 2.50 Citizenship Marks 0.88 0.21 0.91 0.24 ns 0.93 0.14 0.95 Socioeconomic Statusd 5.26 0.66 5.40 0.99 ns 4.51 1.32 5.31 Father's Education 9.99 3.20 9.85 2.80 ns 11.76 3.07 9.96 Mother's Education 9.59 3.59 9.38 2.63 ns 11.58 2.07 9.10 (N== 13) (N=50) (N==33) (N=3 Girls: Chronological Age0 8.48 0.54 8.03 0.48 ns 8.29 0.44 8.15 Gradfr-polnt Average 1.78 0.31 1.80 0.31 ns 2.54 0.13 2.52 Citizenship Marks 0.95 0.19 0.93 0.I6 ns 0.90 0.20 0.89 Socioeconomic Status1 * 5.08 1.04 5.18 0.88 ns 4.67 1.01 4,82 Father's Education 9.42 4.13 8.57 3.94 ns 11.15 3.39 10.71 Mother's Education 9.92 2.47 8.58 2.30 ns 11.61 1.41 9.55 (N=40) (N=98) (N= =80) N=68 Both: - Chronological Age0 8.41 0.56 8.37 0.53 ns 8.26 0.40 6.22 Grade-point Average 1.80 0.31 1.79 0.28 ns 2.54 0.13 2.51 Citizenship Marks 0.90 0.19 0.92 0.20 ns 0.92 0.17 0.92 Socioeconomic Status1 * 5.17 0.85 5.29 0.93 ns 4.58 1.20 5.06 Father's Education 9.70 3.49 9110 3.45 ns 11.41 3.20 10.37 Mother's Education 9.70 3.24 8.97 2.49 ns 11.60 1.74 9.35 ®AA and MA are abbreviations for the terms Anglo-American and Mexican-American* j^Based on the modified t ratios computed by Kramer's analysis test for the difference between means. Chronological age In terms of grade placement units. ^Socioeconomic status computed by Warner, Meeker, and Eells Revised Scale for Rating Occupation. TABLE 18 ONS OF THE MEANS FOR THE PERSONAL TRAIT SCORES IICITY, ACHIEVEMENT, AND SEX GROUPINGS Middle Achievers High Achievers AA® MA a Level of AA® MA® Level of ’ Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Sign!ficanceb Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Significanceb (N=47) (N=30) 1N=33) CN=23) 8.24 0.36 8.31 0.55 ns 8.20 0.30 8.17 0.36 ns 2.54 0.13 2.50 0.10 ns 3.15 0.25 3.14 0.27 ns 0.93 0.14 0.95 0.14 ns 0.86 0.21 0.93 0.19 ns 4.51 1.32 5.31 1.07 .01 4.45 1.25 4.83 1.23 ns 11.76 3.07 9.96 1.16 ns 11.58 2.82 10.71 1.73 ns 11.58 2.07 9.10 3.34 .0! 12.12 1.95 11.43 1.38 ns ( N ==33) (N=38) (N=6I) (N= =35) 8.29 0.44 8.15 0.34 ns 8.28 0.34 8.15 0.34 ns 2.54 0.13 2.52 0.13 ns 3.30 0.29 3.16 0.25 ns 0.90 0.20 0.89 0.20 ns 0.96 0.11 0.96 0.14 ns 4.67 1.01 4,82 1.14 ns 4.69 1.30 5.03 1.12 ns 11.15 3.39 10.71 2.78 ns 11.92 2.89 9.92 2.99 ns 11.61 1.41 9.55 2.82 ns 12.41 1.57 10.17 2.81 •01 (N=80) N=68) (N=94) (N=58) 8.26 0.40 8.22 0.44 ns 8.25 0.32 8.16 0.35 ns 2.54 0.13 2.51 0.11 ns 3.25 0.27 3.15 0.26 ns 0.92 0.17 0.92 0.17 ns 0.92 0.16 0.94 0.16 ns 4.58 1.20 5.06 1.10 .01 4.61 1.27 4.95 1.17 ns 11.41 3.20 10.37 2.93 ns 11.65 2.86 10.14 2.59 ns 11.60 1.74 9.35 3.05 .01 12.26 1.72 10.80 2.42 .01 can, difference between means. or Rating Occupation 118 Chronological age.— An examination of the chronolo gical age scores for the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils shov mean age scores ranging from 13 years 3 months to 13 years 8 months. Although there is a tendency for the chronological age scores to decrease from the lover achievement levels to the high, none of the over-all mean differences betveen the tvo ethnic groups are significant beyond the five per cent level according to Kramer's multiple range analysis test. In Table 29 the interaction effect betveen the ethni city and sex variables shovs an F ratio of 4,85 that is significant beyond the one per cent level, Kramer's multi ple range test reveals the fact that the significant inter action effect may have arisen from the significant mean score differences in chronological age betveen the high achieving Mexican-American boys and the middle and high achieving Anglo-American boys. The mean differences in favor of the Mexiean-American pupils are significant beyond the five per cent level. Aside from these exceptions, none of the other mean sex differences betveen the tvo ethnic groups at each of the achievement levels is significant at the five per cent level. The lack of a significant age factor betveen the lov, middle, and high achievers, as reported in this study, is further underscored by the findings of Sutcliffe (1958), 119 Gray (1960), and Pippert (1963). Norman's study (1962), however, indicated that achievers were significantly younger than non-achievers. He attributed his findings to the earlier school entry or to some acceleration to account for the greater youthful ness of the high achiever. Grade-point average.— Kramer's analysis test reveals no significant over-all mean differences in grade-point average betveen the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo- American and Mexican-American pupils. In addition, the mean sex differences in grade-point average betveen the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-Ameri can boys and girls are also not significant at the five per cent level. An examination of Table 30 reveals a very significant F ratio of 997.60 for the achievement level variable. By definition, a highly significant mean difference betveen achievement levels is expected. At the tvo extremes of the achievement continuum, there are only 13 pupils in the lov group compred to 61 in the high group for the Anglo-American sample. For the Mexican-American sample, there are 51 lov achievers com pared with 35 in the high achievement levels. In short, there are about four times more lov achieving Mexican-Ameri can than Anglo-American girls. The ratio of Mexican-Ameri can to Anglo-American boys in the lov achievement groups is 120 about 2 to 1• In the high achievement levels, fever Mexi can-American boys are found0 At the middle achievement range there are comparable numbers of Anglo-American and Mexican-American boys and girls. In Jensen*s study (i960) of Mexican-American junior high pupils, there vere also significantly more girls in the B-plus range than boys. An average teachers' mark of C-plus vas also revealed in his study. In a recent article Wright (1963) also reported the fact that more girls than boys are commonly found in the high achieving ranks in junior high school. In short, this study's findings are substantially in agreement vith the tvo reports mentioned and also vith those of Jacobs (1959), Miller (1961), Edvards (1961), and Thorndike (1963). The last four investigations seem to agree that in at least one aspect of the under-achievement studies, boys far outnumber girls. Citizenship marks.— Kramer's analysis test reveals no significant over-all mean score differences in citizen ship marks betveen the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American samples. Comparisons of mean sex differences in citizenship marks betveen the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican- American boys and girls also shov no significant findings beyond the five per cent level. Hovever, it is interesting to note that the interaction effect betveen grade-point 121 arerage and sex as seen in Table 31 shovs an F ratio of 4.38 that is significant at the fire per cent level. Here it is evident that the significant over-all F value as revealed by the analysis of variance method, is not substantiated by any significant mean score differences in citizenship marks betveen the two ethnic groups at each achievement level by the Kramer's method. On the other hand, an examination of the mean differences in Table 18 for the citizenship mark variable shovs a tendency for boys in the lov achieving and high achieving groups to earn lover mean scores than girls, regardless of the ethnic group factor. Kramer's analysis test, hovever, indicates that these mean differences are not significant at the five per cent level. Sutcliffe (1958) reported that lov achievers invari ably received significantly more unsatisfactory marks in work habits than high achievers. His findings differed somevhat from this study's results wherein no significant mean differences are found betveen the three achievement levels. Previous studies by Meyer et al. (1956) and Beilin (1959) shoved that girls, as a group, are more likely to re ceive significantly higher behavior ratings than boys. They concluded that teacher bias favored the girls' against the boys' behavior patterns. The present findings shoved no significant mean sex differences in citizenship marks to support the findings of Meyer and Beilin. 122 Socioeconomic status.— The F ratio of 6*92 for the achievement effect in Table 32 is significantly beyond the i one per cent level, Kramer’s analysis test, however, re- i veals the fact that the over-all mean difference in socio- ! : ! I economic ratings betveen the middle achieving Anglo-American; and Mexican-American groups is the only significant finding i j obtained. No significant over-all mean differences are seen i ; j betveen the tvo ethnic groups at the lov and high achieve ment levels. Mean sex differences in socioeconomic ratings be tveen the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American boys and girls shov significant mean differences betveen the tvo ethnic groups in only one in stance. In this case, the Anglo-American middle achieving boys earned a socioeconomic rating of 4.51 that is signi ficantly higher than the rating of 3.31 for the Mexican- American middle achieving boys. Aside from this one ex ception, no significant mean sex differences in socio economic ratings are found betveen the tvo ethnic groups at the remaining achievement levels investigated by the Kramer's analysis test. I In general, the present findings agree vith these ; ■ reported by Gray (1960), MacDonald (1963), and Pippert I(1963) vho indicated that no significant relationships i ' ; ;vere found betveen socioeconomic status and achievement level. It should be noted that none of the above studies ‘ ........’ .. ' '....... 123.. j included the Mexican-American pupil in their sample popula tion* Cline (1961), vho compared the Spanish-speaking pupil; in Nev Mexico vith his Anglo-American counterpart, reported j ! i significant mean differences in socioeconomic status 1 ratings betveen the tvo ethnic groups* [ Father’s level of education*— Kramer*s analysis test , ! reveals no significant over-all mean differences in father's i level of education betveen the lov, middle, and high achiev ing Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils* Further more, the mean sex differences in father's level of educa tion betveen the tvo ethnic groups at each achievement level also reveal no significant findings at the five per cent level* Hovever, the over-all F ratio of 6*50 for the achievement level effect shovn in Table 33 is significant beyond the one per cent level* Kramer's test shovs that the significant mean differences in father's level of education exist betveen the lov achieving Mexican-American and the middle and high achieving Anglo-American pupils* Signifi cant mean differences are also seen betveen the lov achiev ing Mexican-American girls and the middle and high achieving; Anglo-American boys and girls* In passing, it should be noted that in all instances the Anglo-American group shoved higher mean scores in father's level of education than their Mexican-American counterpart* Mother's level of education*— Kramer's analysis test 124 reveals very significant over-all mean differences in mother's level of education betveen the middle and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils in favor of the Anglo-American group, but no significant mean differences betveen the tvo ethnic groups at the lov achievement level. The over-all F ratio of 23.87 shovn in Table 34 for the achievement level effect indicates the fact that signi ficant mean differences in the mother's level of education exist betveen the lov, middle, and high achievers betveen the tvo ethnic groups. Kramer's test indicates that the level of mother's education for the high achieving Anglo- American group is significantly higher than that for the lov and middle achieving Mexican-American groups. Kramer's test also shovs that the mother's level of education for the middle achieving Anglo-American is also significantly higher than that for the lov achieving Mexican-American group. Kramer's analysis test reveals very significant mean sex differences in mother's level of education in favor of the Anglo-American group at the middle achievement levels for the boys and at the high achievement levels for the girls. Even though the Anglo-American group shovs higher mean scores in mother's level of education at each of the remaining achievement levels, none of the mean differences is significant at the five per cent level. 125 Kramer's analysis test also reveals further signifi cant mean sex differences in mother's level of education in favor of the Anglo-American group betveen the Anglo-American high achieving boys and girls and those obtained for the lov and high achieving Mexican-American boys and the lov and middle achieving Mexican-American girls* The middle achiev ing Anglo-American boys and girls also attained significant ly higher mean scores on mother's level of education than the lov and middle achieving Mexican-American boys and girls. Finally, the high achieving Mexican-American boys shov significantly higher mean scores for the mother's level of education than the lov achieving Anglo-American boys. There are more significant mean differences betveen the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils for mother's than for father's level of education. Authors such as Nemzek (1940), Gray (i960), and Ferreira (1960) received different results in their studies. They found no significant differences be tveen lov and high achievers for both the father's and mother's level of education. Hovever, more recent studies by Shav (1963), Whittier (1962), and Lefever (1963) report ed results that vere more compatible vith this study's findings. All three authors indicated that under-achieving pupils tended to have parents vho have less education than parents of over-achieving pupils. 126 Other related personal traits In the present section comparisons betveen the tvo ethnic groups at each achievement level are attempted for each of the folloving personal traits: parental birthplace, place of parental schooling, type of parental occupation held before coming to the United States, and language spoken by the pupil at home. Parental birthplace.— Table 19 presents the findings for the tvo ethnic groups by achievement level in regard to the country in vhich the parents of Anglo-American and Mexi can-American groups vere born. The results shov that the majority of the parents in both ethnic groups at each achievement level vere born in the United States. Parents of the lov achieving Mexican-American group reported the largest per cent born outside the United States. Analysis of the data for the sexes betveen the tvo ethnic groups at each achievement level indicates that parents of lov achieving Mexican-American girls tend to shov a larger per cent born outside the United States. Aside from the exception noted, comparisons betveen the ethnic groups for the sexes at each achievement level re veal no real difference in parental birthplace. Place of parental schooling.— Table 20 gives the findings betveen the tvo ethnic groups at each achievement level vith respect to the country in vhich parental school ing vas completed. A majority of the parents for both TABLE 19 A COMPARISON OF THE EIGHTH GRADE ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERIC ACHIEVEMENT LEVELS ON THE BASIS OF THE COUNTRY IN WHICH THE F Low Achievers Middle A < Sex Parental Birthplace® A A b Number Per Cent M A b Number Per Cent A A b Number Per Cent Boys: IN=271 (N=48) (N=47) Both parents United States 25 92.6 39 81.1 46 98.0 One parent outside the 1 3.7 8 < 16.8 1 2.0 United S tates Both parents outside the 1 2.1 United S tates 0 0 0 0 Unknown 1 3.7 0 0 0 0 Total 27 100.0 48 100.0 47 100.0 G irls: (N=I3) (N=50J (N =33) Both parents United S tates 12 92.0 34 68.0 30 91.0 One parent outside the United S tates 1 8.0 10 20.0 1 3.0 Both parents outside the United S tates 0 0 5 10.0 0 0 Unknown 0 0 1 2.0 2 6.0 Total 13 100.0 50 100.0 33 100.0 Both: (N=40) (N=98) (N=80) Both parents United States 37 92.5 73 74.5 76 95.2 One parent outside the 5.0 18 18.4 2.4 United States 2 2 Both parents outside the 6 6.1 United States 0 0 0 0 Unknown 1 2.5 1 1.0 2 2.4 Total 40 100.0 98 100.0 80 100.0 “The formal for th is table was adopted, In p a rt, from Brown's study 11956)• bA A and M A are abbreviations forthe terms Anglo-American and Mexican-American. TABLE 19 E ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN GROUPS AT THE THREE BASIS OF THE COUNTRY IN WHICH THE PARENTS WERE BORN Middle Achievers High Achievers Per Cent Number A A b Per Cent M A b Number Per Cent A A b Number Per Cent M A b Number Per Cent ) IN 1=471 (N=30) (N=33) (N=23) 81.1 46 98.0 25 83.7 33 100.0 19 82.6 16.8 1 2 .0 4 13.0 0 0 1 4 .4 2.1 0 0 1 3.3 0 0 2 8 .6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 .4 100.0 47 100.0 30 100.0 33 100.0 23 100.0 > ) (N =33) (N = =38) IN=6!) (N=35) 68.0 30 91.0 31 81.5 54 88.5 29 82.6 20.0 1 3.0 6 15.9 6 9.9 3 8.7 10.0 0 0 1 2.6 0 0 3 8 .7 2 .0 2 6.0 0 0 1 1.6 0 0 100,0 33 100.0 38 100.0 61 100.0 35 100.0 1 ) (N =€0) (N: =68) (N=94l (N=58) 74.5 76 95.2 56 82.0 87 92.5 48 83.0 18.4 2 2.4 10 15.0 6 6.4 4 6 .8 6.1 0 0 2 3 .0 0 0 5 8 .5 1.0 2 2.4 0 0 1 l . l 1 1.7 100.0 80 100.0 68 100.0 94 100.0 58 100.0 TABLE 20 A COMPARISON OF THE EIGHTH GRADE ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN GROUPS ; ON THE BASIS OF THE COUNTRY IN WHICH PARENTAL SCHOOLING WA! Sex Parental B irthplace8 Low Achievers A A d Number Per Cent M A Number Per Cent Middle A c) A A Number Per Cent Boys: Both parents United S tates One parent outside the United States Both parents outside the United States Unknown Total (N=27) IN=48| IN*47l 26 96.3 40 83.2 45 96.0 0 0 5 10.5 1 2.0 0 0 1 2.1 0 0 1 3.7 2 4.2 1 2.0 27 100.0 48 100.0 47 100.0 G irls: Both parents United S tates One parent outside the United States Both parents outside the United S tates Unknown Total C N =13J (N=50) IN=33) 13 100.0 37 74.0 31 94.0 0 0 8 t6,0 0 0 0 0 1 2.0 0 0 0 0 4 8.0 2 6.0 13 100.0 50 100.0 33 100.0 Both: Both parents United States One parent outside the United S tates Both parents outside the United States Unknown Total (N=40) (N=981 IN=80I 39 97.5 77 78.6 76 95.0 0 0 13 13.3 1 1.2 0 0 2 2.0 0 0 1 2.5 6 6.1 3 3.8 40 100.0 98 100.0 80 100.0 aThe format for th is table was adopted, in p a rt, from Brown’s study 119561 A A and M A are abbreviations for the terms Anglo-American and Mexican-American. TABLE 20 -A M ERICA N A N D M EX ICA N-AM ERICA N G R O U PS A T TH E TH R EE ACH IEV EM EN T LEV ELS C O U N T R Y IN W H IC H PA REN TA L SCH O O LIN G W A S C O M PL E T E D Middle Achievers High Achievers V lA b Per Cent A A b Number Per Cent Number M A b Per Cent A A b Number Per Cent M A b Number Per Cent II ■ f a * CO (N=47) CN=30) (N=33) (N=23) 83.2 45 96.0 25 86.6 32 97.0 22 95.6 10.5 1 2 .0 2 6.7 0 0 0 0 2.1 0 0 3 6.7 0 0 1 4.4 4.2 1 2 .0 0 0 1 3 .0 0 0 100.0 47 100.0 30 1 0 0 . 0 33 1 0 0 . 0 23 100. =50) (N=33) (N=38) IN=6I) (N=35) 74.0 31 94.0 31 81.8 56 92 .0 27 76.8 t6 .0 0 0 6 15.6 1 1.6 4 11.6 2 .0 0 0 0 0 3 4 .8 4 11.6 8.0 2 6 .0 1 2.6 1 1.6 0 0 100.0 33 100.0 38 100.0 61 1 0 0 . 0 35 1 0 0 . 0 1=98) (N=80) (N=68) (N=94) (N=58) 78.6 76 95.0 56 82.0 88 93.4 49 84.7 13.3 1 1 . 2 8 12.0 1 l . l 4 6.8 2 . 0 0 0 3 4.5 3 3.3 5 8.5 6.1 3 3.8 1 1.5 2 2 .2 0 0 100.0 80 1 0 0 . 0 68 1 0 0 . 0 94 1 0 0 . 0 58 1 0 0 . 0 (1956) in-Americen. * 129 ethnic groups at each achievement level received their schooling in the United States* Hovever, the lov and middle achieving Mexican-American group shov more parents vho vere educated outside the United States* Comparisons betveen the tvo ethnic groups for the sexes at each achieve ment level reveal almost similar results* In this instance, the lov and middle achieving Mexican-American girls shov a larger per cent of parents vho vere educated outside the United States. Prior parental occupations (if foreign born).— Table 21 shovs the data for the tvo ethnic groups at each achieve ment level regarding the parents' occupations vhich differ from the occupations they held before coming to the United States. Less than five per cent of the parents in both ethnic groups at each achievement level reported occupations vhich differed from the occupation they held prior to en tering the country. Analysis of the results for the sexes for both ethnic groups at each achievement level reveal similar findings. Thus, no real difference in parental occupations exist vith respect to the occupations held nov and before coming to this country. Language spoken by the pupil at home.— Table 22 pre sents the findings for the tvo ethnic groups at each achievement level vith respect to the language spoken by the pupil at home. One hundred per cent of the Anglo- TABLE 21 A C O M PA R ISO N OF TH E EIGHTH G R A D E A N G LO -A M ER IC A N A N D M EX ICA N-AM ERICA N G R O W O N T H E BASIS OF T H E PARENTS' OCCUPATIONS V W IC H DIFFER F R O / T H E Y H E L D BEFO RE C O M IN G T O TH E UNITED STATE Low Achievers Middle Sex , ■ ’•"» > * •' JJS SJS involvement Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Boys: One parent 0 (N=27) 0 2 (N=48) 4 .2 0 <N=47) 0 Both p arents 0 0 0 0 0 0 None 27 100.0 46 95.8 47 100.0 Total 27 100.0 48 100.0 47 100.0 G irls : One parent 0 (N=I31 0 0 (N=50) 0 1 (N=33) 3 .0 Both p aren ts 0 0 0 0 0 0 None 13 100.0 50 100.0 32 97.0 Total 13 100.0 50 100.0 33 100.0 Both: One parent 0 (N=40) 0 2 (N=98) 2.0 1 (N=80) 1.2 Both parents 0 0 0 0 0 0 None 40 100.0 96 98.0 79 98.8 Total 40 100.0 98 100.0 80 100.0 aA A and A A A are ab b rev iatio n s for the terms Anglo-American and AAexIcan-Amerlcan. TABLE 21 A N D MEXICAN-AMERICAN GROUPS AT THE THREE ACHIEVEMENT LEVELS CUPATIONS WHICH DIFFER FROM THE OCCUPATIONS COM ING TO THE UNITED STATES Middle Achievers High Achievers nt AAa Number Per Cent AAA® Number Per Cent AA“ Number Per Cent AAA® Number Per Cent 0 (N=47) 0 2 <N=301 6.7 1 (N=33 i 3.0 1 (N=23> 4.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4.4 47 100.0 28 93.3 32 97.0 21 91.2 47 100.0 30 100.0 33 100.0 23 100.0 1 (N=33) 3.0 0 (N=38) 0 2 (N=61) 3.3 2 (N=35) 5.7 0 0 2 5.3 0 0 I 2.9 32 97.0 36 94.7 59 96.7 32 91.4 33 100.0 38 100.0 61 100.0 35 100.0 1 (N=80) 1.2 2 (N=68) 3.0 3 CN=94) 3.2 3 (N=58) 5.2 0 0 2 3.0 0 0 2 3.4 79 98.8 64 94.0 91 96.8 53 91.4 80 100.0 68 100.0 94 100.0 58 100.0 an. TABLE 22 A COAAPARISON OF THE EIGHTH GRADE ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERIC, ON THE BASIS OF LANGUAGE SPOKEN BY THE P I Low Achievers I Sex Language Factor AAb Number Per Cent MAb Number Per Cent AAb Number P Boys: English only 27 (N=27) 100.0 10 (N=48) 20.8 (N=47 47 Degree of Bilingualism Always 0 0 0 0 0 Atore than half 0 0 6 12.5 0 Half the time 0 0 9 18.8 0 Less than half 0 0 23 47.9 0 Never 0 0 0 0 0 Total 27 100.0 48 100.0 47 Girls: English only 13 (N=131 100.0 18 (N=50) 36.0 (N=33 33 Degree of Bilingualism Always 0 0 3 6.0 0 AAore than half 0 0 3 6.0 Q Hitf the time 0 0 II 22.0 0 Less than half 0 0 12 24.0 0 Never 0 0 13 6.0 0 Total 13 100.0 50 100.0 33 Both: English only 40 (N=40) 100.0 28 (N=98) 28.6 (N=8( 80 Degree of Bilingualism Always 0 0 3 3.1 0 Atore than half 0 0 9 9.1 0 Half the time 0 0 20 20.4 0 Less than half 0 0 35 35.7 0 Never 0 0 3 3.1 0 Total 40 100.0 98 100.0 80 dThe format for this table was adopted, In part, from Brown's study (1956). bAA and AAA are abbreviations for the terms Anglo-American and Mexican-Amerlean. TABLE 22 MERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN GROUPS AT THE THREE ACHIEVEMENT LEVELS F LANGUAGE SPOKEN BY THE PUPIL AT HOME Middle Achievers High Achievers b t Per Cent AAb Number Per Cent MAb Number Per Cent AAb Number Per Cent MAb Number Per Cent ■8) (N=47) (N=30) IN=33) (N=23) 20.8 47 100.0 10 33.3 33 100.0 15 65.2 0 0 0 1 3.3 0 0 1 4.3 12.5 0 0 2 6.7 0 0 0 0 18.8 0 0 2 6.7 0 0 1 4.3 47.9 0 0 13 43.3 0 0 6 26.2 0 0 0 2 6.7 0 0 0 0 100.0 47 100.0 30 100.0 33 100.0 23 100.0 50) C N=33) (N=38) (N=6!) tN=35) 36.0 33 100.0 1 1 28.9 61 100.0 14 40.0 6.0 0 0 1 2.6 0 0 3 8.6 6.0 Q 0 2 5.3 0 0 3 8.6 22.0 0 0 5 13.2 0 0 2 5.7 24.0 0 0 17 44.7 0 0 10 28.5 6.0 0 0 2 5.3 0 0 3 8.6 100.0 33 100.0 38 100.0 61 100.0 35 100.0 98) (N=80) (N=68) IN=94) (N=58) 28.6 80 100.0 21 30.9 94 100.0 29 50.0 3.1 0 0 2 2.9 0 0 4 6.9 9.1 0 0 4 5.9 0 0 3 5.2 20.4 0 0 7 10.3 0 0 3 5.2 35.7 0 0 30 44.1 0 0 16 27.5 3.1 0 0 4 5.9 0 0 3 5.2 100.0 80 100.0 68 100.0 94 100.0 58 100.0 1956). -American. 132 American group at each of the achievement levels spoke English exclusively at home. Among the Mexican—American group there is a variation of findings ranging from less than thirty per cent in the lov and middle achievement groups to fifty per cent at the high achieving group with respect to the language spoken by the pupil at home. Analysis of findings for the two ethnic groups by sex at each achievement level again show the fact that one hundred per cent of the Anglo-American pupils spoke English exclusively. In the Mexican-American group sixty-five per cent of the high achieving boys compared with forty per cent for the girls spoke English at home. The remaining Mexican- American boys and girls at the low and middle achievement levels show no real differences with respect to the language spoken by the pupil at home. Of the Mexican-American group at all three achievement levels, about twelve per cent used Spanish exclusively or more than half the time. Forty per cent of the Mexican-American group at each achievement level used Spanish either half the time or occasionally. Thus, it is apparent that comparisons among the low, middle, and high achieving Mexican-American groups for the two sexes show almost similar findings. To this writer's knowledge, there are no available studies wherein present findings as discussed in this section may be compared. 133 Intellectual traits Table 23 contains the means and standard deviations for each of the intellectual traits according to ethnic grouping and achievement level* Language IQ.— The Kramer*s test shovs a very signi ficant over-all mean difference in language IQ scores be tween the Anglo-American and Mexican-American high achiev ing groups* In this instance, the Anglo-American high achievers earned significantly higher mean scores. No significant over-all mean differences in language IQ scores are found between the low and middle achieving Anglo-Ameri can and Mexican-American groups* The over-all significant F ratio of 104.47 shown in Table 35 for the achievement level effect indicates the fact that significant mean differences in language IQ's exist between the low, middle, and high achievers, regard less of ethnic factors* Inspection of the language IQ's in Table 23 shows progressive increases in mean IQ scores from 87.05 in the low group to 99*88 and 112*67 respective ly for the middle and high achievement groups. Kramer's analysis test indicates that the mean differences between achievement levels are significant well beyond the one per cent level. Thus, significant mean differences in language IQ exist between the high achieving Anglo-American pupils and the low and middle achieving Mexican-American pupils* TABLE 23 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE MEANS FOR THE IN ACCORDING TO ETHNICITY, ACHIEVEMENT, AND SE1 Sex Intelligence Test Scores8 Low Achievers Middle < AAb Mean S.D. MAb Mean S.D. Level of Sign!flcancec AAb Mean S.D. MA1 Mean Boys: (N"27) IN=48 5 IN«47I IN*3< Language IQ 89.00 12.27 88.60 14.37 ns 104.38 14.57 103.00 1 Non-language IQ 98.81 14.15 100.40 (2.80 ns 110.15 13.52 109.07 1 Total IQ 94.11 10.18 94.54 11.41 ns 107.36 11.29 106.23 I Girls: (N-131 (N=50) CN-331 (N=3E Language IQ 84.15 16.43 86.58 10.67 ns 98.52 11.16 93.50 1 Non-language IQ 99.46 14.40 98.62 10.35 ns 104.15 14.24 102.18 1 Total IQ 91.77 12.65 92.66 8.15 ns 101.48 10.00 98.03 1 Both: CN-401 (N*981 (N«80) (N=68 Language IQ 87.43 13.73 87.57 12.68 ns 101.77 13.48 97.69 1 Non-language IQ 99.03 14.05 99.49 11.59 ns 107.63 14.13 105.22 1 Total IQ 93.35 10.94 93.58 9.88 ns 104.83 10.64 101.65 1 0Intelligence test scores were derived from the CTMM 1957 edition* bAA and MA are abbreviations for the terms Anglo-American and Mexican-American* cBased on the modified t ratios computed by Kramer's analysis test for the difference between means* TABLE 23 IONS OF THE MEANS FOR THE INTELLIGENCE TEST SCORES INICITY, ACHIEVEMENT, AND SEX GROUPINGS Middle Achievers High Achievers AAb MAb Level of Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Significance0 AAb Mean S.D. MAb Mean S.D. Level of Significance0 (N=47S IN-30) IN-33) IN- >23) 104.38 14.57 103.00 15.38 ns 114.84 12.75 109 .43 15.72 ns 110.15 13.52 109.07 11.79 ns 117.78 12.53 113.43 11.00 ns 107.36 tl.29 106.23 12.62 ns 116.47 10.93 111.61 11.66 ns IN-331 IN-38) IN-611 IN-351 98.52 11.16 93.50 13.60 ns 115.64 12.38 108.23 1t.39 .04 104.15 14.24 102.18 14.21 ns 115.95 14.68 107.66 12.13 •01 101.48 10.00 98.03 11.40 ns 115.93 11.53 108.17 9.62 .01 IN-80) INa >68) |N=94) IN-=58) 101.77 13.48 97.69 13.07 ns 115.24 12.51 108.71 13.15 .01 107.63 14.13 105.22 13.55 ns 116.86 13.53 109.95 11.94 •01 104.83 10.64 101.65 12.0) ns 116.20 11.10 109.53 10.53 .01 lean* difference between means. 135 Similarly, significant mean differences in language IQ exist between the high achieving Mexican-American pupils and the low and middle achieving Anglo-American pupils. Kramer's test results reveal no significant mean sex differences in language IQ between the Anglo-American and Mexican-American boys at each achievement level. However, significant mean language IQ differences between the Anglo- American and Mexican-American girls exist at the high achievement level but not at the low and middle achievement levels. Further analysis with the Kramer's test indicates that an insignificant mean language IQ difference exists between the high achieving Mexican-American boys and the middle achieving Anglo-American boys. In addition, the comparison of the two mean language IQ's between the middle achieving Mexican-American girls and the low achieving Anglo-American boys reveals no significant findings beyond the five per cent level. Lastly, the high achieving Mexi can-American girls likewise earned mean language IQ's that are not significantly different from the middle achieving Anglo-American boys according to the Kramer's test at the five per cent level. Non-language IQ.— The Kramer's test shows a very significant over-all mean difference in non-language IQ between the Anglo-American and Mexican-American high achieving groups in favor of the Anglo-American sample. No significant over-all mean differences in non-language IQ 136 are found between the low and middle achieving Anglo-Ameri can and Mexican-American groups. The over-all significant F ratio of 35.62 shown in Table 36 for the achievement level effect reveals the fact that significant mean differences in non-language IQ exist between the low, middle, and high achievers regardless of ethnic group membership. However, Kramer's test results indicate that aside from the reported significant increases in mean IQ from the low to the high achievement levels, ex pected significant differences in mean IQ do not necessarily occur. For example, the mean difference in non-language IQ between the high achieving Mexican-American group and the middle achieving Anglo-American group is not significant at the five per cent level, Kramer's test results reveal no significant mean sex differences in non-language IQ between the Anglo-American and Mexican-American boys at each achievement level. How ever, significant mean non-language IQ differences between the Anglo-American and Mexican-American girls exist at the high achievement level but not at the low and middle achievement levels. Further analysis with the Kramer's test shows results which indicate that the mean non-language IQ's between the high achieving Mexican-American boys and girls and the middle achieving Anglo-American boys and girls are not significant at the five per cent level. Total IQ test.— The Kramer's test for the total test 137 IQ shows results which are rather similar to those reported on the language and non-language sections of this chapter. As noted earlier, a very significant over-all mean differ ence in test scores betveen the Anglo-American and Mexican- American high achieving groups in favor of the Anglo-Ameri can group is shown by the Kramer's test. Likewise, no sig nificant over-all differences in test scores are found be tveen the low and middle achieving Anglo-American and Mexi can-American groups. In addition, Kramer's test also indi cated that the mean total IQ for the high achieving Mexican- American group is not significantly different from that ob tained for the middle achieving Anglo-American group. Kramer'3 test results reveal no significant mean sex differ ences in total IQ scores betveen the Anglo-American and Mexican-American boys at each achievement level. Signifi cant mean total IQ differences betveen the Anglo-American and Mexican-American girls exist at the high achievement level but not at the lov and middle achievement levels. Kramer's test also shows that the total IQ betveen the middle achieving Anglo-American boys and the middle achiev ing Mexican-American girls are significant beyond the five per cent level. Frager's study (1961) is the only available cross- cultural research employing the grade-point average cri terion as a measurement of school achievement. His study indicated that significant mean score differences in 138 intelligence test scores are found between the low and high achieving pupils, Riessman (1961) in his discussion of the culturally deprived pupil pointed out the fact that low in telligence test scores are related to low achievement scores. It is evident that neither of the two reports cited above show results that are comparable in nature to the findings of this study. Achievement traits Table 24 contains the means and standard deviations for each of the achievement traits according to ethnic grouping and achievement level. The Kramer's test for the total test battery and for five of its six sub-tests— reading vocabulary and compre hension, arithmetic reasoning and fundamentals, and mechan ics of English— shows very significant over-all mean score differences between the Anglo-American and Mexican-American high achieving groups in favor of the Anglo-American group. On the sixth sub-test, spelling, the mean score differences between the Anglo-American and Mexican-American high achievers are not significant at the five per cent level. No significant over-all mean difference for the total test battery and its six sub-test seores are found between the low and middle achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils. An examination of mean scores for each of the sub- TABLE 24 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE MEANS FOR THE ACHIEVEMENT ACCORDING TO ETHNICITY, ACHIEVEMENT, AND SEX GROUPIN Sex Achievement Test Scores® Low Achievers Middle Achievers AAb Mean S.D. MAb Mean S.D. Level of Significance0 AAb Mean S.D. MAb Mean S.D. Boys: Reading IN-27) (N=48) (N-47) |N=30) Vocabulary 7.11 1.84 6.69 1.72 ns 8.78 1.56 8.33 1.65 Comprehension 7.03 1.50 6.70 1.17 ns 8.73 1.76 8.39 2.00 Arithmetic Reasoning 6.95 1.23 6.98 1.21 ns 8.42 1.14 8.37 1.29 Fundamentals 6.63 1.05 6.93 1.28 ns 8.49 1.65 8.30 1.38 Language Arts Mechanics of English 7.06 1.82 6.88 1.54 ns 8.92 1.31 8.40 1.38 Spelling 6.03 1.73 5.79 1.56 ns 7.56 1.86 7.06 1.92 Total Test 6.84 1.34 6.69 1.14 ns 8.51 i 1.28 8.16 1.40 Girls: Reading IN*= 131 IN=50I (N=33) IN-381 Vocabulary 6.30 1.66 6.90 1.39 ns 8.24 1.49 7.77 1.76 Comprehension 7.08 2.11 6.58 1.03 na 8.00 1.29 7.62 1.40 Arithmetic Reasoning 7.07 1.43 6.69 1.05 ns 7.82 1.05 7.37 1.16 Fundamentals 6.76 1.23 6.75 1.07 ns 8.22 1.46 7.61 0.94 Language Arts Mechanics of English 7.29 2.06 7.22 1.31 ns 8.82 1.29 8.66 1.67 Spelling 6.32 1.38 6.53 1.53 ns 7.06 1.34 7.47 1.82 Total Test 6.83 1.48 6,80 0.96 ns 8.05 1.05 7.77 1.25 Both: Reading (N=403 (N=98l (N-80) (N-681 Vocabulary 6.70 1.77 6.79 1.55 ns 8.51 1.52 8.10 1.71 Comprehension 7.05 1.80 6.64 1.10 ns 8.36 1.52 8.00 1.70 Arithmetic Reasoning 6.99 1.28 6.83 1.14 ns 8.10 1.09 7.87 1.22 Fundamentals 6.67 1.10 6.84 1.17 ns 8.38 1.57 7.95 1.20 Language Arts Mechanics of English 7.17 1.94 7.05 1.42 ns 8.87 1.30 8.53 1.52 Spel1ing 6.13 1.62 6.19 1.58 ns 7.36 1.68 7.26 1,86 Total Test 6.83 1.37 6.75 1.05 ns 8.32 1.20 7.94 1.32 Achievement test scores were derived from the CAT 1957 edition. bAA and MA are abbreviations for the terms Anglo-American and MexicaewAmerican. cBa*ed on the modified t ratios computed by Kramer's analysis test for the difference between means. TABLE 24 IONS OF THE MEANS FOR THE ACHIEVEMENT TEST SCORES HNICITY, ACHIEVEMENT, AND SEX GROUPINGS Middle Achievers High Achievers , c AAb MAb Level of Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Significance0 AAb MAb /Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Level of Significance0 IN’ *471 (N=3GI CN-331 (N=231 8.78 1.56 8.33 1.65 ns 9.91 1.42 9.20 1.64 ns 8.73 1.76 8.39 2.00 ns 9.86 1.89 9.77 2.32 ns 8.42 1.14 8.37 1.29 ns 9.55 1.27 9.20 1.40 ns 8.49 1.65 8.30 1.38 ns 10.16 1.40 9.78 1.71 ns 8.92 1.31 8.40 1.38 ns 10.12 1.18 9.48 1.38 ns 7.56 1.86 7.06 1.92 ns 8.83 1.58 8.45 1.66 ns 8.51 1.28 8.16 1.40 ns 9.76 1.24 9.34 1.41 ns (N=33) CN-38) (N-61) (N=35l 8.24 1.49 7.77 1.76 ns 10.07 l.tl 8.87 1.29 •01 8.00 1.29 7.62 1.40 ns 10.68 1.99 9.24 1.34 .01 7.82 1.05 7.37 1.16 ns 9.42 1.13 8.49 0.90 .01 8.22 1.46 7.61 0.94 ns 10.37 1.55 9.25 1.40 .01 8.82 1.29 8.66 1.67 ns 10.94 1.33 9.93 1.36 .01 7.06 1.34 7.47 1.82 ns 9.42 1.31 9.40 I.16 ns 8.05 1.05 7.77 1.25 ns 10.16 1.13 9.22 0.91 .01 (N=305 IN =681 IN=94> |N=58I 8.51 1.52 8.10 1.71 ns 10.00 t.26 9.03 1.45 .01 8.36 1.52 8.00 1.70 ns 10.27 1.93 9.50 1.83 .01 8.10 1.09 7.87 1.22 ns 9.48 1.18 8.84 1.17 •01 8.38 1.57 7.95 1.20 ns 10.26 1.47 9.51 1.55 .01 8.87 1.30 8.53 1.52 ns 10.53 1.25 9.70 1.37 .01 7.36 1.68 7.26 1.86 ns 9.15 1i44 9,11 1.44 ns 8.32 1.20 7.94 1.32 ns 9.96 1.18 9.27 1.12 •01 rican. e difference between means. 140 tests in Table 24 shows a gradual but definite increase in mean differences between the low, middle, and high achievers regardless of ethnic or sex group membership* The F ratios as shown in Tables 38 to 44 for the achievement level effect reveal the fact that these mean differences are statistically significant beyond the one per cent level. Kramer®s test results reveal no significant mean sex differences on the total test scores as well as on the six sub-tests between the Anglo-American and Mexican-American boys at each achievement level. Significant mean differ ences exist on the total test scores and on five of the six sub-tests between the high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American girls. On the sixth sub-test, spelling, the mean score differences between the Anglo-American and Mexican-American high achieving girls are not significant at the five per cent level. No significant over-all mean sex differences for any of the achievement tests are found between the two ethnic groups at low and middle achievement levels. In addition, the Kramer®s test results show that no significant mean differences for any of the achievement tests are found between the Mexican-American high achieving girls and the Anglo-American middle achieving boys and girls. Furthermore, the mean differences for any of the achievement tests betveen the middle achieving Mexican- 141 American girls and the lov achieving Anglo-American boys are also not significant at the five per cent level. Tvo significant interaction effects betveen the eth nicity and achievement level (GPA) variables for the reading vocabulary and arithmetic fundamental sub-test scores are seen in Tables 38 and 41• This means that the significant mean differences in the above tvo skill subjects betveen the high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American girls may be attributed to either of the tvo effects (ethnicity and GPA factors) acting together and not to either influence acting alone. Erickson's study (1963) comparing over-achieving and under-achieving Mexican-American and Anglo-American pupils is the only available research reported in the literature. He concluded that no significant mean difference on the total achievement test existed betveen the tvo ethnic groups. Since Erickson's criterion of achievement status vas determined by teacher's estimate of ability rather than by grade-point average, it is questionable that a comparison betveen Erickson's findings and those reported in this study vould be feasible. Motivational traits Table 25 contains the means and standard deviations for each of the total motivation test scores according to ethnic grouping and achievement level. TABLE 25 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE MEANS FOR THE MOTIVAT 1 C ACCORDING TO ETHNICITY, ACHIEVEMENT, AND SEX 6R0UF Sex Motivation Test Scores* Low Achievers Middle Achiever AAb Mean S.D. MAb Mean S.D. Level of Significance0 AAb Mean S.D. MAb Mean S.D. Boyst (N-27) (N-48I (N=471 CN-301 Total Integrated 122.04 4.12 122.3! 4.11 ns 122.13 4.14 121.60 4.44 Total Unintegrated 121.70 2.93 120.02 3.71 ns 120.19 3.68 120.57 3.18 Total SMAT 243.74 5.54 242.33 5.43 ns 242.32 5.17 242.17 5.98 Girts: IN-131 (N=501 (N-331 1N“381 Total Integrated 120.34 3.10 121.38 3.75 ns 123.06 3.72 122.39 3.99 Total Unlntegrated $21.92 2.40 120.70 3.69 ns 121.24 5.81 M9 *89 3.62 Total SMAT 242.46 4.27 242.08 4.30 ns 244.30 6.56 242.28 5.38 Both: $N=40J (N=981 (N=801 fNc68) Total Integrated $21.55 3.6$ 121.78 3.93 ns 122.5$ 3.82 122.04 4.26 Total Unintegrated 121.78 2.74 $20.37 3.70 ns 120.63 4.67 120.19 3.42 Total SMAT 243.33 4.90 242.15 4.9$ ns 243.14 5.86 242.23 5.58 aMotivatlon test scores were derived from the SMAT Research Edition, 1961 bAA and MA are abbreviations for the terms Anglo-American and Mexican-American. cBa$ed on the modified t ratios computed by Kramer's analysis test for the difference between means. TABLE 25 S OF THE MEANS FOR THE MOTIVATION TEST SCORES CITY, ACHIEVEMENT, AND SEX GROUPINGS Middle Achievers High Achievers AAb MAb Level of AAb MAb Level of Mean S.D* Mean S.D. Significance0 Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Significance0 (N=47l IN-301 (N-331 (N-231 122.13 4.14 121.60 4.44 ns 121.09 5.28 121.91 4.28 ns 120.19 3*68 120.57 3.18 ns 119.82 3.49 121.00 2.30 ns 242.32 5.17 242.17 5.98 ns 240.91 6.61 242.91 4.22 ns (N-331 CN-381 (N-6t) (N-351 123.06 3.72 122.39 3.99 ns 121.61 3.02 121.77 4.10 ns 121.24 5.81 119.89 3.62 ns 120.20 2.87 120.03 2,81 ns 244.30 6.56 242.28 5.38 ns 241.81 4.46 241.80 4.81 ns CN-801 (N-681 (N-941 (N-581 122.51 3.82 122.04 4.26 ns 121.43 4.10 121.83 4.17 ns 120.63 4.67 120.19 3.42 ns 120.06 3.09 120.41 2.64 ns 243.14 5.86 242.23 5.58 ns 241.49 5.53 242.24 4.50 ns n« fference between means* 143 Gross motivation test scores.— The results of the Kramer's analysis test shov no significant means score dif ferences on the total motivation test, total integrated test, and the total unintegrated test betveen the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican- American groups. A further examination of the results in Table 25 also indicates that no significant mean sex differences exist betveen the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo- American and Mexican-American boys and girls on any of the three total motivation tests. The analysis of variance results shovn in Tables 45, 46, and 47 for the three total motivation tests for the achievement level treatment variable reveal F values that are not significant at the five per cent level. The re sults of the interaction effects for the three variables— ethnicity, achievement, and sex— likevise shov no signifi cant F values. In short, the findings shov that Anglo-American and Mexican-American lov, middle, and high achievers are likely to earn mean total motivation test scores vhich are not sig nificantly different at the five per cent level. Integrated motivation test scores.— Table 26 con tains the means and standard deviations for each of the over-all intrinsic and acquired interest factors at the in tegrated level according to ethnic grouping and achievement TABLE 26 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE MEANS FOR THE INTEGRATED AND UN INTEGRA! ACCORDING TO ETHNICITY AND ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL Motivational Trait Scores8 Low Achievers Middle Achiever AAb Mean S.D. MAb Mean S.D, Level of Signi ficance0 AAb Mean S.D. MAb Mean S.D. Integrated: Intrinsic Interests (N»40l CN*981 <N=801 |N=681 Assertion 6.86 2.54 6.10 2.55 ns 6.81 2.40 6.75 2.48 Sensua1f ty 9.88 2.34 9.29 2.55 ns 9.46 2.11 9.47 2.22 Sex 8.58 2.67 8.79 2.94 ns 9.20 2.42 9.43 2.54 Gregarious 7.98 2,95 8.29 2.62 ns 7.41 2.53 7.44 2.43 Narcissism 9.13 2.73 9.59 3.14 ns 9.54 2,75 10.29 2.49 Constructive 7.95 3.01 8.18 2.98 ns 8.08 2.43 7.96 2.28 Protective 8.f8 2.73 7.99 2.61 ns 7.65 2.63 7.72 2.45 Curiosity 8.58 3.09 8.56 2.82 ns 8.59 2.23 8.53 2.55 Aggression 7.78 2.75 8.14 2.60 ns 7.91 2.31 8.10 2.44 Play Fantasy 9.53 2.90 9.19 2.37 ns 10.24 2.15 9.54 2.75 Acquisition 6.98 2.65 7.09 3.02 ns 6*81 2.23 6.90 2.44 Acquired Interests Self Sentiment 8.58 2.81 8.38 2.84 ns 8.14 2.03 8.66 2.65 Super Ego 7.85 2.36 8.38 2.77 ns 7.91 2.33 7.76 2.63 Religion 7.13 2.92 7.47 2.85 ns 7.89 2.57 7.31 2.75 Patriotism 6.63 2.13 6.41 3.03 ns 6.84 2.21 6.06 2.76 Unintegrated: Intrinsic Interests (N=401 (N=98l (N=801 (N=68I Assertion 7.43 1.13 7.88 1.44 ns 7.59 1.54 7.96 1.26 Sensuality 9.18 1.22 8.57 1.38 .05 9.05 1.28 8.75 1.23 Sex 9.35 1.44 8.94 1.43 ns 9.09 1.31 8.93 1.25 Gregarious 8.53 1.81 8.20 1.66 ns 8.09 1.61 8.44 1.29 Narcissism 8.93 1.46 9.18 1.42 ns 9.46 1.14 9.32 1.07 Constructive 7.43 1.88 7.44 1.88 ns 7.41 1.48 7.60 1.73 Protective 7.95 1.20 7.87 1.30 ns 7.86 1.43 7.71 1.25 Curiosity 7.23 f«40 7.14 1.41 ns 7.48 1.38 7.26 1.30 Aggression 7.80 1.52 8.09 1.54 ns 7.74 1.54 7.44 1.21 Play Fantasy 8.00 1.91 7.60 1.56 ns 7.83 1.72 7.81 1.21 Acquisition 7.78 1.31 7.79 1.36 ns 7.88 1.33 7.79 1.07 Acquired Interests Self Sentiment 7.78 1.27 7.67 1.57 ns 7.71 1.30 7.49 1.09 Super Ego 7.58 1.45 7.43 1.31 ns 7.39 1.41 7.57 1.14 RetIgion 7.97 1.56 8.21 1.45 ns 7.94 1.26 8.12 1.32 Patriotism 8.63 1.55 8.31 1.59 ns 7.98 1.37 7.96 1.32 *Motivationaf trait scores were derived from the SMAT research edition, 1961. cBased on the modi fie bAA and MA are abbreviations for the terms Anglo-American and Mexican-American. between means. TABLE 26 NS FOR THE INTEGRATED AND UN INTEGRATED MOTIVATIONAL TRAIT SCORES TO ETHNICITY AND ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL Middle Achievers A A Mean S.D. M A Mean S.D. Level of Significance0 High Achievers A A Mean S.D. M A Mean S.O. Level of Significance0 (N=80J (N1 “681 6.81 2.40 6.75 2.48 ns 9.46 2.11 9.47 2.22 ns 9.20 2.42 9.43 2.54 ns 7.41 2.53 7.44 2.43 ns 9.54 2,75 10.29 2.49 ns 8.08 2.43 7.96 2.28 ns 7.65 2.63 7.72 2.45 ns 8.59 2.23 8.53 2.55 ns 7.91 2.31 8. JO 2.44 ns 10.24 2.(5 9.54 2.75 ns 6.81 2.23 6.90 2.44 ns 8.14 2.03 8.66 2.65 ns 7.91 2.33 7.76 2.63 ns 7.09 2.57 7.31 2.75 ns 6.84 2.21 6.06 2.76 ns ( N = =80) (N==68) 7.59 1.54 7.96 1.26 ns 9.05 1.28 8.75 1.23 ns 9.09 1.31 8.93 1.25 ns 8.03 1.61 8.44 1.29 ns 9.46 1.14 9.32 1.07 ns 7.41 1.48 7.60 1.73 ns 7.86 1.43 7.71 1.25 ns 7.48 1.38 7.26 1.30 ns 7.74 1.54 7.44 1.21 ns 7.83 1.72 7.81 1.21 ns 7.88 1.33 7.79 1.07 ns 7.71 1.30 7.49 1.09 ns 7.39 I.41 7.57 1.14 ns 7.94 1.26 8.12 1.32 ns 7.98 1.37 7.96 1.32 ns IN-94) IN«58) 7.43 1.86 7.21 2.50 ns 9.31 1.84 10.17 2.27 ns 8.76 1.94 9.17 2.56 ns 7.12 1.79 7.09 2.52 ns 9.86 2.25 9.52 2.79 ns 7.67 2.24 7.40 2.50 ns 7.76 2.06 7.79 2.80 ns 7.70 2.04 7.86 2.56 ns 7.88 2.11 7.71 2.24 ns 9.68 2.09 9.53 2.69 ns 7.34 2.27 7.26 2.68 ns 8.38 1.75 9.12 2.4) ns 7.69 2.44 8.10 2.65 ns 7.97 2.12 7.24 3.05 ns 6.73 1.98 6.19 2.50 ns (N=94J (N*58) 7.50 1.17 7.57 1.24 ns 9.06 1.14 8.78 1.33 ns 8.65 1.25 8.91 1.30 ns 8.18 1.41 8.19 1.33 ns 9.56 1.14 9.62 1.12 ns 7.34 0.93 7.53 1.06 ns 8.10 1.10 7.69 1.16 ns 7.34 1.27 7.36 I.IO ns 7.53 1.20 7.47 1.31 ns 7.67 1.30 7.52 1.30 ns 7.77 1.39 7.91 1.25 ns 7.73 1.24 7.53 1.24 ns 7.69 1.28 7.97 1.15 ns 7.97 1.27 8.36 1.07 ns 7.98 1.42 8.00 1.24 ns 1961. jrican °Based on the modified t ratios computed by Kramer's analysis test for the difference between means. 145 level. The results of the Kramer's analysis test show no significant mean score differences on each of the eleven intrinsic and four acquired interest factors between the two ethnic groups at the three achievement levels. Further analysis with the Kramer's test show that the high achieving Anglo-American group earned a mean score of 7.42 on the assertion interest factor that is significantly higher than that of 6.10 for the low achieving Mexican- American group. Likewise, on the gregarious interest fac tor, the low achieving Mexican-American group obtained a mean score of 8.29 that is significantly higher than that of 7.41 and 7.12 for the middle and high achieving Anglo- American group respectively. In addition, on the narcis sistic interest factor, the low achieving Anglo-American group earned a mean score of 9.13 that is significantly lower than that of 10.29 for the middle achieving Mexican- American group. On the last intrinsic interest factor, play fantasy, the middle achieving Anglo-American group earned a mean score of 10.24 that is significantly higher than that of 9.19 for the low achieving Mexican-American group. All the mean differences between the two ethnic groups are significant at the five per cent level. On only one acquired interest factor, self-sentiment, is a significantly higher mean score in favor of the high achieving Mexican-American (9.12) over that of the middle 146 achieving Anglo-American (8.14) found. Table 27 displays the means and standard deviations for each of the integrated intrinsic and acquired factors according to ethnic grouping, achievement level, and sex group membership. The results of the Kramer's analysis test show no significant mean sex differences on each of the fifteen in tegrated interest factors between the low, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American boys. On the other hand, Kramer's analysis test results show no signifi cant mean sex differences on thirteen of the fifteen inte grated interest factors as reported in Table 27 between the low, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican- American girls. In one of the two exceptions noted, the low achieving Mexican-American girls earned a mean score of 7.46 for the constructive factor that is significantly higher than that of 3.62 for the low achieving Anglo- American girls. In the second instance, the middle achiev ing Anglo-American girls earned a mean score of 9.46 for the play fantasy factor that is significantly higher than that of 8.45 for the middle achieving Mexican-American girls. Kramer's test results also show that the mean scores on the sex interest factor for the high (9.26) and middle (10.36) achieving Anglo-American girls to be significantly higher than that of the high (8.48) and middle (8.30) Mexi- TABLE 27 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE MEANS FOR THE INTEGRATED MOTIVATI ACCORDING TO ETHNICITY, ACHIEVEMENT, AND SEX GROUPINGS Integrated Motivational Trait Scores® Low Achievers Middle Achievers AAb Mean S.D. MAb /Mean S.D. Level of Significance0 AAb Mean S.D. MAb Mean S.D. S i Boys: Intrinsic interests (N-27) (N-481 IN-47) IN-301 Assertion 6.81 2.25 6.06 2.36 ns 7.10 2.38 7.16 2.45 Sensuality 10.04 2.33 9.00 2.54 ns 9.36 1.96 8.63 2.08 Sex 8.29 2.71 8.38 2.48 ns 8.38 2.27 8.30 2.39 Gregarious 8.41 3.03 8.96 2.28 ns 7.91 2.59 7.53 2.52 Narcissism 8.52 2.53 8.64 2.82 ns 8.47 2.48 9.30 2.48 Constructive 9.07 2.73 8.94 2.91 ns 8.26 2.49 8.23 2.27 Protective 7.67 2.45 7.31 2.30 ns 7.47 2.66 7.33 2.12 Curiosity 9.00 2.97 9.27 2.87 ns 8.94 2.37 9.40 2.01 Aggression 7.59 2.68 8.44 2.44 ns 8.11 2.45 8.20 2.55 Play Fantasy 10.00 3.11 9.79 2.12 ns 10.66 2.05 10.93 2.26 Acquisition 6.52 2.46 6.63 2.32 ns 6.21 2.01 6.67 2.17 Acquired Interests Self Sentiment 8.37 2.80 8.37 2.85 ns 7.96 1.90 7.90 2.16 Super Ego 8.15 2.36 8.83 2.76 ns 8.45 2.43 8.43 2.30 Religion 6.96 2.31 7.08 2.59 ns 7.62 2.63 7.20 2.63 Patriotism 6.63 2.48 6.54 2.77 ns 7.17 2.34 6.40 2.91 Girls: Intrinsic Interests (N=131 IN=50) IN-331 IN-381 Assertion 6.92 3.15 6.14 2.75 ns 6.39 2.40 6.42 2.49 Sensuality 9.54 2.44 9.56 2.56 ns 9.61 2.33 10.13 2.13 Sex 9.15 2.58 9.18 3.31 ns 10.36 2.15 10.32 2.30 Gregarious 7.06 2.66 7.64 2.79 ns 6.70 2.28 7.37 2.40 Narcissism 10.38 2.79 10.50 3.19 ns 11.06 2.40 11.08 2.22 Constructive 5.62 2.14 7.46 2.90 .01 7.82 2.35 7.74 2.30 Protective 9.23 3.06 8.64 2.74 ns 7.91 2.62 8.03 2.68 Curiosity 7.69 3.25 7.88 2.62 ns 8.09 1.94 7.84 2.74 Aggression 8.15 2.97 7.86 2.73 ns 7.64 2.10 8.03 2.39 Play Fantasy 8.54 2.18 8.62 2.47 ns 9.64 2.19 8.45 2.62 Acquisition 7.92 2.87 7.54 3.53 ns 7.67 2.29 7.08 2.65 Acquired Interests Self Sentiment 9.00 2.89 8.38 2.86 ns 8.39 2.21 9.26 2.86 Super Ego 7.23 2.31 7.94 2.72 ns 7.15 1.97 7.24 2.77 Religion 7.46 3.99 7.84 3.07 ns 8.27 2.47 7.39 2.87 Patriotism 6.62 1.19 6.28 3.28 ns 6.36 1.93 5.79 2.65 •integrated motivational trait scores were derived from the SMAT research edition, 1961, bAA and MA are abbreviations for the terms Anglo-American and Mexican-American. cBased on the modified t ratios computed by Kramer's analysis test for the difference between means. TABLE 27 OF THE MEANS FOR THE INTEGRATED MOTIVATIONAL TRAIT SCORES THNICITY, ACHIEVEMENT, AND SEX GROUPINGS Middle Achievers High Achievers e° AAb Mean S.D. MAb Mean S.D. Level of Sign!ficance0 AAb Mean S.D. MAb Mean S.D. Level of Significance0 (N=47) 7.10 2.38 (N-30) 7.16 2.45 ns (N=33J 7.25 1.62 (N=23) 7.39 2.90 ns 9.36 1.96 8.63 2.08 ns 8.94 1.84 10.04 2.08 ns 8.38 2.27 8.30 2.39 ns 7.82 1.74 8.48 2.59 ns 7.91 2.59 7.53 2.52 ns 7.76 1.85 8.39 2.46 ns 8.47 2.48 9.30 2.48 ns 8.61 2.22 8.09 2.43 ns 8.26 2.49 8.23 2.27 ns 8.79 2.27 8.6! 2.50 ns 7.47 2.66 7.33 2.12 ns 7.42 1.97 6.65 2.64 ns 8.94 2.37 9.40 2.01 ns 8.64 2.37 8.61 2.78 ns 8.11 2.45 8.20 2.55 ns 7.39 2.4! 7.61 1*95 ns 10.66 2.05 10.93 2.26 ns 10.58 2.15 9.96 2.5! ns 6.21 2.01 6.67 2.17 ns 6.03 2.35 6.52 3.04 ns 7.96 1.90 7.90 2.16 ns 7.88 1.78 8.30 2.10 ns 8.45 2.43 8.43 2.30 ns 8.39 2.67 8.78 2.91 ns 7.62 2.63 7.20 2.63 ns 8.00 2.38 6.91 3.33 ns 7.17 2.34 6.40 2.91 ns 7.24 2.29 6.83 2.62 ns IN-33! (N-381 IN-611 IN-33) 6.39 2.40 6.42 2.49 ns 7.52 1.98 7.08 2.24 ns 9.61 2.33 10.13 2.13 ns 9.31 1.83 10.26 2.42 ns 10.36 2.15 10.32 2.30 ns 9.26 1.87 9.63 2.46 ns 6.70 2.28 7.37 2.40 ns 6.77 1.67 6.23 2.20 ns 11.06 2.40 11.08 2.22 ns 10.54 1.97 10.46 2.63 ns 7.82 2.35 7.74 2.30 ns 7.07 1.99 6.60 2.19 ns 7.91 2.62 8.03 2.68 ns 7.93 2.10 8.54 2.66 ns 8.09 E.94 7.84 2.74 ns 7.19 1.65 7.37 2.33 ns 7.64 2.10 8.03 2.39 ns 8.15 1.90 7.77 2.44 ns 9.64 2.19 8.45 2.62 •01 9.19 1.90 9.26 2.80 ns 7*67 2.29 7.08 2.65 ns 8.05 1.89 7.74 2.33 ns 8.39 2.21 9.26 2.86 ns 8.66 1.69 9.66 2.48 ns 7.15 1.97 7.24 2.77 ns 7.31 2.23 7.66 2.41 ns 8.27 2.47 7.39 2.87 ns 7.93 1.99 7.46 2.86 ns 6.36 1.93 5.79 2.65 ns 6.46 1.76 5.77 2.37 ns ; h edition, 1961. wlcan. he difference between means. 143 Gross motivation test scores*— The results of the Kramer’s analysis test shov no significant means score dif ferences on the total motivation test, total integrated test, and the total unintegrated test betveen the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican- American groups. A further examination of the results in Table 23 also indicates that no significant mean sex differences exist betveen the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo- American and Mexican-American boys and girls on any of the three total motivation tests. The analysis of variance results shovn in Tables 45, 46, and 47 for the three total motivation tests for the achievement level treatment variable reveal F values that are not significant at the five per cent level. The re sults of the interaction effects for the three variables— ethnicity, achievement, and sex— likevise shov no signifi cant F values. in short, the findings shov that Anglo-American and Mexican-American lov, middle, and high achievers are likely to earn mean total motivation test scores vhich are not sig nificantly different at the five per cent level. Integrated motivation test scores.— Table 26 con tains the means and standard deviations for each of the over-all intrinsic and acquired interest factors at the in tegrated level according to ethnic grouping and achievement TABLE 26 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE MEANS FOR THE INTEGRATED AND U b ACCORDING TO ETHNICITY AND ACHIEVEMEN1 Motivational Trait Scores® Low Achievers Middle AAb Mean S.D. MAb Mean S.D. Level of Signi ficancec AAb Mean S.D. M/ Mean Integrated: Intrinsic Interests (N=40! IN-981 IN-801 IN0 Assertion 6,85 2.54 6. tO 2.55 ns 6.81 2.40 6.75 Sensua11ty 9.88 2.34 9.29 2.55 ns 9.46 2. I I 9.47 Sex 8*58 2.67 8.79 2.94 ns 9.20 2.42 9.43 Gregarious 7.98 2.95 8.29 2.62 ns 7.41 2.53 7.44 Narcissism 9.13 2.73 9.59 3.14 ns 9.54 2.75 10.29 Constructive 7.95 3.01 8.18 2.98 ns 8.08 2.43 7.96 Protective 8.18 2.73 7.99 2.61 ns 7.65 2.63 7.72 Curiosity 8.58 3.09 8.56 2.82 ns 8.59 2.23 8.53 Aggression 7.78 2.75 8.14 2.60 ns 7.91 2.31 8.10 Play Fantasy 9.53 2.90 9.19 2.37 ns 10.24 2.15 9.54 Acquisition 6.98 2.65 7.09 3.02 ns 6.8! 2.23 6.90 Acquired Interests Self Sentiment 8.58 2.81 8.38 2.84 ns 8.14 2.03 8.66 Super Ego 7.85 2.36 8.38 2.77 ns 7.91 2.33 7.76 Religion 7.13 2.92 7.47 2.85 ns 7.89 2.57 7.31 Patriotism 6.63 2.13 6.41 3.03 ns 6.84 2.21 6.06 Un Integrated* Intrinsic Interests (N=40) |N=98) (N=80I (N= Assertion 7.43 1.13 7.88 1.44 ns 7.59 1.54 7.96 Sensuality 9.18 1.22 8.57 1.38 •05 9.05 1.28 8.75 Sex 9.35 1.44 8.94 1.43 ns 9.09 1.31 8.93 Gregarious 8.53 1.81 8.20 1.66 ns 8.09 1.61 8.44 Narcissism 8.93 1.46 9.18 1.42 ns 9.46 1.14 9.32 Constructive 7.43 1.88 7.44 1.88 ns 7.41 1.48 7.60 Protective 7.95 1.20 7.87 1.30 ns 7.86 1.43 7.71 Curiosity 7.23 1.40 7.14 1.41 ns 7.48 1.38 7.26 Aggression 7.80 1.52 8.09 1.54 ns 7.74 1.54 7.44 Play Fantasy 8.00 1.91 7.60 1.56 ns 7.83 1.72 7.81 Acquisition 7.78 1.31 7.79 1.36 ns 7.88 1.33 7.79 Acquired Interests Self Sentiment 7.78 1.27 7.67 1.57 ns 7.71 1.30 7.49 Super Ego 7.58 1.45 7.43 1.31 ns 7.39 1.41 7.57 Re|igion 7.97 1.56 8.21 1.45 ns 7.94 1.26 8.12 Patriotism 8.63 1.55 8.31 1.59 ns 7.98 1.37 7.96 •Motivational trait scores were derived from the SMAT research edition, 1961• cBased on the bAA and MA are abbreviations for the terms Anglo-American and Mexlcan-Amerlean. between mean: TABLE 26 kEANS FOR THE INTEGRATED AND UN INTEGRATED MOTIVATIONAL TRAIT SCORES I G TO ETHNICITY AND ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL Middle Achievers High Achievers icec AAb MAb Level of Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Significance0 AAb Mean S.D. MAb Level of Mean S.D. Significance0 (14=801 I N ' =68) (N=941 IN' “58) 6.81 2.40 6.75 2.48 ns 7.43 1.86 7.21 2.50 ns 9.46 2.11 9.47 2.22 ns 9.3! 1.84 10.17 2.27 ns 9.20 2.42 9.43 2.54 ns 8.76 1.94 9.17 2.56 ns 7.41 2.53 7.44 2.43 ns 7.12 1.79 7.09 2.52 ns 9.54 2.75 10.29 2.49 ns 9.86 2.25 9.52 2.79 ns 8.08 2*43 7.96 2.28 ns 7.67 2.24 7.40 2.50 ns 7.63 2.63 7.72 2.45 ns 7.76 2.06 7.79 2.80 ns 8.59 2.23 8.53 2.55 ns 7.70 2.04 7.86 2.56 ns 7.91 2.31 8.10 2.44 ns 7.88 2.11 7.71 2.24 ns 10.24 2.15 9.54 2.75 ns 9.68 2.09 9.53 2.69 ns 6.81 2.23 6.90 2.44 ns 7.34 2.27 7.26 2.68 ns 8.14 2.03 8.66 2.65 ns 8.38 1.75 9.12 2.41 ns 7.91 2.33 7.76 2.63 ns 7.69 2.44 8. tO 2.65 ns 7.89 2.57 7.31 2.75 ns 7.97 2.12 7.24 3.05 ns 6.84 2.21 6.06 2.76 ns 6.73 1.98 6.19 2*50 ns (N=80) (N=68) (N=94) (N*58) 7.59 1.54 7.96 1.26 ns 7.50 1.17 7.57 1.24 ns 9.05 1.28 8.75 1.23 ns 9.06 1.14 8.78 1.33 ns 9.09 1.31 8.93 1. 25 ns 8.65 1.25 8.91 1.30 ns 8.09 1.61 8.44 1.29 ns 8.18 1.41 8.19 1.33 ns 9.46 1.14 9.32 1.07 ns 9.56 1.14 9.62 1.12 ns 7.41 1.48 7.60 1.73 ns 7.34 0.93 7.53 1.06 ns 7.86 1.43 7.71 1.25 ns 8.10 1.10 7.69 1.16 ns 7.48 1.38 7.26 1.30 ns 7.34 1.27 7.36 1.10 ns 7.74 1.54 7.44 1.21 ns 7.53 1.20 7.47 1.31 ns 7.83 1.72 7.81 1.21 ns 7.67 1.30 7.52 1.30 ns 7.88 1.33 7.79 1.07 ns 7.77 1.39 7.91 1.25 ns 7.71 1.30 7.49 (.09 ns 7.73 1.24 7.53 1.24 ns 7.39 1.41 7.57 1.14 ns 7.69 1.28 7.97 1.15 ns 7.94 1.26 8.12 1.32 ns 7.97 1.27 8.36 1.07 ns 7.98 1.37 7.96 t.32 ns 7.98 1.42 8.00 1.24 ns , 1961. kmerican. cBased on the modified t ratios computed by Kramer's analysis test for the difference between means. 145 level. The results of the Kramer's analysis test show no significant mean score differences on each of the eleven intrinsic and four acquired interest factors between the two ethnic groups at the three achievement levels. Further analysis with the Kramer's test show that the high achieving Anglo-American group earned a mean score of 7.42 on the assertion interest factor that is significantly higher than that of 6.10 for the low achieving Mexican- American group. Likewise, on the gregarious interest fac tor, the low achieving Mexican-American group obtained a mean score of 8.29 that is significantly higher than that of 7.41 and 7.12 for the middle and high achieving Anglo- American group respectively. In addition, on the narcis sistic interest factor, the low achieving Anglo-American group earned a mean score of 9.13 that is significantly lower than that of 10.29 for the middle achieving Mexican- American group. On the last intrinsic interest factor, play fantasy, the middle achieving Anglo-American group earned a mean score of 10.24 that is significantly higher than that of 9.19 for the low achieving Mexican-American group. All the mean differences between the two ethnic groups are significant at the five per cent level. On only one acquired interest factor, self-sentiment, is a significantly higher mean score in favor of the high achieving Mexican-American (9.12) over that of the middle achieving Anglo-American (8.14) found. Table 27 displays the means and standard deviations for each of the integrated intrinsic and acquired factors according to ethnic grouping, achievement level, and sex group membership. The results of the Kramer's analysis test show no significant mean sex differences on each of the fifteen in tegrated interest factors between the low, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American boys. On the other hand, Kramer's analysis test results show no signifi cant mean sex differences on thirteen of the fifteen inte grated interest factors as reported in Table 27 between the low, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican- American girls. In one of the two exceptions noted, the low achieving Mexican-American girls earned a mean score of 7.46 for the constructive factor that is significantly higher than that of 5.62 for the low achieving Anglo- American girls. In the second instance, the middle achiev ing Anglo-American girls earned a mean score of 9.46 for the play fantasy factor that is significantly higher than that of 8.45 for the middle achieving Mexican-American girls. Kramer's test results also show that the mean scores on the sex interest factor for the high (9.26) and middle (10.36) achieving Anglo-American girls to be significantly higher than that of the high (8.48) and middle (8.30) Mexi- TABLE 27 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE MEANS FOR THE INTEGRATED MOTIVAT ACCORDING TO ETHNICITY, ACHIEVEMENT, AND SEX GROUPING Integrated Motivational Trait Scores8 Low Achieversi Middle Achievers AAb Mean S.D. MAb Mean S.D. Level of Significance® AAb Mean S.D. MAb Mean S.D. S Boys: Intrinsic Interests IN-27) (N-48) (N-47) IN-30) Assertion 6.81 2.25 6.06 2.36 ns 7.10 2.38 7.16 2.45 Sensuality 10.04 2.33 9.00 2.54 ns 9.36 1.96 8.63 2.08 Sex 8.29 2.71 8.38 2.48 ns 8.38 2.27 8.30 2.39 Gregarious 8.41 3.03 8.96 2.28 ns 7.91 2.59 7.53 2.52 Narcissism 8.52 2.53 8.64 2.82 ns 8.47 2.48 9.30 2.48 Constructive 9.07 2.73 8.94 2.91 ns 8.26 2.49 8.23 2.27 Protective 7.67 2.45 7.31 2.30 ns 7.47 2.66 7.33 2.12 Curiosity 9.00 2.97 9.27 2.87 ns 8.94 2.37 9.40 2.01 Aggression 7.59 2.68 8.44 2.44 ns 8.1! 2.45 8.20 2.55 Play Fantasy 10.00 3.11 9.79 2.12 ns 10.66 2.05 10.93 2.26 Acquisition 6.52 2.46 6.63 2.32 ns 6.21 2.0! 6.67 2.17 Acquired Interests Self Sentiment 8.37 2.80 8.37 2.85 ns 7.96 1.90 7.90 2.16 Super Ego 8.15 2.36 8.83 2.76 ns 8.45 2.43 8.43 2.30 Religion 6.96 2.31 7.08 2.59 ns 7.62 2.63 7.20 2.63 Patriotism 6.63 2.48 6.54 2.77 ns 7.17 2.34 6.40 2.91 Girls: Intrinsic Interests (N-131 CN-50) IN-331 IN-381 Assertion 6.92 3.15 6.14 2.75 ns 6.39 2.40 6.42 2.49 Sensuality 9.54 2.44 9.56 2.56 ns 9.61 2.33 10.13 2.13 Sex 9.15 2.58 9.18 3.31 ns 10.36 2.15 10.32 2.30 Gregarious 7.00 2.66 7.64 2.79 ns 6.70 2.28 7.37 2.40 Narcissism 10.38 2.79 10.50 3.19 ns 11.06 2.40 11.08 2.22 Constructive 5.62 2.14 7.40 2.90 .01 7.82 2.35 7.74 2.30 Protective 9.23 3.06 8.64 2.74 ns 7.91 2.62 8.03 2.68 Curiosity 7.69 3.25 7.88 2.62 ns 8.09 1.94 7.84 2.74 Aggression 8.15 2.97 7.86 2.73 ns 7.64 2.10 8.03 2.39 Play Fantasy 8.54 2.18 8.62 2.47 ns 9.64 2.19 8.45 2.62 Acquisition 7.92 2.87 7.54 3.53 ns 7*67 2.29 7.08 2.65 Acquired Interests Self Sentiment 9.00 2.89 8.38 2.86 ns 8.39 2.21 9.26 2.86 Super Ego 7.23 2.31 7.94 2.72 ns 7.15 1.97 7.24 2.77 Religion 7.46 3.99 7.84 3.07 ns 8.27 2.47 7.39 2.87 Patriotism 6.62 1.19 6.28 3.28 ns 6.36 1.93 5.79 2.65 •integrated motivational trait scores were derived from the SMAT research edition, 1961* bAA and MA are abbreviations for the terms Anglo-American and Mexican-American. cBased on the modified t ratios computed by Kramer’s analysis test for the difference between means* TABLE 27 THE MEANS FOR THE INTEGRATED MOTIVATIONAL TRAIT SCORES IICITY, ACHIEVEMENT, AND SEX GROUPINGS Middle Achievers High Achievers AAb MAb Level of Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Significance0 AAb Mean S.D. MAb Level of Mean S.D. Significance0 (N-47) (N==30) IN'=331 IN'=231 7.10 2.38 7.16 2.45 ns 7.25 1.62 7.39 2.90 ns 9.36 1.96 8.63 2.08 ns 8.94 1.84 10.04 2.08 ns 8.38 2.27 8.30 2.39 ns 7.82 1.74 8.48 2.59 ns 7.91 2.59 7.53 2.52 ns 7.76 1.85 8.39 2.46 ns 8.47 2.48 9.30 2.48 ns 8.61 2.22 8.09 2.43 ns 8.26 2.49 8.23 2.27 ns 8.79 2.27 8.6! 2.50 ns 7.47 2.66 7.33 2.12 ns 7.42 1.97 6.65 2.64 ns 8.94 2.37 9.40 2.01 ns 8.64 2.37 8.61 2.78 ns 8.11 2.45 8.20 2.55 ns 7.39 2.41 7.61 1.95 ns 10.66 2.05 10.93 2.26 ns 10.58 2.15 9.96 2.51 ns 6.21 2.01 6.67 2.17 ns 6.03 2.35 6.52 3.04 ns 7.96 1.90 7.90 2.16 ns 7.88 1.78 8.30 2.10 ns 8.45 2.43 8.43 2.30 ns 8.39 2.67 8.78 2.9t ns 7.62 2.63 7.20 2.63 ns 8.00 2.38 6.91 3.33 ns 7.17 2.34 6.40 2.91 ns 7.24 2.29 6.83 2.62 ns IN-331 (N-381 IN-611 IN-35) 6.39 2.40 6.42 2.49 ns 7.52 t.98 7.08 2.24 ns 9.61 2.33 10.13 2.13 ns 9.51 1.83 10.26 2.42 ns 10.36 2.15 10.32 2.30 ns 9.26 1.87 9.63 2.46 ns 6.70 2.28 7.37 2.40 ns 6.77 1.67 6.23 2.20 ns 11.06 2.40 11.08 2.22 ns 10.54 1.97 10.46 2*63 ns 7.82 2.35 7.74 2.30 ns 7.07 1.99 6.60 2.19 ns 7.91 2.62 8.03 2.68 ns 7.93 2.10 8.54 2*66 ns 8.09 1.94 7.84 2.74 ns 7.19 1.65 7.37 2.33 ns 7.64 2.10 8.03 2.39 ns 8.15 1.90 7.77 2.44 ns 9.64 2.19 8.45 2.62 •01 9.19 1.90 9.26 2*80 ns 7.67 2.29 7.08 2.65 ns 8.05 1.89 7.74 2.33 ns 8.39 2.21 9.26 2.86 ns 8.66 1.69 9.66 2.48 ns 7.15 1.97 7.24 2*77 ns 7.31 2.23 7.66 2.41 ns 8.27 2.47 7.39 2.87 ns 7.95 1.99 7.46 2.88 ns 6.36 1.93 5.79 2.65 ns 6.46 1.76 5.77 2.37 ns edition, 1961* lean* difference between means. 148 can-American boys. In like manner, the high (9.63) and middle (10.32) achieving Mexican-American girls also earned mean scores on the sex factor that are significantly higher than the middle (8.38) and high (7.82) achieving Anglo- American boys. For the narcissistic interest factor, similar find ings as those noted for the sex interest factor are also revealed between the low, middle, and high achieving Mexican-American and Anglo-American boys and girls with the following two exceptions: in one instance, the low achieving Anglo-American girls earned a mean score of 10.38 on the narcissistic factor that is significantly higher than that of 8o09 for the high achieving Mexican-American boys. In the other instance, the low (10.30) and middle (11.08) achieving Mexican-American girls earned signifi cantly higher mean scores on the narcissistic factor than the low (8.32), middle (8.47), and high (8.61) achieving Anglo-American boys. On three of the four integrated acquired interest factors, self-sentiment, super-ego, and patriotism, signi ficant mean sex differences are found between the low, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican- American groups. On the Kramer's test for the self-senti ment interest factor, the high achieving Mexican-American girls earned a mean score of 9*66 that is significantly higher than that of 7.96 and 7.88 for the middle and high V. 149 achieving Anglo-American boys respectively. In addition, the middle achieving Mexican-American girls earned a signi ficantly higher mean score (9.26) than the middle (7.96) and high (7.88) achieving Anglo-American boys. On the super ego interest factor, the low achieving Mexican-American boys earned a significantly higher mean score (8.83) than the middle (7.15) and high (7.31) achiev ing Anglo-American girls. Likewise, the high achieving Mexican-American boys earned a significantly higher mean score (8.78) than the middle (7.15) and high (7.31) achiev ing Anglo-American girls. Finally, on the patriotism fac tor, the high achieving Anglo-American boys earned a signi ficantly higher mean score (7.24) than the middle (5.79) and high (5.77) achieving Mexican-American girls. The analysis of variance results for the achievement level variable as shown in Tables 48 to 62 show no signifi cant F ratios on thirteen of the fifteen integrated interest factors. In one case, assertion interest, there is a grad ual increase in mean scores from the low to the high achievement levels. Kramer’s test, however, does not show a significant mean score difference between the middle (6.78) and high (7.34) achievers and also none between the low (6.32) and middle (6.78) achievers. A very significant mean difference beyond the one per cent level is found be tween the low (6.32) and high (7.34) achievers. In the second instance, gregarious interest, there is a progressive 150 decrease in mean scores from the low to the high achievement levels. Kramer's test shows a significant mean score dif ference between the low (8.20) and the high (7*11) achievers beyond the one per cent level, but no significant mean score differences between the low (8.20) and middle (7.42) or be tween the middle and high (8.20) achievers. The analysis of variance results also shown in Tables: < 48 to 62 reveal only one significant interaction effect. On the construction interest factor, the achievement level and sex treatment variable showed an F ratio of 5.57 that is significant beyond the one per cent level. This means that the significant mean differences between the low, middle, and high achieving boys and girls may be due to the in fluences of both the grade-point average and sex factors acting together. Unintegrated motivation test scores.« — Table 26 con tains the means and standard deviations for eaeh of the over-all intrinsic and acquired interest factors at the un integrated level according to ethnic grouping and achieve ment level. I Kramer's analysis test results show no significant mean score differences on ten of the eleven intrinsic and four acquired interest factors between the two ethnic groups at each of the three achievement levels. In the one exception noted, the low achieving Anglo-American i i ! pupils earned a mean score of 9.18 for the sensuality 151 interest factor that is significantly higher than that of 8.57 for the low achieving Mexican-American group. Further analysis with the Kramer*s test reveals the fact that the high achieving Anglo-American group had earned a mean score of 9.06 for the sensuality interest factor that is significantly higher than that of 8.57 for the low achieving Mexican-American group. In addition, on the narcissism interest factor, the high achieving Mexican-American group earned a mean of 9.62 that is significantly higher than that of 8.93 for the low achieving Anglo-American group. Likewise, on the aggression interest factor, the low achieving Mexican-American group earned a mean score of 8.09 that is significantly higher than that of 7.53 for the high achieving Anglo-American group. In all three instances, the mean score differences between the two ethnic groups are statistically beyond the five per cent level. On two of the four acquired interest factors, super ego and patriotism, significant mean score differences be tween the two ethnic groups beyond the five per cent level are found by the Kramer’s test. In one case, the high achieving Mexican-American group earned a mean score of 7.97 that is significantly higher than that of 7.39 for the middle achieving Anglo-American group. In like manner, the low achieving Anglo-American group earned a mean score of 8.63 on the patriotism interest factor that is significantly 152 higher than that of 7.96 for the middle achieving Mexican- American group. Table 28 presents the mean scores for each of the unintegrated intrinsic and acquired interest factors be tween the low, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American boys. Kramer* s test results show no significant mean sex differences between the two ethnic groups at each achieve ment level on ten of the eleven intrinsic and three of the four acquired interest factors. In the first instance, the middle achieving Mexican- American boys earned a mean score of 8.40 on the assertion interest factor that is significantly higher than that of 7.40 for the middle achieving Anglo-American boys. While in the second instance, the high achieving Mexican-American boys earned a mean score of 8.70 for the religion interest factor that is significantly higher than that of 7*85 for the high achieving Anglo-American boys. Further comparisons with the Kramer's test on the assertion interest factor also reveal significant mean score differences between the high (8.40) achieving Mexican- American boys and the low (7.30) and the high (7.42) achieving Anglo-American boys. The mean differences are all significant beyond the one per cent level. For the narcissism interest factor, the high achiev ing Mexican-American boys earned a mean score of 9.57 that TABLE 28 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE MEANS FOR THE UNINTEGRATED MDTI ACCORDING TO ETHNICITY, ACHIEVEMENT, AND SEX GROUF Unintegrated Motivational Trait Scores® Low Achievers Middle Achievers AAb Mean S.D. MAb Mean S.D. Level of Significance0 AAb Mean S.D. MAb Mean S.D. Boys Intrinsic Interests IN*27) |N*48) IN-471 IN-301 Assertion 7.30 1.17 7.81 1.55 ns 7.40 S.47 8.40 1.40 Sensuali ty 9.22 1.28 8.94 1.52 ns 9.15 1.35 8,73 1.34 Sex 9.19 1.24 8.67 1.5! ns 8.72 1.33 8,63 t.22 Gregarious 8.33 1.80 8.13 t.52 ns 8.04 1.81 8.37 1.47 Narcissism 8.74 1.38 9.04 1.54 ns 9.34 1.27 9.20 0.89 Constructive 7.32 1.74 7.50 1.73 ns 7.51 1.63 7.63 1.03 Protective 7.81 1.27 7.75 1.41 ns 7.70 1.52 7.87 1.43 Curiosity 7.22 1.42 6.79 1.62 ns 7.30 1.28 6.97 1.27 Aggression 8.04 1.45 8.23 1.42 ns 7.74 1.52 7.50 1.17 Play Fantasy 8.26 1.89 7.81 1.76 ns 8.00 1.60 8.00 1.23 Acquisition 7.63 1.36 7.96 1.34 ns 7.94 1.31 7.63 1.19 Acquired Interests Self Sentiment 7.81 1.36 7.54 1.68 ns 7.66 1.(8 7.47 l.M Super Ego 7.67 1.52 7.63 1.41 ns 7.64 1.37 7.70 1.35 Religion 8.19 1.69 7.83 1.52 ns 7.83 1.32 8.20 1.16 Patriotism 8.78 1.45 8.40 1.85 ns 7.96 1.47 8.20 1.40 Girls Intrinsic Interests (N*131 (N-501 IN-331 IN-381 Assertion 7.69 1.03 7.94 1.35 ns 7.84 1.62 7.61 1.03 Sensuality 9.08 1.12 8.22 1.13 ns 8.91 1.18 8.76 1.15 Sex 9.69 9.20 1.32 ns 9.61 1*12 9.16 1.24 Gregarious 8.92 1.85 8.28 1.78 ns 8.15 1.30 8.50 1*13 Narcissism 9.31 1.60 9.32 1.30 ns 9.64 0.90 9.42 1.20 Constructive 7.23 2.20 7.38 2.04 ns 7.27 1.26 7.58 1.29 Protective 8.23 1.01 7.98 1.19 ns 8.09 1.28 7.58 1.08 Curiosity 7.23 1.42 7.48 1.09 ns 7.73 1.48 7.50 1.29 Aggression 7.31 1.60 7.96 1.65 ns 7.73 1.59 7.39 t.26 Play Fantasy 7.46 1*90 7.40 1.32 ns 7.58 1.87 7.66 1.19 Acquisition 8.08 i.19 7.62 1.37 ns 7.79 1.36 7.92 0.97 Acquired Interests Self Sentiment 7.69 i.n 7.80 1.47 ns 7.79 1.47 7.50 1.08 Super Ego 7.38 1.33 7.24 1419 ns 7.03 1.40 7.47 0.95 Religion 7.54 1.20 8.58 1.30 .01 8.09 1.16 8.05 1.45 Patriotism 8.29 1.75 8.23 1.30 ns 8.01 1.22 7.76 1.24 ®UnIntegrated motivational trait scores were derived from the SMAT research edition, 1961* °8ased on the m AA and MA are abbreviations for the terms Anglo-American and M e x ic a n -American. difference bet TABLE 28 'IONS OF THE MEANS FOR THE UN INTEGRATED MOTIVATIONAL TRAIT SCORES NG TO ETHNICITY, ACHIEVEMENT, AND SEX GROUPINGS Middle Achievers High Achievers ( I of AAb MAb Level of AAb MAb :lcancec Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Significance0 Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Significance0 CN«47) IN*301 (N-331 (N-231 is 7.40 5.47 8.40 1.40 .01 7.42 1.23 7.78 1.44 ns i s 9.15 1.35 8.73 1.34 ns 9.15 1.15 8.96 1.49 ns is 8.72 1.33 8.63 t.22 ns 8 .2 1 1.47 8.52 1.12 ns IS 8.04 1.81 8.37 1.47 ns 8.03 1.51 8.13 1.46 ns IS 9.34 1.27 9.20 0.89 ns 9.09 1.18 9.57 1.24 ns IS 7.51 1.63 7.63 1.03 ns 7.51 1 ,0 0 7.95 0.98 ns IS 7.70 1.52 7.87 1.43 ns 7.88 1.05 7.61 1.27 ns IS 7.30 1.28 6.97 1.27 ns 7.45 1.15 7.35 1.27 ns IS 7.74 1.52 7.50 1.17 ns 7.64 1.22 7.57 1.20 ns IS 8.00 1.60 8.00 1.23 ns 7.97 1.16 7.65 1.56 ns IS 7.94 1.31 7.63 1.19 ns 8.09 1.16 8.00 1.45 ns IS 7.66 1.18 7.47 M l ns 7.97 1.21 7.52 1.16 ns ns 7.64 1.37 7.70 1.35 ns 7.79 1.52 7.96 1.26 ns ns 7.83 1.32 8.20 I.f6 ns 7.85 1.42 8.70 1.06 .01 ns 7.96 1.47 8.20 1.40 ns 8.06 1.58 7.78 1.41 ns (N»33l (N«38! (N-61) 1N-35J is 7.84 1.62 7.61 1.03 ns 7.54 1.15 7.43 1.09 ns ns 8.91 1.18 8.76 1.15 ns 9.02 1.15 8.66 1.21 ns ns 9.61 1.12 9.16 1.24 ns 8.89 1.05 9.17 1.36 ns ns 8.15 1.30 8.50 1.13 ns 8.26 1.35 8.23 1.26 ns ns 9.64 0.90 9.42 1.20 ns 9.82 1.04 9.66 1.06 ns ns 7.27 1.26 7.58 1.29 ns 7.25 0.89 7.26 1.04 ns ns 8.09 1.28 7.58 1.08 ns 8.21 1.11 7.74 1.09 ns ns 7.73 1.48 7.50 1.29 ns 7.28 1.33 7.37 1.00 ns ns 7.73 1.59 7.39 1.26 ns 7.48 1.19 7.40 1.40 ns ns 7.58 1.87 7.66 1.19 ns 7.51 1.35 7.43 1.12 ns ns 7.79 1.36 7.92 0.97 ns 7.59 1.48 7.86 1.12 ns ns 7.79 1.47 7.50 1.08 ns 7.61 1.24 7.54 1.3! ns ns 7.03 1.40 7.47 0.95 ns 7.64 1.14 7.97 1.10 ns 01 8.09 1.16 8.05 1.45 ns 8.03 1.20 8.14 1.03 ns ns 8.01 1.22 7.76 1.24 ns 7.93 1.34 8.14 t • 12 ns research edition, 1961. °8ased on the modified t ratios computed by Kramer*s analysis test for the can-Amerlcan. difference between means. 154 is significantly higher than that of 8*74 for the low achieving Anglo-American boys beyond the five per cent level. On the religion interest factor, the high achieving Mexican-American boys also earned a mean score (8.70) that is significantly higher than that of 7.83 for the middle achieving Anglo-American boys. The mean difference in this instance is beyond the five per cent level. Table 28 also gives the mean scores for each of the unintegrated intrinsic and acquired interest factors between the low, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American girls. Kramer's test results show no significant mean sex differences between the two ethnic groups at each achieve ment level on each of the eleven intrinsic and three of the four acquired interest factors. In tht one exception, religion interest factor, the low achieving Mexican-American girls earned a mean score of 8.58 that is significantly higher than that of 7.54 for the low achieving Anglo-American girls. In addition, the low achieving Mexican-American girls also earned a significantly higher mean score (8.58) than that of 8.09 and 8.03 respec tively for the middle and high achieving Anglo-American girls. All the mean differences are significant beyond the five per cent level. For the sensuality interest factor, the high 155 achieving Anglo-American girls earned a mean score of 9.02 that is significantly higher than that of 8.22 for the low achieving Mexican-American girls. The mean difference is significant beyond the one per cent level. Further comparisons between the Anglo-American and Mexican-American boys and girls with the Kramer's test for the sensuality interest factor reveal significant mean score differences between the low (8.22) achieving Mexican American girls and the low (9.22), middle (9.15), and high (9.15) achieving Anglo-American boys. The mean differences in these instances are all beyond the one per cent level. For the sex interest factor, the low (9.20), middle (9.16), and high (9.17) Mexican-American girls earned sig nificantly higher mean scores beyond the one per cent level than the middle (8.12) and high (8.12) achieving Anglo-Amer ican boys. For the narcissism interest factor, the high achiev ing Mexican-American girls earned a mean score of 9.57 that is significantly higher than that of 8.74 beyond the five per cent level for the low achieving Anglo-American boys. For the aggression interest factor, the low achieving Mexican-American boys earned a mean score of 8.23 that is significantly higher than that of 7.48 beyond the one per cent level for the high achieving Anglo-American girls. For the play fantasy interest factor, the low achiev ing Anglo-American boys earned a mean score of 8.26 that is 156 significantly higher than that of 7.40 beyond the five per cent level for the Mexican-American girls. For the super-ego interest factor, the high achieving Mexican-American boys earned a mean score of 7.96 that is significantly higher than that of 7.03 beyond the five per cent level for the Anglo-American girls. For the patriotism interest factor, the low achieving Anglo-American boys earned a mean score of 8.78 that is significantly higher than that of 7.76 and 7.93 respectively for the middle and high achieving Mexican-American girls. The mean differences are significant beyond the five per cent level. Finally, for the religion interest factor, the low achieving Mexican-American boys earned significantly higher mean scores (8.70) than the low (7.54), middle (8.09), and high (8.03) achieving Anglo-American girls. All the dif ferences are significant beyond the five per cent level. Results for the achievement level variable on Tables 58 to 62 show no significant F ratios on eleven of the fif teen unintegrated interest factors. Although the obtained F ratio of 4.71 for the achievement level variable shown in Table 65 on the sex interest factor is significant beyond the one per cent level, Kramer's test results reveal that none of the mean differences between the low (9.06), middle (9.01), and high (8.75) are significant at the five per cent level. 157 Similar non-significant results are shovn by Kramer's test for the narcissism interest factor betveen the lov (9*11), middle (9.40), and high (9.58) achievers. The F ratio of 3.74 shovn in Table 62 for the achievement level variable is significant beyond the five per cent level. In passing, it should be noted that a gradual increase in mean scores is revealed by the data shovn in Table 26 for the narcissism interest factor. On the super-ego interest factor, the F ratio of 3.62 for the achievement level variable shovn in Table 75 is sig nificant at the five per cent level. Kramer's results re veal no significant mean differences betveen the lov (7.47), middle (7.47), and high (7.80) achievers. Lastly, for the patriotism interest factor, the F ratio of 3.65 for the achievement level variable shovn in Table 77 is significant at the five per cent level. Similar non-significant results betveen the lov (8.40), middle (7.97), and high (7.99) achievers is shovn by the Kramer's test. The analysis of variance results also shovn in Tables 63 to 77 shov no significant interaction F ratios for the three main effects (ethnicity, grade-point average, and sex) for thirteen of the fifteen unintegrated interest factors. In one case, as shovn in Table 76, a very significant F ratio of 5.40 is shovn for the religious interest factor on the ethnicity and grade-point average and sex treatment 158 effects. This means that the obtained significant mean score differences betveen the lov, middle, and high achiev ing Anglo-American and Mexican-American groups may be attri buted to the interrelated influences of all three variables ethnic group membership, grade-point average, and sex, rather than to the effect of each variable independently. In the second instance, Table 65 shovs a significant F ratio of 3.25 beyond the five per cent level for the ethni city and grade-point average interaction effect on the sex interest factor. The obtained significant interaction var iance indicates that the significant mean differences for the sex interest factor are not due to either of tvo in fluences acting alone, but to the joint effects of the tvo acting together. As reported in Chapter II, the reviev of literature revealed a limited number of studies of Spanish-speaking pupils classified on the basis of the grade-point average criterion and none available in the area of motivation. In any study of academic achievement, the criterion as to vhat constitutes high and lov, above and belov, over and under achievement needs to be clearly defined. In at tempting to relate the present findings vith those obtained in past studies, only the investigations vherein the grade- point average criterion vas used and the sample selected on basis of high and lov achievement vill be employed for comparative purposes. Connor (1961) compared eighth and ninth grade lov i and high achievers on the SMAT* He found only one interest | factor (gregarionsness) that revealed a significant mean score difference betveen the lov and high achievers« No other significant mean differences vere found on the re- j maining integrated and unintegrated interest factors<> Thus, i Connor's study agrees in part vith the present findings* The gregarious factor vas also found to be significantly differentiated betveen the tvo designated achievement levels. It is surprising that Connor's study did not also shov significant mean differences for the integrated asser- i tion interest or for the unintegrated interest factors: ! ! j sex, narcissism, super-ego, and patriotism* | ; i Other investigators, such as Parrish (1954) and Uhlinger, et al* (i960), examined the motivation variable via the McClelland test* Their findings vere essentially similar to those reported in this study* They found more | similarities than differences in motivation, as measured, ( . i betveen the lov and high achievers. The authors expressed a concern about the crude state of current motivational : theory and the lack of a valid motivation measurement device* i SUMMARY I j | This chapter dealt vith the ethnic group comparisons | 1 by achievement level on each of the personal, intellectual, ! ' ' ' 160] i ! iachievement. and motivational characteristics measured in 9 • this study. : i In general| no over-all significant findings are re- ' ported betveen the lov, middle, and high Anglo-American and Mexican-American achievers in the folloving personal traits: chronological age, grade-point average, citizenship marks, land father's level of education. Fev significant mean score: ; ! i differences are revealed for the socioeconomic status and mother's level of education, especially in relation to the middle and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-Ameri can pupils. Significant findings are found on language, non- language, and total IQ scores. Significant mean differences betveen the tvo ethnic groups in the high achievement levels accounted for the bulk of the significant findings. Many of the obtained significant mean comparisons centered around the Anglo-American and Mexican-American high achieving girls. Similar ethnic and achievement group trends as those reported for the intellectual traits are also revealed for the achievement traits. Many significant mean score dif- i 'ferences are found betveen the high achieving Anglo-American ! : and Mexican-American girls, in favor of the Anglo-American : group. The data revealed for the integrated and unintegrated intrinsic and acquired interest factors shoved more 161 similarities than differences in performance on the various interest factors investigated betveen the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils. Many significant mean sex differences in the motivation traits measured are found betveen the boys and girls re gardless of ethnic or achievement group membership. Fev significant interaction effects are reported for the three main effects: ethnicity, achievement level, and sex. Finally, an attempt vas made to relate the present findings vith the data reported in the research studies found in Chapter II. CHAPTER VI SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS The purpose of this chapter is to present the re sults of the study in an integrated pattern. Polloving the summary of the findings is a section in vhich the conclu sions of the study are reported. Lastly, there is a sec tion in vhich certain recommendations based on the findings and conclusions are presented. I. SUMMARY The problem An investigation of Mexican-American students is considered important in viev of the size and exceptional grovth of the Spanish-speaking population in the United States vithin the past ten years (U.S. Census, 1960). Re cent data by Samora (1963) clearly point out the fact that the Spanish-speaking population is not only the fastest groving minority group in California but also in the other four Southvestern states, Arizona, Colorado, Nev Mexico, and Texas. In addition, such authors as Demos (1959) and 162 !Cline (1961) hare strongly recommended the study of motiva tion to ascertain its full force as a cause of academic re- ; itardation in the Spanish-speaking children and youth. Finally, the comparatively reeent development of adequate instruments for measuring pre-adolescent motivation has in vited the examination of the association betveen certain non-cognitive variables, achievement level, and ethnic group membership. The main purposes of this study vere (1) to determine! jvhether certain personal, intellectual, achievement, and mo tivational characteristics existed differentially betveen ; j I eighth grade pupils of Anglo-American and Mexican-American jdescent and (2) to determine vhether these differential j personal, intellectual, achievement, and motivational characteristics existed betveen eighth grade lov, middle, and high achievers of Anglo-American and Mexican-American descent, vhen achievement status vas determined by average teachers' marks for all subjects taken in the seventh and eighth grades. The folloving five questions, from vhich the nine null hypotheses vere formulated, vere employed to I j explore the tvo main purposes of the study: 1• Do differences exist betveen the Anglo-American jgroup and the Mexican-American group, and betveen the tvo ■ ethnic groups vhen classified by achievement levels on each ! S of the personal traits measured? 164 2• Do differences exist betveen the Anglo-American group and the Mexican-American group, and betveen the tvo ethnic groups vhen classified by achievement levels on each of the tested intellectual abilities? | 3. Do differences exist betveen the Anglo-American group and the Mexican-American group, and betveen the tvo ethnic groups vhen classified by achievement levels on each of the achievement test scores? 4* Do differences exist betveen the Anglo-American group and the Mexican-American group, and betveen the tvo :ethnic groups vhen classified by achievement levels on each i !of the motivation test scores? 5. Will certain of the motivational variables in vestigated vary as a function of ethnic group membership, achievement status, and sex? The samples The total sample for the study consisted of 438 eighth grade pupils. Prior to the selection of the sample, |the grade-point average for the entire tvo years of junior j high school vas calculated for each student to provide lov, i middle, and high achievers. These pupils represented l approximately the lover, middle, and upper quartiles by i Igrade-point average of all eighth grade pupils in a total ! population of 620 students. Folloving the identification ! of the pupils by achievement level, they vere then cate- 165 gorized on the basis of their surnames into respective Anglo-American or Mexican-American ethnic group. In this manner 214 Anglo-American and 224 Mexican-American pupils vere identified. The instruments Three tests vere utilized for the measurement of variables vithin the areas of intelligence, achievement, and motivation. Intelligence quotients vere obtained by administering the California Test of Mental Maturity. Achievement in reading, arithmetic, and language art vere secured by administering the California Achievement tests. Motivational scores vere derived for each of the intrinsic and acquired interest factors by the School Motivational Analysis Test. A fourth instrument, the Student Informa tion Sheet, vas constructed to obtain data on the length of residence in the district, degree of bilinguilism, parental birthplace, occupation, and level of education. Statistical procedures In the treatment of the data, the grade equivalent scores for the achievement tests, intelligence quotients for the intelligence tests, and ipsative scores for the motivation tests for each pupil in the sample vere key punched on IBM cards. Means, standard deviations, analysis of variance, and F ratios vere the statistical tools used in this study. The BIMD 14 program, a 2x3x2 general linear 166 factorial design, was utilized to determine whether signi ficant mean differences existed between the two ethnic groups on each of the variables employed. In addition, Kramer's multiple range analysis test procedures for deter mining which pairs of means yielded significant differences were employed whenever the analysis of variance technique revealed significant F values. Findings In this section of the chapter only the major find ings which are pertinent in answering the five questions stated in Chapter I are reported. Supplementary results may be found in Chapters IV and V. For each specific ques tion the important findings are summarized briefly under the following two parts: (1) ethnic group comparisons regard less of achievement level, and (2) ethnic group comparisons by achievement level. Question 1. Do Differences Exist Between the Anglo-American Group and the Mexican-American Group, and Between the Two Ethnic Groups Yhen Classified by Achievement Levels on Eaeh of the Personal Traits As Measured? Ethnic group comparisons regard less of achievemeni level Chronological age.— A non-significant over-all mean difference in chronological age was found between the Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils. The findings showed that the average age for the Anglo-American group vas 13 years and 8 months as compared with the average age of 13 years and 7 months for the Mexican-American sample. The chronological age differences between the tvo ethnic ' groups with respect to sex differences were also not signi ficant. | Grade-point average.— A non-significant over-all i I mean difference in grade-point average was found between ' the Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils. The mean grade-point averages for both ethnic groups were slightly above C-plus. Sex comparisons between the two ethnic groups ranged from a high grade-point average of 2.88 for the Anglo-American girls and a low of 2.31 for the Mexican- American boys. However, none of the mean sex differences vas statistically significant. Citizenship marks.— A non-significant over-all mean difference in citizenship marks was found between the tvo ethnic groups. In each instance, the mean scores for both ethnic groups was 0.92 (slightly below the satisfactory mark of 1.00). No significant mean sex difference in citizenship marks for either sex was found between the Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils. Regardless of the ethnic factor, sex differences in citizenship marks : i favored the girls but the mean differences were not signi ficant. i Socioeconomic status.— A highly significant dif ference beyond the one per cent level in socio-economic status vas found betveen the Anglo-American group mean j rating of 4.71 compared vith a group rating of 5.13 for the Mexican-American sample. Sex differences in socio economic status favored the Anglo-American boys and the Mexican-American girls. Hovever, the only significant mean i j sex differences for the socioeconomic variable vas found j in favor of the Anglo-American boys over the Mexican-Ameri- i can boys. Father’s level of education.— A non-significant over-; all mean difference vas found in father’s level of education betveen the tvo ethnic groups. In this instance the Anglo- American pupils received a mean score of 11.22 years for the father's level of education compared vith 9.73 years of schooling for the Mexican-American. Hovever, very signifi cant sex differences beyond the one per cent level vere found in father's level of education favoring the Anglo- American boys and girls over the Mexican-American boys and girls. Mother's level of education.— A very significant mean difference beyond the one per cent level vas found be- ; j tveen the tvo ethnic groups in mother's level of education. ! i The over-all comparison shoved a mean difference of 1.9 years of schooling in favor of the Anglo-American group. Significant mean differences for the tvo sexes ranging from 1.8 to 2.0 years of scholling in favor of the Anglo-American boys and girls vere also found betveen the tvo ethnic 169 groups• Other related personal traits.— The results shoved that less than ten per eent of the Mexican-American group had parents who vere bora outside the United States com pared vith less than five per cent for the Anglo-American group. Similar findings vere also obtained for the country in vhich parental schooling vas completed. Less than one per cent of the Anglo-American and Mexican-American groups had parents vhose occupations differed from the occupations they held before coming to the United States (if foreign bom). Finally, about sixty-one per cent of the Mexican- American group spoke Spanish as a second language at home. Ethnic group comparisons by achievement level Chronological age.— No significant over-all mean differences in chronological age vere found among the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican- American groups. Surprisingly, Mexican-American pupils as a group tended to be younger than Anglo-American group at each achievement level. No significant chronological age differences vere found betveen the tvo sexes at each of the three achievement levels. Grade-point average.— Although no significant over all mean differences in grade-point average vere found among the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American groups, by definition the mean ! ...... """ " ... 170.| i ; |differences in grade-point averages vere highly differen- i !tiated by achievement level regardless of the ethnic factor* ! Furthermore, the findings shoved significantly larger num bers of Mexican-American (boys 2 to 1} girls 4 to 1) than Anglo-American pupils in the lov achieving groups. In the i high achieving groups the ratio vas a little less than 2 | to 1 in favor of the Anglo-American pupils* Significant mean differences for the sexes in grade-point averages in favor of the girls at each of the achievement levels, re gardless of ethnic group membership, did not materialize statistically as expected* The mean grade-point averages in both ethnic groups ranged from a D-plus rating in the lov achieving groups to C-plus rating in the middle, and lov B rating in the high achieving groups* Citizenship marks*— No significant over-all mean differences in citizenship marks vere found among the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican- American groups* No significant mean sex differences in citizenship marks vere found betveen the tvo ethnic groups at any achievement level* Although the interaction effect (achievement level and sex) vas significant beyond the five per cent level, Kramer's test shoved no significant mean ;differences in citizenship marks betveen the variable effects mentioned. Socioeconomic status*— A significant mean difference in socio-economic status vas found betveen the middle 171 achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils. In this one instance, the Anglo-American pupils received the significantly higher mean rating. In general, there vere no significant over-all mean differences in socioeconomic status among the remaining lov and high achieving Anglo- American and Mexican-American pupils. Significant mean sex differences in socioeconomic status betveen the ethnic groups favored the middle achieving Anglo-American boys over the middle achieving Mexican-American boys. No signi ficant sex differences vere found betveen the tvo ethnic groups for the socioeconomic variable among the tvo rb* maining achievement groups. Father's level of education.— No significant over all mean differences in father's level of education vere found among the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo- American and Mexican-American groups. Similar non-signifi cant mean sex differences vere found betveen the tvo ethni groups at each of the three achievement levels. As ex pected, the fathers of the middle and high achievers, re gardless of the ethnic grouping, shoved significantly more 'years of schooling than the fathers of the lov achievers. Mother's level of education.— Significant over-all mean differences in mother's level of education vere found ; betveen the middle and high achieving Anglo-American and : Mexican-American pupils. Similar significant mean sex differences vere found in mother's level of education in 172 f&ror of the Anglo-American high achieving girls over the Mexican-American girls. In the boys* group, the mothers of the Anglo-American middle achievers shoved significantly more years of schooling than the mothers of Mexican-American middle achievers. Other related personal traits.— Less than five per cent of the Anglo-American group at each achievement level had parents vho vere born outside the United States compared vith less than tventy per cent for the lov, middle, and high achieving Mexican-American group. The middle achieving Mexican-American group had the largest per cent of parents vho vere foreign born. Less than tvo per cent of the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American group had parents vho completed their schooling outside the United States compared vith ten per cent or less for the Mexican-American group at each achievement level. Fever than five per cent of the Anglo-American and Mexican-American groups at each of the three achievement levels had parents vhose occupa tions differed from the occupations they held before coming to the United States. Lastly, about seventy per cent of the lov and middle achieving Mexican-American groups spoke Spanish as a second language at home compared vith less than fifty per centvfor the high achieving Mexican-American group. 173 Question 2* Do Differences Exist Betveen the Anglo-American Group and the Mexican-American Group, and Betveen the Tvo Ethnic Groups Vhen Classified by Achievement Levels on Each of the Tested Intellectual Abilities? Ethnic group comparisons regard less of achievement level Language IQ.— A highly significant over-all F value vas found betveen the tvo ethnic groups in mean language IQ* In this instance, the Anglo-American group received a mean IQ of 104*59 compared vith 96*12 for the Mexican- American group* Similar significant mean differences for each sex for the language IQ in favor of the Anglo-American group vere also obtained* Non-language 1Q«— A non-significant over-all mean difference vas found in mean non-language IQ betveen the tvo ethnic groups. The Anglo-American pupils as a group earned a mean non-language IQ of 109*43 compared vith 103*94 for the Mexican-American group* Hovever, very sig nificant mean differences betveen the tvo ethnic groups in favor of the Anglo-American group vere found separately for boys and girls in mean non-language IQ* Total test IQ*-— A significant over-all mean differ ence in total test IQ vas found betveen the tvo ethnic groups* The Anglo-American group earned a total IQ of 107*14 as compared vith 100*16 for the Mexican-American group* Similar significant mean differences for each sex for the total IQ test in favor of the Anglo-American boys 174 and girls vere also found. Ethnic groan comparisons by achievemeni level Language IQ.— No significant over-all nean differ ences in Bean language IQ vere found betveen the lov and niddle achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American groups. At the high achievement level, the Anglo-American group scored significantly higher mean language IQ than did the Mexican-American group. Similar non-significant mean sex differences in language IQ betveen the lov and middle achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils existed. In the high achievement level, no significant mean differences in language IQ vas found betveen the Anglo- American and Mexican-American boys, but a very significant mean difference in language IQ vas found betveen the Anglo- American and Mexican-American girls. Non-language IQ.— Similar findings as those reported for the performance of the tvo ethnic groups in the language IQ section described in the previous paragraph vere also fovxd lor the non-language IQ sections of the intelligence te In short, at the high achievement level, signifi cantly higher mean non-language IQ in favor of the Anglo- American girls over the Mexican-American girls vere again revealed. Total teat IQ.— The findings reported for the lan guage and non-language IQ sections of the intelligence test 175 betveen the tvo ethnic groups at each of the achievement levels vere likevise found for the total test IQ section, it vas apparent that the high achieving Mexican-American girls, as a group, vere earning significantly lover nean intelligence test scores on all three sections of the test than vere their high achieving ethnic counterparts. Question 3. Do Differences Exist Betveen the Anglo-American Group and the Mexican-American Group, and Betveen the Tvo Ethnic Groups When Classified by Achievement Levels on Each of the Achievement Test Scores? Ethnic gronp comparison regard less of achievemeni level Achievement traits.— Pertinent findings in regard to the achievement test battery performances of the tvo ethnic groups are summarized belov: Yery significant over-all F values vere found betveen the Anglo-American and Mexican-American groups on each of six sub-tests of the achievement test including the total test grade placement score. The Anglo-American group earned an over-all test score of 8.77 compared vith 7*76 for the Mexican-American group. Significant mean sex differences vere found betveen the tvo ethnic groups in favor of the Anglo-American boys and girls on four of the six sub-tests: reading vocabulary, reading comprehension, arithmetic reasoning, and arithmetic fundamentals. On the language arts, mechanics of English, and spelling, no significant mean sex differences betveen the tvo ethnic groups vere 176 obtained. Surprisingly, in language art skills, boys, re gardless of ethnic group membership, earned significantly higher mean scores than girls. No other significant mean sex differences vere found betveen the tvo ethnic groups on the remaining four sub-tests of the achievement battery. I I Ethnic group comparisons by !achievement level I .. i ; Achievement traits.— The very significant over-all i ‘ {mean differences that vere found betveen the Anglo-American | j |and Mexican-American groups on each of the six sub-tests of i I ! !achievement, including the total test grade placement score | | j as reported in an earlier section of this chapter, did not shov similar significant mean score differences vhen the j - . . I tvo ethnic groups vere categorized by lov, middle, and high ! i i , |achievement levels. No significant over-all mean differ- ] ences on any of the six sub-tests, including the total test scores, vere found betveen the lov and middle achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American groups. Only at the | | j high achievement levels vere significantly higher achieve- | j ! j ment test scores in favor of the Anglo-American group found i | . i on five of the six sub-tests and the total test performance.! On the spelling sub-test, a non-significant mean difference i betveen the high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican- | American groups vas found. I i | Findings similar to those reported for the perfor- i nance of the tvo ethnic groups at each of the achievement 177 levels in the preceding paragraph vere also found for the mean sex differences on each of the six sub-tests, in cluding the total test score in the achievement battery. In this instancef the high achieving Mexican-American girls as a group earned significantly lover achievement sub-test scores than their Anglo-American counterparts on five of the six sub-tests, excluding spelling. No significant mean sex differences vere found betveen the lov and middle achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American groups on all six sub tests. No significant mean sex differences betveen the high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American boys on all six achievement sub-tests vere found. Question 4. Do Differences Exist Betveen the Anglo-American Group and the Mexican-American Group, and Betveen the Tvo Ethnic Groups When Classified by Achievement Levels on Each of the Motivation Test Scores? Ethnic group comparisons regard less of achievement level Motivational traits.— Significant findings concerning the performances of the tvo ethnic groups on the motivation test sections, integrated, unintegrated, and total test scores are summarized belov: Integrated motivation test scores.— No significant over-all F value betveen the tvo ethnic groups on the moti vation test vas found from the calculation of the analysis of variance for the total mean integrated score of 121.86 for the Anglo-American group as contrasted vith 121.87 for 178 the Mexican-American group. Similar non-significant mean sex differences for the gross integrated motivation test scores betveen the tvo ethnic groups vere found. No significant mean differences on any of the eleven of the intrinsic factors at the integrated level betveen the Anglo-American and Mexican-American groups vere found. Furthermore, the F value calculated for the mean differences for each of the four acquired factors at the integrated level betveen the tvo ethnic groups vere also all belov the five per cent level of confidence, Yery significant sex differences on three intrinsic interests at the integrated level in favor of the girls in the Anglo-American and Mexican-American groups over the boys in the Anglo-American and Mexican-American groups vere found. Significant mean sex differences on four intrinsic interests at the integrated level in favor of the boys over the girls in both ethnic groups vere also obtained. Thus, seven out of a possible eleven intrinsic interests at the integrated level revealed significant mean score differences along the sex rather than ethnic group classifications. Similar significant sex differences on three of four ac quired interests at the integrated level vere found betveen the boys and girls in both ethnic groups. Unintegrated motivation test scores.— A non-signifi cant F value vas found on the motivation test betveen the tvo ethnic groups for the total mean unintegrated score of 179 120.59 for the Anglo-American group as contrasted to that of 120.33 for the Mexican-American group. Similar non-signifi cant mean sex differences for the total unintegrated motiva- tion test scores betveen the tvo ethnic groups vere also found. No significant mean differences in nine of the eleven intrinsic factors at the unintegrated level betveen the Anglo-American and Mexican-American groups vere found. On the tvo remaining intrinsic factors, the Anglo-American group earned significantly higher mean scores for the sen suality interest factor vhereas the Mexican-American group earned significantly higher mean scores on the assertion interest factor. No significant mean differences on three of the four acquired factors at the unintegrated level be tveen the tvo ethnie groups vere found. On the remaining acquired interest factor, religion, the Mexican-American group earned significantly higher mean scores than the Anglo-American group. Very significant sex differences vere found on four of the eleven intrinsic interests at the unintegrated level in favor of the Anglo-American girls over the Mexican-Ameri can boys. Significant sex differences vere found on tvo intrinsic interests in favor of the Mexican-American girls over the boys in the Anglo-American groups. In short, six out of a possible eleven intrinsic interest factors at the unintegrated level revealed significant mean score differ- 180 ences along the sex rather than ethnic group classification* A significant mean sex difference beyond the one per cent level vas found in favor of the Anglo-American boys and girls over the Mexican-American girls on only one of the four acquired interest factors at the unintegrated level* In this one instance a higher mean score vas obtained on the religion interest factor* Total motivation test scores*— A non-significant F value vas found on the over-all total motivation test betveen the the tvo ethnic groups for the accumulated total score of 242*44 for the Anglo-American group as contrasted vith 242*21 for the Mexican-American group* Similar non significant mean sex differences on the over-all motiva tion test vere found* Ethnic group comparisons by achievement level Motivational traits,— Major findings concerning the performances of the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo- American and Mexican-American pupils on the motivation test sections, integrated, unintegrated, and total test scores, are summarized belov; Integrated motivation test scores*— No significant over-all mean differences for the total mean integrated score vere found betveen the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils* Similar non significant over-all mean sex differences for the total 181 integrated score betveen the tvo ethnic groups at each of the achievement levels vere also found. No significant over-all mean differences vere found on each of the eleven intrinsic and four acquired factors at the integrated level betveen the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils. No significant mean sex differences vere found be tween the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American beys on each of the eleven intrinsic and four acquired interest factors at the integrated level. Similar non-significant mean sex differences vere likevise found betveen the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo- American and Mexican-American girls on each of the eleven intrinsic and four acquired integrated interest factors. In the tvo instances, the lov achieving Mexican-American girls earned significantly higher mean scores on the con structive interest factor vhereas in the second ease, the middle achieving Anglo-American girls earned significantly higher mean scores on the play fantasy interest factor. Unintegrated motivation test scores.— No significant over-all mean differences for the total mean unintegrated scores vere found among the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils. Similar non significant over-all mean sex differences for the total unintegrated scores betveen the tvo ethnic groups at each of the achievement levels vere likevise obtained. 182 No significant over-all mean differences vere found on ten of the eleven intrinsic and four acquired factors at the unintegrated level between the low, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American pupils. In this one case, the Anglo-American lov achieving pupils earned significantly higher mean scores on the sensuality interest factor than the lov achieving Mexican-American pupils. No significant mean sex differences vere found among the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexi can-American boys on ten of eleven intrinsic and three of the four acquired interest factors at the unintegrated level. In the first instance, the middle achieving Mexican- American pupils earned significantly higher mean scores in the assertion interest factor than the middle achieving Anglo-American pupils. In the second example, the high achieving Mexican-American pupils earned significantly higher mean seores in the religion interest factor than the high achieving Anglo-American pupils. Similar non-significant mean sex differences vere found betveen the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo- American and Mexiean-American girls on each of the eleven intrinsic and three of the four acquired interest factors at the unintegrated level. In the one exception, the lov achieving Mexican-American girls earned significantly higher mean scores in the religion interest factor than their high 183 achieving counterpart. Total motivation test scores.-—No significant mean differences on the over-all total motivation test among the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican- American pupils vere found. Similar non-significant mean sex differences on the over-all total motivation test betveen the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American boys and girls vere also found. Question 3. Vill Certain of the Motivational Variables Investigated Vary as a Function of Ethnic Group Membership, Achievement Status, and Sex? The findings yielded uniformly insignificant F values bearing on the effects of motivation and the interaction of ethnic group membership and sex. Only three out of thirty interest factors revealed significant interaction effects betveen a c h ie v em en t and s e x . Hovever, many s i g n i f i c a n t F values vere found for the sex variance effect. At the in tegrated level, tvelve of the fifteen interest factors shoved very significant mean differences betveen sexes. At the unintegrated level, seven of the fifteen interest fac tors revealed significant mean differences for the sexes. The results indicated that the degree or intensity of a specific interest factor vas associated vith sex group mem bership than vith ethnicity or achievement level factors. II. CONCLUSIONS The conclusions presented in this section relate to 184 the nine hypotheses vhich vere stated in Chapter I* The ansvers to the five questions stated in the previous section vere analyzed vithin each of the nine hypotheses* Only those mean differences vhich vere found to be significant at either the five or one per cent levels are mentioned in the acceptance or rejection of each hypothesis discussed* Ethnic Group Comparisons Regardless of Achievement Level Hypothesis 1 There are no significant mean differences betveen the Anglo-American group and the Mexican-American group on each of the folloving personal traits measured: chronological a8e> grade-point average, citizenship marks, socio-economic status, and level of parental education* Chronological age*— The hypothesis of no difference in chronological age vas sustained* None of the mean score differences in chronological age vas significant* Non significant mean differences for each sex in chronological age further supported the acceptance of this hypothesis. Grade-point average.— The hypothesis of no difference in grade-point average vas sustained* Although Anglo- American pupils received slightly higher mean scores, the obtained non-significant F value permitted the confident acceptance of this hypothesis. Sex differences in grade-point averages betveen the tvo ethnic groups favored the girls in both the Anglo-Ameri-j can and Mexican-American groups, but none of the mean dif ferences vas greater than the required significant values. i It can thus be concluded that the acceptance of this hypo- | thesis concerning sex differences in grade-point averages betveen the tvo ethnic groups vas further substantiated* j i Citizenship marks.— The hypothesis of no difference in citizenship marks vas sustained. Although the mean dif ferences for each sex in citizenship marks favored the girls: in the Anglo-American and Mexican-American groups, the mean differences vere not significant* The results also sup- ; ported the acceptance of the hypothesis. Socioeconomic status.— The hypothesis of no dif ference in socioeconomic status vas not tenable* The sig nificant F values calculated for the socioeconomic variable permitted the rejection of this hypothesis* The rejection of this hypothesis vas also sustained on the basis of the significant mean differences for each sex in socioeconomic status in favor of the boys and girls in the Anglo-American group over the boys in the Mexican- American group, but vas accepted vhen comparisons vere made vith the Mexican-American girls. Father's level of education*— The hypothesis of no ! difference in father's level of education vas partially sustained. In one instance, the non-significant F value 1 based on the over-all mean differences in years of schooling 186 supported this conclusion. Hovever, very significant mean differences for each sex in favor of the Anglo-American boys and girls supported the rejection of this hypothesis. Mother's level of education.— -The hypothesis of no difference in mother's level of education vas rejected. The F values based on the mean difference in years of schooling vere found to be highly significant in favor of the Anglo-American group in the over-all comparisons betveen the tvo ethnic groups as veil as those betveen the sexes in the groups studied. Hypothesis 2 There are no significant mean differences betveen the Anglo-American group and the Mexican-American group on each of the folloving tested intellectual abilities: language IQ, non-language IQ, and total IQ. The hypothesis vas rejected. On tvo of the three comparisons, language and total IQ, significant mean dif ferences in favor of the Anglo-American group vere obtained. On the third, non-language IQ, the mean differences vere not significant. It vas thus possible to reject the hypothesis that no real differences in tested intellectual abilities beyond the element of chance factors existed betveen the tvo ethnic groups. Significant mean differences for each sex in lan guage, non-language, and total IQ favored the boys and girls 187 in the Anglo-American group ever the Mexican-American group* These findings also favored the rejection of the hypothesis* Hypothesis 3 There are no significant mean differences betveen the Anglo-American group and the Mexican-American group on each of the folloving achievement traits: reading vocabulary and comprehension, arithmetic reasoning and fundamentals, mechanics of English, spelling, and total achievement test scores* The hypothesis vas rejected* The F values based on the group differences betveen the mean scores in all six of the sub-tests vere significantly in favor of the Anglo- American group* Sex differences in four of the six tests favored the boys and g i r l s i n th e A n g lo -A m e r ic a n g r o u p o v e r the Mexican- American boys and girls by significant margins* Hypothesis 4 There are no significant mean differences betveen the Anglo-American group and the Mexican-American group on each of the folloving motivational traits: total motivation scores, integrated and unintegrated intrinsic and acquired interest factors* The hypothesis vas accepted* Hone of the mean score differences on any of the fifteen interest factors at both the integrated and unintegrated levels produced F values of 188 any significance. Sex differences in gress motivation characteristics also favored the acceptance of this hypothesis. There vere fev significant mean differences for each sex on each of the eleven intrinsic and four acquired interest factors at both the integrated and unintegrated levels betveen the Anglo-American and Mexican-American boys and girls, but many mere significant differences vere obtained betveen the boys and girls regardless of ethnie group membership. Ethnic Group Comparisons by Achievement Level Hypothesis 5 There are no significant mean differences betveen the Anglo-American group and the Mexican-American group vhen classified by achievement levels on each of the personal traits measured. Chronological age.— The hypothesis of no difference in chronological age vas accepted. Non-significant mean differences for each sex betveen the tvo ethnic groups in chronological age at each achievement level also supported the acceptance of this hypothesis. Grade-point average.— The hypothesis of no difference in grade-point average at each achievement level betveen the tvo ethnic groups vas sustained. Non-significant mean dif» ferences for each sex betveen the tvo ethnie groups in grade-point average at each achievement level further supported this hypothesis. Hovever, the hypothesis of no ) {difference among the lov, middle, and high achieving Anglo- ! American and Mexican-American groups vas rejected. By ; definition, very significant differences vere expected to occur among the lov, middle, and high aohievers. ! j Citizenship marks.— The hypothesis of no difference ;in citizenship marks vas sustained. Similar conclusions |regarding the tenability of the hypothesis vere based on the non-significant mean differences for each sex in citizenship marks betveen the tvo ethnic groups at each achievement level. Socioeconomic status.— The hypothesis of no differ ence in socioeconomic status betveen the tvo ethnic groups at each achievement level vas sustained. The only signifi cant mean differences in socioeconomic status vere those that existed betveen the middle achieving Anglo-American and Mexican-American groups. The non-significant mean differ ences for the sexes in socioeconomic status also supported the hypothesis. Father's level of education.— The hypothesis of no difference in father's level of education at each of the achievement levels betveen the tvo ethnic groups vas sus- i i tained. Non-significant mean sex differences in father's i level of education at each achievement level betveen the l ! ; i tvo ethnic groups also supported the conclusion that the ! ■ 1 hypothesis vas tenable. Mother*a level of education.— The hypothesis of no difference in mother's level of education at each of the achievement levels betveen the tvo ethnic groups vas re jected. Significant mean differences in mother's level of education betveen the tvo ethnic groups vere found in favor of the middle and high achieving Anglo-American groups. Very significant mean differences for the sexes at each level betveen the tvo ethnic groups also favored the re jection of this hypothesis. Hypothesis 6 There are no significant mean differences betveen the Anglo-American group and the Mexican-American group vhen classified by achievement levels on each of the intellectual traits measured. The hypothesis vas rejected at the high level but sustained at the lov and middle achievement levels betveen the tvo ethnic groups. Since five of the six comparisons shoved no significant findings in language, non-language, and total IQ at each achievement level betveen the tvo ethnic groups for each sex, over-all acceptance of the hypo thesis vas clearly indicated. Hypothesis 7 There are no significant mean differences betveen the Anglo-American group and the Mexican-American group vhen classified by achievement levels on each of the achievement 191 traits measured. The hypothesis was rejected at the high hut sustained at the low and middle achievement levels between the two ethnic groups. Similar conclusions were derived when sex differences at each achievement level between the two eth nic groups were compared. Hypothesis 8 There are no significant mean differences between the Anglo-American group and the Mexican- American group when classified by achievement levels on each of the motivational traits measured. The hypothesis was sustained. Non-significant mean differences for the sexes between the ethnic groups at each achievement level also favored the acceptance of this hypo thesis. In addition, non-significant mean differences between the two ethnic groups for tventy-nine out of thirty inte grated and unintegrated interest factors assessed likewise supported the acceptance of the hypothesis. Hypothesis 9 None of the motivational traits, as measured, will vary significantly as a function of ethnic group membership, achievement level, and sex. The hypothesis was sustained. Twenty-seven out of the thirty interest factors measured by the motivation test 192 revealed no significant interaction effects between the main effects ethnicity, achievement level, and sex* 111, OTHER CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS In this section of the ehapter further conclusions are reported* In addition, recommendations based on both the findings and conclusions of the present study are in cluded* 1* The results of the present study show quite con clusively that Mexiean-American pupils as a group generally score significantly lover on standardized achievement tests than their Anglo-American counterparts* Re-evaluation of the curricula is needed to explore the feasibility of em ploying such special adjustment programs as remedial and tutorial reading or multiple grade procedures in alleviating the existing educational problem* 2* The findings shoved a definite dichotomy of in terests along the sex group membership classification rather than solely on the basis of the ethnic group or achievement level factors* Since the SMAT manual does not provide separate norms for boys and girls, the findings of this study clearly indicated that in future revisions of the motivation test careful consideration should be given to the construction of separate norms for the tvo sexes* 3* Predictive studies should be inaugurated, espec ially vith respect to Mexiean-American pupils to answer such questions as these: "Would measurement of school mo tivation improve prediction of achievement above that of an aptitude test alone?" and "Are pupils vho are identified as achievers or under-achievers on the basis of teachers1 marks different from those vho are picked as achievers or under achievers on the basis of achievement test scores?" | 4. To vhat extent the development of motivation 5 ! arises from achievement and resultant satisfactions, and to j ! vhat extent it is the motivating characteristics of pre viously derived interest, is not clear. Further study of ! 1 i ; a longitudinal nature is needed to (1) investigate the j | interplay of both aspects of the problem, and (2) to deter— j mine vhether the basic motivation patterns as measured in i i this study remain fairly constant or fluctuate in intensity j j ! as a pupil progresses from grade to grade. 5. Since the motivation test employed in this study Jvas primarily research-oriented, cautious use of it in edu cational as veil as other areas of counseling is indicated. The findings also suggest that continued statistical im provement of the motivation test should be made to increase ; ! ! I ; its internal consistency for purposes of diagnosis and counseling vith individual pupils from varying ethnic back- 1 i i i grounds, sex, and grade levels. ! ; 6. Success or lack of success in school achievement i i | is usually assessed by either one of tvo vays: teachers’ j marks or standardized test scores. In contrast to the i 194 ▼oluainous literature on the reliability and validity of standardized achievement tests, further research is needed to determine the employability of grade-point average as an effective measure of academic achievement of Spanish speaking children and youth. In addition, there is also a further need to deter mine vhat portions of the grade-point average criterion may be attributable to student productivity and vhat por tions to non-cognitive variables such as attitudes, socio economic level, citizenship, parental education, sex of the teacher, and other related factors, 7, The findings of this study suggest that the use of scholastic and achievement tests in identifying Spanish speaking pupils for special curricular considerations in programs for the gifted are subject to cultural bias. Sig nificant interaction findings vere revealed betveen the ethnic factor and those for intelligence and achievement test variables but none vas obtained betveen the grade- point average criterion and the test variables mentioned. It is thus recommended that this study be replicated to determine vhether the use of the grade-point average cri terion is less vulnerable to bias than current standardized intelligence and achievement techniques in the identifica tion of giftedness vith pupils of Mexiean-American descent, 8, More studies of Spanish-speaking pupils should be encouraged to investigate the similarities as veil as 195 differences in other nen-intellectual variables such as personality traits, achievement motivation, or related conative factors. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Ahlem, Lloyd H. The relationships of classroom climate to teachers* knowledge of pupils* sociometric status, manifest anxiety, ability, achievement, and socio economic status. Unpublished £fi.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1962. Ahman, J. S., and Glock, M. D« Evaluating pupil grovth. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1959. Anastasi, Anne. Differential psychology. (3d ed.) Nev Tork: Macmillan Company, 1958. Anklam, Phoebe A. A study of the relationship betveen tvo divergent instructional methods and achievement motivation of elementary sehool children. Unpub lished E&.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1962. Arsenian, S. Bilingualism in the postvar vorld. Psycho logical Bulletin. 1945, 42, 65-86. Atkinson, John W. Motives in fantasy, action, and society. Princeton, Nev Jersey: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1958. ________, and McClelland, D. C. The projective expression of needs: The effect of different intensities of hunger drive of thematic apperception. Journal of Experimental Psychology. 1948, 38, 643-65§T Beilin, H. Teachers and clinicians attitudes tovard the behavior problems of children: A reappraisal. Child Development. 1959, 30, 9-25. Berkshire, J. B. Undermeasurement of intelligence. Pre pared under Contract NONE 816(02) of the Office of Naval Eeseareh and Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, 1961. 197 198 Bernardoni, Louis C. A culture fair intelligence test for the ugh, no, and oo-la-la. Personnel and guidance. 1964, 42, 554-557. Bindra, D. Motivation, a systematic reinterpretation. Nev lork: Ronald Press, 1^$9. Birney, R. C. The reliability of the achievement motive. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 1959, 58. 244- 247. Bledsoe, Joseph C. The self concepts of elementary school children in relation to their academic achievement, intelligence, interest, and manifest anxiety. Paper presented at the American Psychological Association Annual Meeting, Philadephia, Pennsylvania, August 29, 1963. Bloom, Benjamin S., and Peters, Prank R. The dee of aca demic prediction scales for counseling and selecting college entrants, Nev York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1961. Briggs, Villiam A., and Hummel, Dean L. Counseling minority group youth: Developing the experience of equality through education. Columbus. Ohio: P. J. Heer Printing Company, 1962. Brovn, Charles. Acculturation and school achievement. Un published E&.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1956. Burma, John H. Spanish-speaking groups in the United States. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press, 1954. Carter, Robert S. Hov invalid are marks assigned by teachers? Journal of Educational Psychology. 1952, 43, 218-28. Castaneda, A., Palermo, D. S., and McCandless, B. R. Com plex learning and performance as a function of anxiety in children and task difficulty. Child Development. 1956, 27, 327-332. _, McCandless, B. R., and Palermo, D. S. The child ren* s form of the manifest anxiety scale. Child Development, 1956, 27, 317-326. Cattell, R. B. Personality and motivation structure and measurement. Nev York: World Book Company. 1957. 199 Cattell, R. B. The dynamic calculus: Concepts and crucial experiments, Nebraska Symposium on Motivations: University of Nebraska Press, 1956, , Factors in objective motivation vith children, a preliminary study, Australian Journal of Psychology, 1961, 13, 73-88. . Prediction and understanding of the effect of children's interest upon school performance. Co operative Research Project, No, 701, Urbana: Uni versity of Illinois, 1962, ________, and Butcher, J. Prediction of school achievement. Cincinnati: Bobbs—Merrill', 19<>4. . Maxvell, E. F., et al. The objective measurements of attitudes, British Journal of Psychology. 1949, 4g,>81-90. . Sveney, A, B., and Radcliffe, J. A. The objective measurement of motivation structure in children. Journal of Clinical Psychology. 1960, 16, 227-232, Christie, Richard, and Lindauer, Florence, Personality structure. Annual Review of Psychology. 1963, 14, 201-230. Clark, Selby G. The Rorschach and academic achievement. Personnel and Guidance Journal. 1958, 34, 339-341• Cline, Marion, Achievement of bilinguals in the seventh grade by socio-economic levels. Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1961. Conant, James B, Slums and suburbs. Nev York: McGrav-Hill Book Company, Inc., 19<>1. Connor, David. Motivation and school achievement. Paper presented at the Ammerican Psychological Association Annual Meeting, Nev York City, Nev York, September 6, 1961, Corvin, Betty. The influence of culture and language on performance on individual ability tests. Paper presented at the California Educational Research Association Conference, Los Angeles, California, November 20, 1962. 200 Cosgrove, John C. The identification of scientific talent. Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1962. Crandall, V., Katkovsky, V., and Preston, Anne. Motiva tional and ability determinants of young children*s intellectual achievement behaviors. Child Develop ment. 1962, 33, 643-662. Darley, John G., and Anderson, Gordon Y. The functions of measurement in counseling. In E. F. Lindquist, (Ed.), Educational measurement. Washington, D. C.s Ameri- can Council on Education, 1961. Deese, James. The psychology of learning. Nev York: MoGrav-Hi11 Book Company, Inc., 1938. Demos, George D. Attitudes of student ethnic groups on issues related to education. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1959. Dutchover, Mary F. Raising achievement level to the ability level in Spanish-speaking students. Unpublished Master*s project, University of Southern California, 1958. Edvards, T. Bentley, and Wilson, Alan. A study of some social and psychological factors influencing educa tional achievement. United States Office of Educa tion} Health, Education, and Welfare Research Pro ject, No. SAE 7787, June, 1961. Erickson, Donald Keith. A comparison of measured student anxiety and recorded teachers* comments. Unpublished Master*s thesis, University of Southern California, 1963. Esparaza, Daniel. An exploratory study of the mental ability and scholastic achievement of a group of Spanish-speaking pupils according to extent of bi lingualism. Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Southern California, 1955. Estes, W. K. Stimulus-response theory of drive. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation! University of Nebraska Press, 1958. Evens, William P. Relationship of interest to aptitude by profiles and by interest areas. Personnel and Guidance Journal. 1963, 42, 359-363. 201 Farq^ihar, Villiam. Motivation factors related to academic achievement. U, S. Office of Education Cooperative Research Project, No. 846. East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1963* Faught, Charles* A study of the aeadeaic achieveaent of Mexiean-American and Anglo-American pupils at the seventh grade level. Unpublished Master's thesis, Vhittier College, 1962. Feldhusen, John F., and Klausmeier, Herbert. Anxiety, in telligence, and achievement in children of lov, average, and high intelligence. Child Development. 1962, 33, 403-410. Ferreira, Joseph R., and Oakes, Phillip V. Automatic data processing: An aid in studying pupil characteris tics. California Journal of Educational Research. 1960, 11, 3-7. Frager, Robert D. A cross-cultural study of academic achievement. Paper presented at the Yestern Psycho logical Association Meeting, San Jose, California, June 15, 1961. Frandsen, Arden N. Hov Children Learn. Nev York: MeGrav- Hill Book Company, Inc., 1957. Frymier, Jack R. Development and validation of a motivation index: A further report. Curriculum Research Bulle tin. No. 9. Orlando, Florida: 1961. ________. Assessing junior high school students' aotiva- 7ion. High School Journal. 1962, 23, 107-119. Garlock, Jerry C. Age-grade relationships 1929, 1933, 1937, 1946, and 1958. California Journal ef Educational Research. 1960, 11. 1&6-19&. Geist, H. Manual for Geist Pieture Interest Inventory, General Form, Male. Psychological Reports, Mono graph Supplement 3. Psychological Test Specialists, Missoula, Montana, 1959. ________. An exploratory study of the relationship betveen grades and a pictorial interest test. California Journal of Educational Research. 1961, 12, 91-96. Gill, Lois J., and Spilka, Bernard. Soae non-intellectual correlates of academic achievement among Mexican- Aaerican secondary school students. Journal of Edu cational Psychology. 1962, 53, 144-149. 202 Geldard, Frank A. Fundamentals of psychology. Nev Tork: John Viley and Sens, Inc., 19(>2. Gray, Benjamin G. Characteristics of high and lov achieving high school seniors of high average aptitude. Un published Ed.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1960. Guilford, J. P. Fundamental statistics in psychology and education^ (3d ed.) Nev Tork: McGrav-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1956. Guthrie, Anthony John. A study of male academic achievement motivation in a self economy context. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1962. Guthrie, E. R. The psychology of human conflict. Nev York: Harper and Brothers, 1938. Hackett, Edvard V. Some impressions of the scientific literature on over and underachievement. Prepared under Contract NONE 816(02) of the Office of Naval Research and Vashington University, St. Louis, Missouri, 1961. Haggard, Ernest A. Socialization, personality and academic achievement in gifted children. School Reviev. 1957, 65, 388-414. Hall, John F. Psychology of motivation. Nev York: J. B. Lippincott Company, 19<>1. Helmstadter, Gerald, et al. A psychometric description of bilingual children vith reference to pseudo versus real retardation and certain socio-cultural factors. American Psychologist. 1963, IjJ, 348. Hildreth, Gertrude. Teaching reading: A guide to basic principles and modernpraeiices. Nev York: Henry Holt and Company, 1958. Holland, ¥. R. Language barrier as an educational problem of Spanish-speaking children. Exceptional Children. 1960, 2X, 42-47. Hunt, J. McY. Motivation inherent in information processing and action. Prepared under Contract NONE 1147(07) of the Office of Naval Research and University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, 1963. 203 Jacobs, Charles Norman. Formal recognition of mentally superior children: Its effect on achierement and achierement motivation. Unpublished E&.D. disserta tion, Stanford University, 1958. Jacobs, James. Aptitude and achievement measures in pre dicting high school academie success. The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1959, 3£, 5. Jensen, Arthur B. Learning abilities in Mexiean-American and Anglo-American children. California Journal of Educational Research. 1961, 12. 147-159. Jensen, Viggo M. The relationship between marks and atten dance in a junior high school. Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Southern California, 1960. Jordan, A. M. Measurement in education: An introduction. Mew York! McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1961. Eaplan, Louis. Mental health and human relations in educa tion. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1959. Keller, E. Duwayne, and Rowley, Vinton. Junior high school and additional elementary school normative data for the children's manifest anxiety scale. Child Devel opment. 1962, 33, 675-682. Kennedy, Vallace, DeRiet, Vernon, and Vhite, James. A nor mative sample of intelligence and achievement of Negro elementary school children in the south eastern United States. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development. 1963. 28. 1—112. Kingsley, Howard, and Garry, Ralph. The nature and condi tions of learning. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1961. Klausmeier, Herbert. Learning and human abilities: Educa tional psychology. Mew York: Harper and Brothers, T W T . Klineberg, Otto. Negro-white differences in intelligence test performance: A new look at an old problem. American Psychologist. 1963, 18, 198-203. Knapp, Robert R. The effects of time limits on the intel ligence test performance of Mexican and American subjects. Journal of Educational Psychology. 1960, 51, 14-20. 204 Kramer, C. T. Extension of multiple range tests to group measures vith unequal numbers of replications. Biometrics. 1956, 12, 307-310. Lane, Paul A. Lane aspired motivation level indicator. Bridgeport, Conneeiicut: Behavioral InstitutePub lications, 1961. Lefever, D. Velty. Implications of current research for the prevention of dropouts. Paper presented at the Southvest Avenue Secondary Counselors group of Los Angeles County, Morningside High School, Los Angeles, California, May 16, 1963. Lindzey, Gardner. Assessment of human motives. Nev Tork: Holt, Rinehart, and Winsion, Inc., 195&. London, Perry, and Eosenhan, David. Personality dynamics. Annual Reviev of Psychology. 1964, 1j>, 447-492. Madsen, K. B. Theories of motivation. Cleveland, Ohio: Hovard Allen, Inc., 1961. Magary, James P., and Eichorn, John R. The exceptional child: A book of readings. Nev Tork: Holt, Rine hart, and Winston, Inc., 1960* Manuel, Herschel T. A comparison of Spanish-speaking and English-speaking children in reading and arithmetic. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1935, 19. 189-202. Marcoux, Fred ¥• Handicaps of bilingual Mexican children. Unpublished Master*s thesis, University of Southern California, 1961. Maslov, H. A. Motivation and personality. Nev Tork: Harper and Brothers, 1954. Mayo, George, and Manning, Vinton. Motivation measurement. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1961, 2JL, 73-&T. " McCandless, B. R., and Castaneda, A. Anxiety in children, school achievement, and intelligence. Child Devel opment. 1956, 27, 379-82. McClelland, David, et al. The achievement motive. Nev Tork: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1953. ________• Studies in motivation. Nev Tork: Appleten- Century-Crofts, Inc., 1955• 205 McDonald, Keith Henry, An investigation into the relation ship of socio-economic status to an objective measure of motivation— the Michigan M-scales, Un published Fh.D, dissertation, Michigan State Uni versity, 1962, McDougall, Villiam, The energies of men, Nev Tork: Scribner and Company, 193^. McKeachie, V, J. Motivation, teaching methods, and college learning, Nebraska Symposium on Motivation: Uni versity of Nebraska Press, 1961, Meyer, ¥, J,, and Thompson, G-. 0, Sex differences in the distribution of teacher approval and disapproval among sixth-grade children. Journal of Educational Psychology. 1956, 47, 385-396. Miller, Carroll H, Foundations of guidance, Nev Tork: Harper and Brothers, 1961, Miller, Neal E, Comments on multiple process conceptions of learning. Psychological Beviev. 1951, 58. 375-81. Montez, Philip, Some differences in factors related to educational achievement of tvo Mexiean-American groups. Unpublished Master*s thesis, University of Southern California, 1961, Movrer, 0. H. Learning theory and behavior. Nev Tork: John Wiley and Sons, Inc,, 19(>0. Murray, H. A. Thematic apperception test manual. Cam bridge: Harvard University Printing Office, 1943, . Some basic psychological assumptions and concep tions. Dialectics. 1951, 5, 266-92. Mussen, Paul H, Handbook of research methods in child development. Nev Tork: John VIley and Sons, Inc.. 1960. Nemzek, C. L. The value of certain non-intellectual factors for direct and differential prediction of academic success. Journal of Social Psychology. 1940, 12. 21-29. Norman, Balph D., Clark, B., and Bessemer, D. Age, sex, intelligence quotient, and achievement patterns in achieving and non-achieving gifted children. Ex ceptional Children. 1962, 29-» 116-123. I 206 Parrish, J., and Kethlingshafer, D. A study of the need to achieve in college achievers and non-achievers* Journal of General Psychology. 1954, %Qt 209-226. Payne, David A., and Farquhar, William V. The dimensions of an objective measure of academic self-concept. Journal of Educational Psychology. 1962, 53, 187-192. Phillips, Beeman N. Sex, social class, and anxiety as sources of variation in school achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology. 1962, 53, 316-322. Peck, Robert L«, and Galliani, Como. Intelligence, ethni city, and social roles in adolescent society. Socionetry. 1962, 25, 64-72. Pico-Rivera Digest. An economic analysis of the city of Pico Rivera. Annual Publication prepared by the Allied Property Analysts, Los Angeles, 1961. Pippert, Ralph, and Archer, N. Sidney. A comparison of tvo methods for classifying under-achievers vith respect to selected criteria. Personnel and Gui dance. 1963, 41, 788-791. Quinn, G. R., and Szuberla, C. A. Relative grading: A consistent and equitable approach to the evaluation of student achievement. Clearing House. 1963, 37. Remmers, H. H. Cross-cultural studies of teenagers' prob lems. Journal of Educational Psychology. 1962, 53. 254-261. Riessman, Frank. The culturally deprived child. Nev York: Harper and Rov, 1962. Ristov, Lester W. Using tests in the schools. Los Angeles: County Superintendent of Schools 6£fice, 1962. Roca, Pablo. Construction of a general ability group test for Puerto Rican students in the elementary and se condary schools. Paper presented at the American Psychological Association Annual Meeting, Philadel phia, Pennsylvania, August 29, 1963. Russell, Ivan L», and Thalman, ¥. A. Personality: Does it influence teachers' marks? Journal of Educational Research. 1955, 48, 561-64. 207 Samora, Julian. The education of the Spanish-speaking in the Southwest— an analysis of the 1960 census mater ials. Paper presented at the Careers for louth and the Mexic&n-American Community Workshop, Pasadena, California, January 18, 1963. Shaftel, George. The needs and anxieties of Spanish speaking children. California Journal of Secondary Education. 1953, 28. l68-lt6. Shav, Merville C., and Alves, Gerald J. The self-concept of bright academic under-achievers: Continued. Personnel and Guidance. 1963, 42, 401-403. Sheldon, Paul. Mexican in urban public schools. California Journal of Educational Research. 1961, 12, 21-26. Sheldon, V. The intelligence of Mexican children. School and Society. 1924, 19, 139-142. Shotwell, Anna M., Hurley, J. R., and C&ttell, Raymond. Motivational structure of an hospitalized mental defective. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology. 1961, 62, 422-426. Smallenburg, Harry, and Martinson, Ruth. Guidance in ele mentary schools. Englewood Cliffs: Prentiee-Hall, Inc., 1959. Sorenson, H e r b e r t . Psychology i n e d u c a t io n . New T o r k : McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1954. Spence, Kenneth V. Behavior theory and learning. New Tork: Prentiee-Hal1, Inc., 1960. Stablein, John E., Willey, Darrell S., and Thompson, Calvin V. An evaluation of the Davis-Eells test using Spanish and Anglo-American children. Journal of Educational Sociology. 1961, 35. 73-78. Stacey, C. L., and DeMartino, M. P. Understanding human motivation. Cleveland, Ohio: Howard Allen, Inc., T958Z Sullivan, Elizabeth T., Clark, Willis W., and Tiegs, Ernest W. California short form test of mental maturity. Los AngAles, California: California Test bureau, 1957. Sutcliffe, Charles E. Factors related to low achievement by high school pupils of high mental ability. Un published Ed.D. dissertation, University of Southern 208 California, 1958* Sveney, Arthur. Hunan Motivation Measured, by objective tests. Psychological Reports. 1962, 10. 408-413. . and. Cattell, Raymond. Handbook for the school Motivation analysis tests: Research edition. Champaign, Illinois: The Instiiute for Personality and Ability Testing, 1961. . and Cattell, Raymond. Dynamic factors in twelve year old children as revealed in measures of inte grated motivation. Journal of Clinical Psychology. 1961, 17, 360-369. . and Cattell, Raymond. Laboratory of personality assessment and group behavior. Journal of Social Psychology. 1962, 571 217-266. Taylor, Janet A. A personality scale of manifest anxiety. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 1953, 48, 285-290. Thorndike, Robert L. The concepts of over and underachieve ment. Nev Tork: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1963. Tiegs, Ernest ¥., and Clark, Willis V. California achieve ment tests. Los Angeles, California: California Test Bureau, 1957. Tireman, L. S. Teaching Spanish-speaking children. Mexico City, Mexico: Universiiy of Mexico Press,1951• Travers, Robert M. W. Essentials of learning. New Tork: Macmillan Company, 1963. Uhlinger, Carolyn, and Stephens, Mark. Relation of achieve ment motivation to academie achievement in students of superior ability. Journal of Educational Psycho logy. 1960, £1, 259-26^7“ Vinaeke, W. E. The drive modification theory of human mo tivation. Journal of Genetic Psychology. 1960, 96, 245—268. o Motivation as a complex problem. Nebraska Sym posium on Motivation: University of Nebraska Press, 1962. United States Bureau of the Census. Eighteenth census of the United States. I960. Population: California. General Characteristics". Washington, D.C.: Govern ment Printing Office, 1962. United States Office of Education) Health, Education and Welfare. Composite forum recommendations vith res pect to education. White House Conference on Child ren and Youth, 1960. Walter, Sidney. The prediction of high academic success: a longitudinal study. Unpublished Ph.D. disserta tion, University of California at Los Angeles, 1962. Warner, Lloyd W., et al. Social class in America. Chicago Science Besearch Associaies, 1949. White, Mary A., and Harris, Myron. The school psychologist Nev York: Harper and Brothers, 1961. Whittier, C. T., and Burdette, Maxvell E. An exploratory study of inefficient achievement in grade 8. Calif ornia Test Bureau Besearch Bulletin. No* 272-A, 1962 Witty, Paul. The nature and needs of gifted and superior adolescents. In Samuel Everett (Ed.), Programs for the gifted. Nev York: Harper and Brothers, 1960. Wright, Grace S., and Greer, Edith S. The junior high school. Bulletin No. 32, 0E-20046 of the United States Office of Education. Washington, B.C.: Government Printing Office, 1963. Yates, A., and Pidgeon, D. Admission to grammar schools. London: Nevnes Educational Publishing Company, 1957 Young, Paul T. Motivation and emotion: A survey of the determinants of human and animal activity. Nev York John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1961. If APPENDICES | j i t t | I i APPENDIX A ANALYSIS OF VARIANCES 212 TABLE 29 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE CHRONOLOGICAL AGE GRADE PLACEMENT SCORES FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnic!ty 24.06 1 24.06 1.27 ns Achievement Level (GPAI 225.60 2 112.80 5.94 .01 Sex 0.56 1 0.56 0.03 ns Ethnicity x GPA 4.72 2 2.36 0.12 ns Ethnicity x Sex 92.03 1 92.03 4.85 .05 GPA x Sex 12.35 2 6.17 0.33 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 11.38 2 5.69 0.20 ns Within Groups 8086.78 426 18.98 Total 8457.48 437 213 TABLE 30 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE GRADE-POINT AVERAGE SCORES FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 1314 1 1314 2.29 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 1143872 2 571936 997.60 .001 Sex 826 1 826 1.44 ns Ethnicity x GPA 734 2 367 0.64 ns Ethnicity x Sex 178 1 178 0.31 ns GPA x Sex 1172 2 586 1.02 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 1575 2 787 1.37 ns Within Groups 244230 426 573 Total 250029 437 214 TABLE 31 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE CITIZENSHIP MARKS FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Sum of Variation Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Conf 1- dence Level Ethnicity 8712 1 8712 0.27 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 780 2 290 0.01 ns Sex 89900 1 89900 2.79 ns Ethnicity x GPA 10416 2 5208 0.16 ns Ethnicity x Sex 29964 1 29964 0.93 ns GPA x Sex 282012 2 141006 4.38 .05 Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 1620 2 810 0.03 ns Within Groups 13714856 426 32194 Total 14138260 437 TABLE 32 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS* FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN OESCENT WITH RE6AR0 TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX 1 1 Source of : Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 11.67 1 11.67 9.29 .01 Achievement Level (GPA 17.40 2 8.70 6.92 .01 Sex 0.27 1 0.27 0.21 ns Ethnicity x GPA 1.38 2 0.69 0.55 ns Ethnicity x Sex 1.40 1 1.40 1.12 ns GPA x Sex 3.64 2 1.82 1.45 ns lEthnicity x GPA x Sex 2.68 2 1.34 1.07 ns Within Groups 535.40 426 1.26 Total i 573.84 437 *Assessed by the Warner, Meeker, and Eel Is Revised Scale for Rating Occupation 216 TABLE 33 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE FATHER'S LEVEL OF EDUCATION FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, SPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sun of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 4716.32 1 4736.32 2.61 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 23461.13 2 11730.56 6.50 .01 Sex 3216.38 1 3216.38 1.78 ns Ethnicity x GPA 2695.32 2 1347.66 0.75 ns Ethnicity x Sex 885.13 1 885.13 0.49 ns GPA x Sex 760.57 2 380.28 0.21 ns Ethnlci ty x GPA x Sex 517.82 2 258.91 0.14 ns Within Groups 769027.81 426 1805.23 Total 805280.48 437 217 TABLE 34 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE MOTHER'S LEVEL OF EDUCATION FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 207.99 1 207.99 36.02 .001 Achievement Level (GPA) 275.73 i 2 137.86 23.87 .001 Sex 2.13 1 2.13 0.37 ns Ethnicity x GPA 32.48 2 16.24 2,81 ns Ethnicity x Sex 13.79 1 13.79 2.39 ns GPA x Sex 10.28 2 5.14 0.89 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 17.43 2 8.71 1.51 ns Within Groups 2442.70 423 5.77 Total 3002.53 434 218 TABLE 35 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE LANGUAGE INTELLIGENCE TEST SCORES8 FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAM-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Squares F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 766 1 766 4.39 •05 Achievement Level IGPA) 36445 2 18222 104.47 •001 Sex 1330 1 1330 7.62 .01 Ethnicity x GPA 803 2 401 2.30 ns Ethnicity x Sex 20 1 20 0.17 ns GPA x Sex 976 2 488 2.80 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 162 2 81 0.47 ns Within Groups 74134 425 174 Total 113661 436 8Assessed by the California Test of Mental Maturity, Junior High Level, Short Form, 1957 edition. 219 TABLE 36 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE NON-LANGUAGE INTELLIGENCE TEST SCORES FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 580 1 580 3*40 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 12157 2 6073 35.62 .001 Sex 1212 1 1212 7.10 •01 Ethnicity x GPA 731 2 365 2.14 ns Ethnicity x Sex 137 1 137 0.80 ns GPA x Sex 520 2 260 1.52 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 41 2 20 0.12 ns Within Groups 72522 425 170 Total 87900 436 220 TABLE 37 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE TOTAL INTELLIGENCE TEST SOCRES FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnic!ty 654 1 654 5,53 •05 Achievement Level (GPA) 22913 2 11456 96,77 •001 Sex 1287 1 1287 10.87 .01 Ethnicity x GPA 730 2 365 3,08 .05 Ethnic!ty x Sex 59 1 59 0.50 ns GPA x Sex 560 2 280 2.37 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 45 2 22 0.19 ns Within Groups 50316 425 118 Total 76564 436 221 TABLE 36 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE READING VOCABULARY TEST SCORES?FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY* GPA* AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio ConfI- dencs Level Ethnicity 1815.34 1 1815.34 7.84 .01 Achievement Level (GPA) 44570.12 2 22285.06 96.26 •01 Sex 924.94 1 924.94 4.00 .05 Ethnicity x GPA 1616.26 2 808.14 3.49 .05 Ethnicity x Sex 66.50 1 66.50 0.29 ns 6PA x Sex 374.28 2 187.14 0.81 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 845.75 2 422.87 1.83 ns Within Groups 98625.47 426 231.52 Total 148838.68 437 aAssessed by the California Achievement Tests* Junior High Level* Form W* 1957 edition. I 222 TABLE 39 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE READING COMPREHENSION TEST SCORES FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXI CAN-AMER I CAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares D egrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 2425.78 1 2425.78 9.04 .01 Achievement Level (GPA) 55450.35 2 27725.17 103.28 .01 Sex 453.88 1 453.88 1.69 ns Ethnicity x GPA 334.69 2 167.34 0.62 ns Ethnicity x Sex 605.16 1 605.16 2.25 ns GPA x Sex 1619.72 2 809.86 3.02 .05 Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 903.03 2 451.51 1.68 ns Within Groups 114359.28 426 268.45 Total 176151.89 437 223 TABLE 40 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE ARITHMETIC REASONING TEST SCORES FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXtCAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 1173 1 1173 8.63 .01 Achievement Level (GPA) 29738 2 14869 109.31 .001 Sex 1745 1 1745 12.83 .01 Ethnicity x GPA 394 2 197 1.45 ns Ethnicity x Sex 509 1 509 3.75 ns GPA x Sex 770 2 385 2.83 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 16 2 8 0.06 ns Within Groups 57540 423 136 Total 91885 434 224 TABLE 41 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE ARITHMETIC FUNDAMENTALS TEST SCORES FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level- Ethnicity 1039 1 1039 5.55 .05 Achievement Level (GPA) 58112 2 29056 155.32 .001 Sex 458 1 458 2.45 ns Ethnicity x GPA 1166 2 583 3.12 .05 Ethnicity x Sex 553 1 553 2.96 ns GPA x Sex 345 2 172 0.92 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 76 2 38 0.20 ns Within Groups 79135 423 187 Total 140884 434 225 TABLE 42 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE MECHANICS OF ENGLISH TEST SCORES FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Conft- dence Level Ethniclty 1655*12 1 1655.12 8.03 .01 AchIeveroent Love 1 CGPA) 52538,69 2 26269.34 127.43 .001 Sex 996,41 1 996.4 f 4.83 .05 Ethnicity x GPA 729,44 2 364.72 1.77 ns Ethniclty x Sex 4.62 1 4.62 0.02 ns GPA x Sex 501.87 2 250.93 1.22 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 214.84 2 107.42 0.52 ns Within Groups 87819.22 426 206.15 Total 144460.21 437 226 TABLE 43 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE SPELLING TEST SCORES FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEX I CAN-AMER I CAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethniclty 69 1 69 0.28 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 49680 2 24840 99.26 .001 Sex 1572 1 1572 6.28 .05 Ethnicity x GPA 65 2 32 0.13 ns Ethnicity x Sex 775 8 775 3.10 ns GPA x Sex 1201 2 600 2.40 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 146 2 73 0.29 ns Within Groups 806357 425 250 Total 159865 436 227 TABLE 44 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE TOTAL ACHIEVEMENT TEST SCORES FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 1209 1 1209 8.55 .01 Achievement Level (GPA 47220 2 23610 167.08 .001 Sex 51 S 51 0.36 ns Ethnicity x GPA S3S 2 265 1.88 ns Ethnicity x Sex 2B 3 28 0.20 ns GPA x Sex 634 2 31? 2*24 ns Ethnicity x x Sex 207 2 i©3 0.73 ns Within Groups 59630 422 141 Tote S 109510 433 228 TABLE 45 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE TOTAL INTEGRATED MOTIVATION TEST SCORES® FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEX I CAN-AMER I CAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 2.00 1 2.00 0.09 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 45.50 2 22.75 I. 00 ns Sex 0.19 1 0.19 0.01 ns Ethnicity x GPA 27.88 2 13.94 0.61 ns Ethnicity x Sex 0.06 1 0.06 0.00 ns GPA x Sex 65.69 2 32.84 1.45 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 5.38 2 2.69 0.92 ns Within Groups 9657.50 426 22.67 ' Total 9804.20 437 ®Assessed by the School Motivation Analysis Test, Research edition, 1961. 229 TABLE 46 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE TOTAL UNINTEGRATED MOTIVATION TEST SCORES FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sura of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square « F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 21.31 1 21.31 1.70 ns Achievement Level (GPAI 41.50 2 20.75 1.65 ns Sex 1.06 1 1.06 0.08 ns Ethnicity x GPA 56.37 2 28.18 2.24 ns Ethnicity x Sex 17.68 1 17.68 1.41 ns GPA x Sex 8.50 2 4.25 0.34 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 19.25 2 9.62 0.77 ns Within Groups 5356.38 426 Total 5522.05 437 230 TABLE 47 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE TOTAL MOTIVATION TEST SCORES FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 8.75 1 8.75 0.25 ns Achievement Level (GPA1 50.00 2 25.00 0.71 ns Sex 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 ns Ethnicity x GPA 76.00 2 38.00 1.08 ns Ethnicity x Sex 20.25 1 20.25 0.57 ns GPA x Sex 48.00 2 24.00 0,68 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 46.00 2 23.00 0.65 ns Within Groups 15054.50 426 35.34 Total 15303.50 437 231 TABLE 48 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE INTEGRATED ASSERTION INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 7.85 1 7.85 1.39 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 42.82 2 21.41 3.79 .05 Sex 4.37 1 4.37 0.77 ns Ethnicity x GPA 10.40 2 5.20 0.92 ns Ethnicity x Sex M l 1 l.ll 0.20 ns GPA x Sex 13.20 2 6.60 1.17 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 1.69 2 0.84 0.15 ns Within Groups 2405.10 426 5.65 Total 2486.54 437 232 TABLE 49 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE INTEGRATED SENSUALITY INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEX I CAN-AMER I CAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 1,05 1 1.05 0.21 ns Achievement Level (GPA! 4.52 2 2.26 0.46 ns Sex 17.39 1 17.39 3.55 ns Ethnicity x GPA 33.77 2 16.88 3.45 ns Ethnicity x Sex 9.96 1 9.96 2.03 ns GPA x Sex 10.99 2 5.99 1.12 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 12.86 2 6.43 1.13 ns Within Groups 2085.32 426 4.89 Total 2175.86 437 TABLE 50 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE INTEGRATED SEX INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 2.60 1 2.60 0.44 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 28.60 2 14.30 2.43 ns Sex 177.04 1 177.04 30.12 .01 Ethnicity x GPA 6.32 2 3.16 0.54 ns Ethnicity x Sex 0.25 1 0.25 0.04 ns GPA x Sex 21.47 2 10.73 1.83 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 0.49 2 0.24 0.04 ns Within Groups 2503.83 426 5.88 Total 2740.60 437 234 TABLE 51 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE INTEGRATED GREGARIOUS INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom /Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 5.81 1 5.81 1.03 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 36.11 2 18.55 3.21 .01 Sex 134.03 1 134.03 23.83 .01 Ethnicity x GPA 4.15 2 2.07 0.37 ns Ethnicity x Sex 0.03 1 0.03 0.01 ns GPA x Sex 14.37 2 7.18 1.28 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 21.60 2 10.80 1.92 ns Within Groups 2396.32 426 5.63 Total 2612.42 437 235 TABLE 52 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE INTEGRATED NARCISSISM INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 0,63 I 0.63 0.10 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 24.28 2 12.14 1.90 ns Sex 399.42 I 399.42 62.66 .001 Ethnicity x GPA 9.23 2 4.61 0.72 ns Ethnicity x Sex 0.40 1 0.40 0.06 ns GPA x Sex 1.83 2 0.91 0.14 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 6.97 2 3.48 0.55 ns Within Groups 2715.48 426 6.37 Total 3158.24 437 236 TABLE 53 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE INTEGRATED CONSTRUCTIVE INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Vari at Ion Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 2.39 1 2.39 0.40 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 5.28 2 2.64 0.44 ns Sex 239.56 1 239.56 39.74 .001 Ethnicity x GPA 21.52 2 10.76 1.79 ns Ethnicity x Sex 6.95 1 6.95 1.15 ns GPA x Sex 67.10 2 33.55 5.57 .01 Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 22.01 2 11.00 1.83 ns Within Groups 2567.88 426 6.03 Total 2932.69 437 237 TABLE 54 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE INTEGRATED PROTECTIVE INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom /Mean Square F Ratio. Confi dence Level Ethnicity 3.30 1 3.30 0.54 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 22.99 2 11.49 1.88 ns Sex 107.34 1 107.34 17.55 .01 Ethnicity x GPA 3.55 2 1.77 0.29 ns Ethnicity x Sex 5.07 1 5.07 0.83 ns GPA x Sex 13.16 2 6.58 1.08 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 10.58 2 5.29 0.87 ns Within Groups 2605.91 426 6.12 Total 2771.90 437 238 TABLE 55 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE INTEGRATED CURIOSITY INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Conf 1- dence Level Ethnicity 1.75 1 1.75 0.29 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 28.97 2 14.48 2.42 ns Sex 157.26 1 157.26 26.25 •01 Ethnicity x GPA 0.38 2 0. 19 0.03 ns Ethnicity x Sex 0.92 1 0.92 0.15 ns GPA x Sex 0.45 2 0.22 0.04 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 3,8! 2 1.95 0.32 ns Within Groups 2552.24 426 5.99 Total 2745.78 437 239 TABLE 56 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE INTEGRATED AGGRESSION INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sun of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Conf i- dence Level Ethnicity 1.99 1 1.99 0.35 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 6.37 2 3.18 0.55 ns Sex 0.17 1 0.08 0.03 ns Ethnicity x GPA 2.49 2 1.24 0.22 ns Ethnicity x Sex 5.34 1 5.34 0.93 ns GPA x Sex 0.66 2 0.33 0.93 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 8.19 2 4.09 0.71 ns Within Groups 2445.12 426 5.74 Total 2470.33 437 240 TABLE 57 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE INTEGRATED PLAY FANTASY INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEX I CAN-AMER I CAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Sun of Variation Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square W Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 6*66 1 6.66 1.21 ns Achievement Level IGPA) 29«05 2 14.52 2.65 ns Sex 175.65 1 175.65 32.01 •01 Ethnicity x GPA 2.34 2 1.17 0.21 ns Ethnicity x Sex 0.64 1 0.64 0.11 ns GPA x Sex 9.06 2 4.53 0.82 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 22.38 2 11.19 2.04 ns Within Groups 2337.72 42 6 5.49 Total 2583.50 437 241 TABLE 58 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE INTEGRATED ACQUISITION INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence level Ethnic!ty 0.13 1 0.13 0.02 ns Ach i evement Level (GPAI 4.14 2 2.07 0.33 ns Sex 143.31 1 143.31 23.04 .01 Ethnicity x GPA 0.86 2 0.43 0.07 ns Ethnicity x Sex 14.09 1 14.09 2.27 ns GPA x Sex 8.41 2 4.20 0.68 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 1.14 2 0.57 0.09 ns Within Groups 2650.22 426 6.22 Total 2822.30 437 242 TABLE 59 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE INTEGRATED SELF SENTIMENT INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 6.85 1 6.85 1.20 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 4.28 2 2.14 0.38 ns Sex 54.14 1 54.14 9.50 •01 Ethnicity x GPA 15.66 2 7.83 1.37 ns Ethnicity x Sex 2.00 1 2.00 0*35 ns GPA x Sex 8.74 2 4.37 0.77 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 9.53 2 4.76 0.84 ns Within Groups 2427.23 426 5.70 Total 2528.43 437 243 TABLE 60 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE INTEGRATED SUPER EGO INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sun of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 12.58 1 12.58 2.00 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 4.34 2 2.17 0.34 ns Sex 110.16 1 110.16 17.52 .01 Ethnicity x GPA 6.64 2 3.32 0.53 ns Ethnicity x Sex 0.01 1 0.01 0.00 ns GPA x Sex 1.74 2 0.87 0.14 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 0.09 2 0.04 0.01 ns Within Groups 2678.06 426 6.29 Total 2813.62 437 244 TABLE 61 ANALYSIS OF INTEREST FOR THE INTEGRATED RELIGION INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 14.68 1 14.68 2.04 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 5.38 2 2.69 0.37 ns Sex 17.57 1 17.57 2.44 ns Ethnicity x GPA 17.94 2 8.97 1.25 ns Ethnicity x Sex 0.39 1 0.39 0.05 ns GPA x Sex 2.11 2 1.05 0.15 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 5.04 2 2.52 0.35 ns Within Groups 3069.48 426 7.21 Total 3132.59 437 TABLE 62 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE INTEGRATED PATRIOTISM INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Sum of Variation Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 21.43 1 21.43 3.46 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 1.46 2 0.73 0.12 ns Sex 32.40 1 32.40 5.23 ns Ethnicity x GPA 3.30 2 1.65 0.27 ns Ethnicity x Sex 0.27 1 0.27 0.04 ns GPA x Sex 9.29 2 4.64 0.75 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 1.17 2 0.58 0.09 ns Within Groups 2637.85 426 6.19 Total 2707.17 437 246 TABLE 63 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE UN INTEGRATED ASSERTION INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Conf i- dence Level Ethnicity 8.07 1 8.07 4.62 .05 Achievement Level (GPA) 5.08 2 2.54 1.46 ns Sex 0.01 1 0.01 0.01 ns Ethnicity x GPA 1.42 2 0.71 0.41 ns Ethnicity x Sex 10.17 1 10.17 5.82 .05 GPA x Sex 3.21 2 1.60 0.92 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 4.25 2 2.12 1.22 ns Within Groups 744.07 426 1.75 Total 776.28 437 247 TABLE 64 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE UNINTEGRATED SENSUALITY INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnic!ty 13,25 1 13.25 8.32 .01 Achievement Level IGPA! 0.43 2 0.21 0.13 ns Sex 5.91 1 5.91 3.71 ns Ethnicity x GPA 1.61 2 0.80 0.50 ns Ethnicity x Sex 0.57 1 0.57 0.36 ns GPA x Sex 1.62 2 0.81 0.51 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 2.70 2 1.35 0.85 ns Within Groups 678.47 426 1.59 Total 704.56 437 248 TABLE 65 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE UN INTEGRATED SEX INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Conf1- dence Level Ethnicity 2.36 I 2.36 1.46 ns Achievement Level (GPAI 15.25 2 7.62 4.71 .01 Sex 36.95 1 36.95 22.84 .01 Ethnicity x GPA 10.50 2 5.25 3.25 .05 Ethnicity x Sex 0.33 1 0.33 0.20 ns GPA x Sex 0.53 2 0.26 0.16 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 0.72 2 0.36 0.22 ns Within Groups 689.24 426 1.62 Total 755.88 437 249 TABLE 66 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE UN INTEGRATED GREGARIOUS INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Leve 1 Ethnicity 0.04 1 0.04 0.01 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 3.74 2 1.87 0.80 ns Sex 4.51 1 4.51 1.94 ns Ethnicity x GPA 8.74 2 4.37 1.88 ns Ethnicity x Sex 0.77 1 0.77 0.33 ns GPA x Sex 1.03 2 0.51 0.22 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 0.80 2 0.40 0.17 ns Within Groups 988.43 426 2.32 Total 1008.06 437 250 TABLE 67 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE UNINTEGRATED NARCISSISM INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 0.19 ! 0.19 0.13 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 11.10 2 5.55 3.74 .05 Sex 12.38 1 12.38 8.34 .01 Ethnicity x GPA 2.50 2 1.25 0.84 ns Ethnicity x Sex 2.60 1 2.60 1.75 ns GPA x Sex 0.55 2 0.27 0.19 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 1.39 2 0.69 0.47 ns Within Groups 632.29 426 1.48 Total 663.00 437 251 TABLE 68 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE UNINTEGRATED CONSTRUCTIVE INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Sum of Variation Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 2*66 I 2.66 1.29 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 0.60 2 0.30 0.14 ns Sex 7*23 1 7.23 3.49 ns Ethnicity x GPA 0.45 2 0.22 0.11 ns Ethnicity x Sex 0*01 1 0.01 0.01 ns GPA x Sex 2*20 2 I. 10 0.53 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 2.01 2 I.00 0.48 ns Within Groups 882.55 426 2.07 Total 897.71 437 - 252 TABLE 69 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE UN INTEGRATED PROTECTIVE INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Vari at ion Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Conf1- dence Level Ethnicity 5.12 1 5.12 3.29 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 1.09 2 0.54 0.35 ns Sex 3 .84 1 3.84 2.47 ns Ethnicity x GPA 0.90 2 0.45 0.29 ns Ethnicity x Sex 2.93 1 2.93 1.88 ns GPA x Sex 1.22 2 0.66 0.39 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 1.31 2 0.65 0.42 ns Within Groups 663.56 426 1.56 Total 679.97 437 TABLE 70 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE UN INTEGRATED CURIOSITY INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERI CAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confl- dence Level Ethnicity 1.47 ! 1.47 0.86 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 2.64 2 1.32 0.77 ns Sex 5.90 1 5.90 3.44 ns Ethnlclty x GPA 1.35 2 0.67 0.39 ns Ethnicity x Sex 2.51 1 2.51 1.46 ns GPA x Sex 5.76 2 2.88 1.68 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 1.36 2 0.68 0.40 ns Within Groups 732.05 426 1.72 Total 753.04 437 254 TABLE 71 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE UNINTEGRATED AGGRESSION INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXI CAN-AMER I CAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Sum of Variation Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Conf 1- dence Level Ethnicity 0.04 1 0.04 0.02 ns Achievement Level (GPA* 8.42 2 4.21 2.16 ns Sex 5.45 1 5.45 2.79 ns Ethnicity x GPA 7.75 2 3.8V 1.99 ns Ethnicity x Sex 0.36 1 0.36 0.18 ns GPA x Sex 3.03 2 1.51 0.78 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 1.25 2 0.62 0.32 ns Within Groups 831.09 426 1.95 Total 857.39 437 255 TABLE 72 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE UNINTEGRATED PLAY FANTASY INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Sum of Variation Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 1.77 1 1.77 0.80 ns Achievement Level (GPA! 1.99 2 0.99 0.45 ns Sex 18.4-2 1 18.42 8.33 .01 Ethnicity x GPA 1.61 2 0.80 0.36 ns Ethnicity x Sex 1.30 1 1.30 0.58 ns GPA x Sex 1.14 2 0.57 0.26 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 0.36 2 0.18 0.08 ns Within Groups 942.34 426 2.21 Total 968.93 437 256 TABLE 73 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE UN INTEGRATED ACQUISITION INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Sum of Variation Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 0.04 1 0.04 0.02 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 0.36 2 0.18 O.li ns Sex 0.40 1 0.40 0.24 ns Ethnicity x GPA 0.59 2 0.29 0.18 ns Ethnicity x Sex 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 ns GPA x Sex 3.24 2 1.62 0.96 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 6.63 2 3.31 1.97 ns Within Groups 716.74 426 1.68 Total 728.00 437 TABLE 74 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE UN INTEGRATED SELF-SENTIMENT INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean | Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 3.48 1 3.48 2.00 ns Achievement Level (GPA} 0.72 2 0.36 0.21 ns Sex 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 ns Ethnicity x GPA 0.52 2 0.26 0.15 ns Ethnicity x Sex 1.17 1 1.17 0.67 ns GPA x Sex 1.32 2 0.66 0.38 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 1.27 2 0.63 0.37 ns Within Groups 741.75 426 1.74 Total 750.23 437 258 TABLE 75 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE UNINTEGRATED SUPER EGO INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi- dence Level Ethnici ty 1.75 I 1.75 1.05 ns Achievement Level (GPAI 11.99 2 5.99 3.62 .05 Sex 6.95 1 6.95 4.19 .05 Ethnicity x GPA 2.24 2 1.12 0.68 ns Ethnicity x Sex 0.51 1 0.51 0.31 ns GPA x Sex 2.27 2 (.13 0.69 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 0.89 2 0.44 0.27 ns Within Groups 706.55 426 1.66 Total 733.15 437 259 TABLE 76 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE UN INTEGRATED RELIGION INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 10.17 1 10.17 5.9! •01 Achievement Level (GPA) 1.72 2 0.86 0.50 ns Sex 0.06 1 0.06 0.04 ns Ethnicity x GPA 1.71 2 0.85 0.50 ns Ethnicity x Sex 0.16 1 0.16 0.09 ns GPA x Sex 1.23 2 0.66 0.36 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 18.58 2 9.29 5.40 .01 Within Groups 733.55 426 1.72 Total 767.18 437 260 TABLE 77 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE UNINTEGRATED PATRIOTISM INTEREST FACTOR FOR PUPILS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN DESCENT WITH REGARD TO ETHNICITY, GPA, AND SEX Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Ratio Confi dence Level Ethnicity 0.75 I 0.75 0.36 ns Achievement Level (GPA) 14.95 2 7.47 3.65 .05 Sex 1.69 1 1.69 0.83 ns Ethnicity x GPA 0.94 2 0.47 0.23 ns Ethnicity x Sex 0.24 1 0.24 0.12 ns GPA x Sex 3.18 2 1.59 0.78 ns Ethnicity x GPA x Sex 4.50 2 2.25 (•to ns Wl th1n Groups 870.89 426 2.04 Total 897.14 437 APPENDIX B REVISED SCALE FOR RATING OCCUPATION TABLE 78 REVISED SCALE FOR RATING OCCUPATION8 Rating Assigned to Professionals Occupation Proprietors and Managers Business Men Clerks and Kin dred Workers, etc. J V w 1 Lawyers, doctors, den- tists, engineers, Jud ges, Nigh school super intendents, veterinar ians, ministers (grad uated from divinity school), chemists, etc* with post-graduate training, architects Businesses valued at $75,000 and over Regional and divi sional managers of large financial and Industrial enter prises Certified Public Ac countants 2 High school teachers, trained nurses, chiro practors, chiropodists, undertakers, ministers (some training), news paper editors, librar ians (graduate) Businesses valued at $20,000 to $75,000 Assistant managers and office and de partment managers of large businesses, assistants to execu tives, etc. Accountants, salesmen, of real estate, of in surance, postmasters 3 Social workers* grade- school teachers, opto metrists, librarians, (not graduate), under taker's assistants, ministers (no training) Businesses valued at $5,000 to $20,000 All minor officials of businesses Auto salesmen, bank clerks and cashiers, postal clerks, secre taries to executives, supervisors of rail road, telephone, etc., justices of the peace Coni 4 Businesses valued at $2,000 to $5,000 Stenographers, bookkeep- Fac ers, rural mail clerks, elm railroad ticket agents, pita salespeople in dry goods ca r | stores, etc. 5 Businesses valued at $500 to $2,000 Dime store clerks, hard- Ca r | ware salesmen, beauty tri< operators, telephone Hat operators phoi rep worl 6 Businesses valued at less than $500 Mou wor car 7 Hea odd Earner, Meeker, and Eel Is Revised Occupation Scale (1949) TABLE 78 D SCALE FOR RATING OCCUPATION® Clerks and Kin dred Workers, etc* Manual Workers Protective and Service Workers Farmers 1- of and Certified Public Ac countants Gentlemen farmers »rs ie- ■s isesp <ecu- Accountants* salesmen* of real estate* of in surance* postmasters Large farm owners* farm owners 1 a Is Auto salesmen* bank clerks and cashiers* postal clerks* secre taries to executives* supervisors of rail road* telephone, etc., justices of the peace Contractors « * Stenographers* bookkeep- Factory foremen* ers* rural mail clerks* electricians (own railroad ticket agents* plumbers (bust- sat espeople In dry goods carpenters (ness stores* etc. watchmakers Dry cleaners* butchers* sheriffs* railroad en gineers and conductors Dime store clerks* hard- Carpenters* plumbers, elec- vvere salesmen, beauty triclans (apprentice), operators* telephone timekeepers* linemen* tele operators phone or telegraph* radio repairmen* medium-ski 11 workers Butcher's apprentices* barbers* firemen* practical nurses* po licemen* seamstresses cooks in restaurant* bartenders Tenant farmers Moulders, semi-skilled workers* assistants to carpenter* etc* Baggagemen* night po- Small tenant 1 icemen and watchmen* farmers taxi and truck drivers* gas station attendants waitresses in restaurant Heavy labor* migrant work* odd-job men* miners Janitors* scrubwoman* newsboys Migrant farm laborers

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A Study Of Delinquency Among Urban Mexican-American Youth

PDF

A Four-Year Follow-Up Of Educationally Disadvantaged Preschool Children, Analyzing Home Environment Variables Facilitating Achievement

PDF

The Relationship Of Personal Data Items To Vocational Rehabilitation

PDF

Validity Concomitants Of Various Scoring Procedures Which Attenuate The Effects Of Response Sets And Chance

PDF

Reversal And Nonreversal Shift Performance Of Retardates Under Various Motivational And Stimulus Conditions

PDF

An Individual Testing Approach To Assess Creative Abilities

PDF

Performance Of Retardates On Piagetian Tasks As A Function Of Ethnicity

PDF

The influence of social intelligence and social teaching methods upon academic achievement

PDF

Learning Styles At Six Years In Two Ethnic Groups In A Disadvantaged Area

PDF

Reward Expectancy Strength As Related To The Magnitude Of Frustration In Children

PDF

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

PDF

A Semantic Differential Investigation Of Critical Factors Related To Achievement And Underachievement Of High School Students

PDF

Educational Group Counseling Within A Remedial Reading Program

PDF

Time And Man-Nature Value-Orientations As Related To Sex Identity, Ethnicidentity, And Socioeconomic Status And As Predictors Of Academic Success

PDF

Classroom Climate And Pupil Characteristics In Special Classes For The Educationally Handicapped

PDF

An Investigation Of The Relationship Between College Freshman Withdrawal And Certain Critical Personality And Study Orientation Factors

PDF

Frustration Versus Secondary Reinforcement In Children Under Continuous And Partial Primary Reinforcement

PDF

The Relative Efficiency Of Prompting And Confirmation Learning Paradigms

PDF

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

PDF

Prediction Of Therapeutic And Intellectual Potential In Mentally Retardedchildren

Asset Metadata

Creator Johnson, Henry Sioux (author)

Core Title Ethnic Group Differences In Certain Personal, Intellectual, Achievement, And Motivational Characteristics

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Education

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

Tag education, educational psychology,OAI-PMH Harvest

Format dissertations (aat)

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Meyers, Charles Edward (committee chair), McDonagh, Edward C. (committee member), Metfessel, Newton S. (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-344986

Unique identifier UC11359125

Identifier 6413500.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-344986 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 6413500.pdf

Dmrecord 344986

Document Type Dissertation

Format dissertations (aat)

Rights Johnson, Henry Sioux

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