A study of the goals of The College of The Bahamas as perceived and preferred by faculty, staff and administrators.

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
A study of the goals of The College of The Bahamas as perceived and preferred by faculty, staff and administrators.
Physical Description:
xvi,184 p. : ill. ; 30 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
Marshall, Lincoln Herbert
Publisher:
The American University
Publication Date:
Copyright Date:
1982

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Education, Higher -- Aims and objectives -- Bahamas   ( mets )
Genre:
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
Spatial Coverage:
Nassau, Bahamas

Notes

Summary:
The purpose of this study was: (1) to survey a sample of the College of the Bahamas' community as to the nature of the College's goals, as assessed through the Small College Goals Inventory (SCGI), both as they are perceived and as they are preferred; (2) to determine the statistical differences among SCGI goal area means for respondents classified by faculty, student, and administrator roles; and (3) to interpret the findings for their implications regarding present and future college planning strategies and/or mission.
Thesis:
Support for the development of the technical infrastructure and partner training provided by the United States Department of Education TICFIA program.
General Note:
Six hypotheses tested that are no significant differences among faculty, students, and administrator respondent groups at the College of the Bahamas regarding importance of student growth and development, service and support goals as measured by SCGI.

Record Information

Source Institution:
The College of The Bahamas
Holding Location:
The College of The Bahamas Main Library
Rights Management:
All rights reserved by the source institution.
Resource Identifier:
bs-nacli - COLOFB 1698
System ID:
AA00000009:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text


8300092


Marshall, Lincoln Herbert

A STUDY OF THE GOALS OF THE COLLEGE OF THE BAHAMAS AS
PERCEIVED AND PREFERRED BY FACULTY, STUDENTS AND
ADMINISTRATORS

The American University PH.D. 1982

University
Microfilms
International 3OON.ZeebRoad.nAror.MI48106

Copyright 1982

by
Marshall, Lincoln Herbert

All Rights Reserved














INFORMATION TO USERS


This reproduction was made from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming.
While the most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce
this document, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the
quality of the material submitted.

The following explanation of techniques is provided to help clarify markings or
notations which may appear on this reproduction.

1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document
photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing
page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This
may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages
to assure complete continuity.

2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark, it is an
indication of either blurred copy because of movement during exposure,
duplicate copy, or copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed. For
blurred pages, a good image of the page can be found in the adjacent frame. If
copyrighted materials were deleted, a target note will appear listing the pages in
the adjacent frame.

3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photographed,
a definite method of sectioningg" the material has been followed. It is
customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to
continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary,
sectioning is continued again-beginning below the first row and continuing on
until complete.

4. For illustrations that cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic
means, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and inserted
into your xerographic copy. These prints are available upon request from the
Dissertations Customer Services Department.

5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases the best'
available copy has been filmed.



Un films
International
300 N. Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor; MI48106








PLEASE NOTE:


In all cases this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy.
Problems encountered with this document have been identified here with a check mark j .


1. Glossy photographs or pages
2. Colored illustrations, paper or print
3. Photographs with dark background
4. Illustrations are poor copy
5. Pages with black marks, not original copy
6 Print shows through as there is text on both sides of page
7. Indistinct, broken or small print on several pages
8 Print exceeds margin requirements
9. Tightly bound copy with print lost in spine
10. Computer printout pages with indistinct print
11. Page(s) lacking when material received, and not available from school or
author.
12. Page(s) seem to be missing in numbering only as text follows.
13. Two pages numbered Text follows.
14. Curling and wrinkled pages
15. Other










University
Microfilms
International


a/,1










CO' L.EGE OF SAHAIM







This is an authorized facsimile
printed by microfilm/xerography on acid-free paper
in 1985 by
UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS INTERNATIONAL
Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.


1416


_I










A STUDY OF THE GOALS OF THE COLLEGE OF THE BAHAMAS

AS PERCEIVED AND PREFERRED BY FACULTY, STUDENTS AND

ADMINISTRATORS.

by

Lincoln H. Marshall


submitted to the

Faculty of the College of Arts and Science

of

The American University

in Partial Fulfillment of

The Requirements for the Degree

of


Doctor of Philosophy

in

Counselling and Student Development


Deandof the College


Date V I


Signatures of Comnittee


1982

The American University
Washington, D.C. 20016



TB AMERICAN UNIVERSITY LIBRARY


,lo4



















TO

my mother

LOUISE A. MARSHALL



She, through her example, showed me the true meaning of love
and making sacrifices


and


MAGGIE BLACKWELL & VAL TYNES



They shared my happiness, disappointments, and vicarious
thoughts during my entire graduate studies....they were
always there....they are good friends.














A STUDY OF THE GOALS OF THE COLLEGE OF THE BAHAMAS

AS PERCEIVED AND PREFERRED BY FACULTY, STUDENTS AND ADMINISTRATORS

BY

Lincoln H. Marshall

ABSTRACT


The purpose of this study was: (1) to survey a sample of the

College of the Bahamas' community as to the nature of the College's

goals, as assessed through the Small College Goals Inventory (SCGI),

both as they are perceived and as they are preferred; (2) to determine

statistical differences among SCGI goal area means for respondents

classified by faculty, student, and administrator roles; and (3) to

interpret the findings for their implications regarding present and

future college planning strategies and/or mission. Six hypotheses

tested that there are no significant differences among faculty,

students, and administrator respondent groups at the College of the

Bahamas regarding importance of Student Growth and Development, Service

and Support goals as measured by the SCGI.


The Small College Goals Inventory, a five-point Likert-type

questionnaire was administered to the 225 participants (202 students,

17 full-time faculty, and six administrators) in January, 1982. This

sample-size represented a 16 percent stratified sample of the College's

population. The Kruskal-Wallis statistic was utilized in testing the










six null hypotheses at the .01 level or better. The return rate of

useable questionnaires was 98.4 percent.

The Kruskal-Wallis test did not indicate any significant differences

among the three study groups, consequently, the following results are

based on goal area mean responses for the total of study participants.

The goal areas Academic Development, Intellectual Skills, and vocational

Preparation currently received the greatest importance, while Cultural/

Aesthetic Awareness, Meeting Local Needs, and Religious Orientation

received the least importance. Respondent groups preferred the goal

areas of Vocational Preparation, Intellectual Skills, and Planning to

receive the greatest importance and Religious Orientation, Cultural/

Aesthetic Awareness, and Meeting Local Needs to receive the least impor-

tance in the future.

This study shows that: (1) the emphasis currently given to the
goal areas of the College of the Bahamas is reasonably clear to its

constituents; (2) a comparison between the College of the Bahamas'

stated mission, and the SCI goal areas study participants feel should

receive greatest importance at the College suggests that the two lack

congruence.














ACKNOWLEDGEMENT


The completion of a dissertation requires a committee that demands

perfection, an unrelenting typist, and a large support group.

Many individuals gave unstingily of their time and knowledge during

the preparation of this dissertation. I happily acknowledge and appre-

ciated the patience of my committee chairman, Dr. Bernard Hodinko. He

meticulously assisted in transforming my scattered ideas into a coherent

presentation....his doors were always open to me as a teacher and

advisor during my entire graduate studies at The American University.

Dr. Ron Maggiore, my statistician, helped in making random

statistical concepts materialize into valid research ideas.

Dr. Keva Bethel, my other committee member, was a continual source

of encouragement and freely gave information concerning educational

issues in the Bahamas.

Maggie Blackwell, my typist, exhibited the patience of Job in

typing and retyping numerous drafts....without her altruism, this task

may have been insurmountable.

Numerous persons were in my support group while I pursued my graduate

studies. Val, Cherrie, Crusher, Mavis Young, Sandra J., Pat R., Pam J.,

Pam W., Judith Theophilus, Ambassador and Mrs. Woods, Dennis, Winsie and










Monica, Mary and Reno Brown; you all made the experience a pleasant

ordeal. Gibby, thanks for everything, especially your help with the

computer. Peter Pratt, thanks for lending me your car to distribute

the CGs to all of the classes and participants.

Dr. Geoffrey Fisher, your confrontations and ideas about this research

project were appreciated.

The members of the Career Developnent Division of the Career Center

at The American University were supportive while I wrote my drafts. They

listened, laughed, and felt for me. Laura, Ken, Marty, and Sally, you

all were good "Family" to work with.

A special thanks is given to the Registrar of the College of the

Bahamas for giving me permission to conduct the study. In addition, I

am grateful for the courtesies given to me by Celestine Cooper, Chair-

person of the Humanities Division of the College of the Bahamas. She

and her colleagues kindly consented to allow me to interrupt numerous

English classes to collect the data for this research. My gratitude is

also extended to all of the faculty, students, and administrators of

the College of the Bahamas who generously gave their time to complete a
small College Goals Inventory.

To all of you, Thanks a Million for your friendships, cooperation,

and goodwill....without your benevolence, this dissertation would have

been impossible.














TABLE OP CONTENTS


ABSTRACT ..........................o............................ i


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .............................................. iv


LIST OF TABLES ............................................... vii


CHAPTER ONE: THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING ..................... 1

Introduction ............................................. 1
Statement of the Problem ................................. 3
Statement of the Hypotheses ............................. 3
Setting of the Problem ................................... 5
Study Institution ........................................ 7
Assumptions of the Study ................................ 10
Limitations .............................................. 10
Definition of Terms ................................. .. 11
Organization of the Study ................................ 13


CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE ........................... 15

Review of Related Bahamian Literature .................... 15
Organizational Goals ..................................... 18
Institutional Goals ..................................... 20


CHAPTER THREEs METHODOLOGY .................................. 28

The Survey Instrument .................................... 28
Reliability of the Small College Goals Inventory ......... 32
Validity of the Small College Goals Inventory ............ 34
Study Participants ................................... 37
Data Collection ......................................... 40
Data Analysis ........................ ................... 42


CHAPTER FOUR: ANALYSIS OF THE DATA ........................... 46

Individual Goal Area Data ............................... 46
Rank Order of Goal Areas ................................ 77











CHAPTER FIVEs SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 85

Summary of the Results ................................. 88
Conclusions .............................................. 92
Recommendations .......................................... 93


APPENDIX A STUDY CORRESPONDENCE TO THE COLLEGE OF THE
BAHAMAS *....*..*.. ............................. 95

APPENDIX B CORRESPONDENCETO THE STUDY PARICIPANTS**.... 99

APPENDIX C CORRESPONDENCE WITH EDUCATIONAL TESTING SERVICE 107

APPENDIX D SMALL COLLEGE GOALS INVENTORY .................. 110

APPENDIX E SMALL COLLEGE GOALS INVNTORY STATEMENTS GROUPED
ACCORDING TO GOAL AREAS ........................ 122

APPENDIX F KRUSKA-WALLIS TESTS; FOR THE RESPONDENT GROUPS'
"IS" AND "SHOULD BE" RESPONSES TO THE SMALL
COLLEGE GOAL INVENTORY AREAS ................... 130

APPENDIX G SMALL COLLEGE GOAS INVENTORY ITEM ANALYSIS FOR
"IS" RESPONSES OF 202 STUDENTS, 17 FACULTY, AND
SIX ADMINISTRATORS BY GOAL AREAS ............... 134

APPENDIX H SMALL COLLEGE GOALS INVENTORY ITEM ANALYSIS FOR
"SHOULD BE" RESPONSES OF 202 STUDENTS, 17
FACULTY, AND SIX ADMINISTRATORS BY GOAL AREAS .. 157

BIBLIOGRAPHY .............................................. 180


LI _














LIST OF TABLES


1. Distribution of Total Population and Study Participants
by Campus Role .................................... .. 49

2. Rate of Return of Small College Goals Inventory by Study
Population ............................................ 42

3. Responses of 201 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Three Categories of the Small College
Goals Inventory with "IS" Means and H-values .......... 48

4. Responses for 201 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Three Categories of the Small College
Goals Inventory with "SHOULD BE" Means and H-values ..... 48

5. Responses of 17 Faculty to Twenty Goal Areas of the
Small College Goals Inventory by Means for "IS" and
"SHOULD BE" Responses, Discrepancies Between Means, and
Rank Order for "IS" and "SHOULD BE" Responses by Means .. 59

6. Responses of 202 Students to Twenty Goal Areas of the
Small College Goals Inventory by Means for "IS" and
"SHOULD BE" Responses, Discrepancies Between Means, and
Rank Order for "IS" and "SHOULD BE" Responses by Means .. 50

7. Responses of Six Administrators to Twenty Goal Areas of
the Small College Goals Inventory by Means for "IS" and
"SHOULD BE" Responses, Discrepancies Between Means, and
Rank Order for "IS" and "SHOULD BE" Responses by Means .. 51

8. Responses of the Aggregate of 202 Students, 17 Faculty,
and Six Administrators Rank Ordered by 20 Small College
Goals Inventory Goal Area "IS" and "SHOULD BE" Means .... 55

9. Rank Order of "IS" and "SHOULD BE" Mean Discrepancies by
Small College Goals Inventory Area for the Aggregate of
202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six Administrators ........ 78

10. Two Largest (Underemphasized) and Two (Overemphasized)
Discrepancies Between "IS" and "SHOULD BE" Importance
Goal Area Means for Student, Faculty, and Administrator
Respondents ........................ .................. 81


viii











11. Five Goal Areas with Highest and Lowest "SHOULD BE"
Importance Mean Scores for Faculty, Student, and
Administrator Respondents .............................. 83

12. The Top Five IGI, SCI, and CCG Goal Areas in Terms of
"SHOULD BE" Importance as Perceived by Three Research
Samples .... ..................................... ........... 91

13. Kruskal-Wallis Test for the Responses of 17 Faculty, 201
Students, and Six Administrators to Small College Goals
Inventory Items Comprising the Student Growth and
Development Goals for "IS" Responses ................... 131

14. Kruskal-Wallis Test for the Responses of 17 Faculty, 201
Students, and Six Administrators to Small College Goals
Inventory Items Comprising the Student Growth and
Development Goals for "SHOULD BE" Responses ........... 131

15. Kruskal-Wallis Test for the Responses of 17 Faculty, 201
Students, and Six Administrators to Small College Goals
Inventory Items Comprising the Service Goals for "IS"
Responses ............................................... 132

16. Kruskal-Wallis Test for the Responses of 17 Faculty, 201
Students, and Six Administrators to Small College Goals
Inventory Items Comprising the Service Goals for "SHOULD
BE" Respnses .................................... .. 132

17. Kruskal-Wallis Test for the Responses of 17 Faculty, 201
Students, and Six Administrators to Small College Goals
Inventory Items Comprising the Support Goals for "IS
Responses ............................................... 133

18. Kruskal-Wallis Test for the Responses of 17 Faculty, 201
Students, and Six Administrators to Small College Goals
Inventory Items Comprising the Support Goals for "SHOULD
BE" Responses ........................................... 133

19. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Academic Development Area, and Means, and
Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses ................... 135

20. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Intellectual Skills Area, and Means, and
Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses .................. 136



ix


. -










21. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Personal Development Area, and Means, and
Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses ................... 137

22. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Ethical/Moral Orientation Area, and Means,
and Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses ............... 138

23. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Cultural and Aesthetic Awareness Area, and
Means, and Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses ........ 139

24. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Religious Orientation Area, and Means,
and Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses ............... 140

25. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Preparation for Lifelong Learning Area,
and Means, and Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses .... 141

26. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Vocational Preparation Area, and Means,
and Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses ............... 142

27. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Interpersonal Skills Area, and Means, and
Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses ................... 143

28. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Social/Political Responsibility Area, and
Means, and Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses ........ 144

29. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Meeting Local Needs Area, and Means, and
Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses ................... 145

30. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Self-Understanding Area, and Means, and
Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses ................... 146










31. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Assistance for Faculty and Staff Area,
Means, and Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses......... 147

32. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Continuing Education Area, and Means, and
Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses ................... 148

33. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Democratic Governance and Freedom Area,
and Means, and Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses .... 149

34. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Campus Comaunity Area, and Means, and
Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses .................. 150
35. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Intellectual Environment Area, and Means,
and Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses ............... 151

36. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Snall College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Student Social Environment Area, and
Means, and Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses ....... 152

37. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Snall College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Cooperation with Outside Agencies Area,
and Means, and Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses .... 153

38. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Planning Area, and Means, and Standard
Deviation for "IS" Responses ........................ 154

39. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Miscellaneous Area, and Means, and
Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses .................. 155

40. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Miscellaneous Area, and Means, and
Standard Deviation for "IS" Responses .................. 156










41. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Academic Development Area, and Means, and
Standard Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses ........... 157

42. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Intellectual Skills Area, and Means, and
Standard Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses ............ 158

43. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Personal Development Area, and Means, and
Standard Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses ............ 159

44. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Ethical/Moral Orientation Area, and Means,
and Standard Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses ........ 160

45. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Cultural and Aesthetic Awareness Area, and
Means, and Standard Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses 161

46. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Religious Orientation Area, and Means, and
Standard Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses ............ 162

47. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Vocational Preparation Area, and Means,
and Standard Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses ....... 163

48. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Preparation for Lifelong Learning Area,
and Means, and Standard Deviation for "SHOULD BE"
Responses ............................................. 164

49. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Self-Understanding Area, and Means, and
Standard Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses ............ 165

50. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
AdMinistrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Interpersonal Skills Area, and Means, and
Standard Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses ........... 167


L










51. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Saall College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Social/Political Responsibility Area, and
Means, and Standard Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses 168

52. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Snall College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Meeting Local Needs Area, and Means, and
Standard Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses ............ 169

53. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Assistance for Faculty, and Staff Area,
Means, Standard Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses ..... 170
54. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Continuing Education Area, Means, Standard
Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses .................... 171

55. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Democratic Governance and Freedom Area,
and Means, Standard Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses 172

56. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Campus Comuunity Area, and Means, Standard
Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses .................... 173
57. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Intellectual Environment Area, and Means,
Standard Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses ............ 174

58. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Student Social Environment Area, and
Means, Standard Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses ..... 175

59. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Cooperation with Outside Agencies Area,
and Means, Standard Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses 176
60. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Planning Area, and Means, Standard
Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses .................... 177


xiii











61. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Saall College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Miscellaneous Area, and Means, and
Standard Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses ............ 178

62. Responses of 202 Students, 17 Faculty, and Six
Administrators to Small College Goals Inventory Items
Comprising the Miscellaneous Area, and Means, and
Standard Deviation for "SHOULD BE" Responses ........... 179














CHAPTER I


THE PROBLEM AD ITS SETI'NG

Introduction

For any organization to remain vibrant, coherent, and productive,

it must identify its purpose and goals clearly. This is true parti-

cularly for post-secondary institutions. The current financial

restraints at all levels of education have marked the end of super-

fluous funding, and has forced colleges and universities to articulate

their goals and justify their existence. With this as the eminent

consideration regarding the College of the Bahamas, this study was

undertaken. Specifically, it addressed the problem of clarifying the

mission of the Bahamas' only post-secondary educational institution,

the College of the Bahamas.

In 1970, Richard Peterson, a research psychologist at the

Educational Testing Service, in expressing his concern that post-

secondary institutions should state their goals, said

It seems essential in these times that colleges
articulate their goals: to give direction to
present and future work; to provide an ideology
that can nurture internal cooperation, communi-
cation and trust; to enable appraisal of the
institution for public understanding and support
(p. 11).
Dr. Peterson's statement cites the advantage of institutions

identifying clearly-defined goals. His reference is to well-

established colleges and universities in a developed country, the United













States. Needless to say, his concern would be even greater for a newly

developing institution like the College of the Bahamas. The

sociologist, Charles Perrow, further reiterated that organizations

within an institutional establishment," are tools designed to achieve

various goals. To understand them fully, one must understand the goals

they pursue" (Perrow, 1970, p. 186). The College of the Bahamas must

therefore be regarded as an organization pursuing a symmetry of educa-

tional and national goals which at present are invariably multiple and

conflicting, thus presenting a caricature of instability.

The College of the Bahanas, founded in 1974, one year after the

country gained its independence, has not pursued clear and explicit

goals. Traditionally, the Bahamas Government, through the Ministry of

Education, has always defined the College's goals and has developed

directions with minimal input from its constituent members. It would

seem, therefore, that in order that an institution maintain autonomy and

integrity regarding the goals which it has chosen, a plan for

accomplishing those goals must be developed. In addition those goals

and objectives must be clearly articulated and supported by all the

institution's constituents. At present, the administration at the

College is still attempting to anticipate the direction in which the

Government will lead them. Speculation continues at all levels, thus

many of the College's constituents are uncertain of either its goals

or direction.












The them of this paragraph is beautifully captured in Seneca's
(the R1an Philosopher) saying that, "when a man does not know what
harbour he is making for, no wind is the right wind." Similarly, there
is a Chinese proverb stating that, "If we don't change our direction, we
are likely to end up where we are heading." The deduction to be made
here is that direction is important. lWithout precise goals and
objectives, no institution can effectively evaluate how well it is
performing, decide how to allocate its limited resources wisely, plan for
future growth, motivate its members or justify its existence to the
public.

Statement of the Problem
The purpose of this study was: (1) to survey a sample of the
College of the Bahamas' community regarding the institution's goals,
as assessed through the Small College Goals Inventory (SCOI), both as
they are perceived and as they are preferred; (2) to determine
statistical differences among CGI goal area means for respondents
classified by faculty, student, and administrator roles; and (3) to
interpret the findings for their implications regarding present and
future college planning strategies and/or mission.

Statement of Hypotheses

Six hypotheses were tested:

1. There are no significant differences among student, faculty, and
administrator respondent groups at the College of the Bahamas













regarding the "IS" mean response for the importance of Student

Growth and Development goals as measured by the Small College

Goals Inventory.


2. There are no significant differences among student, faculty, and

administrator respondent groups at the College of the Bahamas

regarding the "IS" mean response for the importance of Service

goals as measured by the Small College Goals Inventory.


3. There are no significant differences among student, faculty, and

administrator respondent groups at the College of the Bahamas

regarding the "IS" mean response for the importance of Support

goals as measured by the Small College Goals Inventory.


4. There are no significant differences among student, faculty, and

administrator respondent groups at the College of the Bahamas

regarding the "SHOULD BE" mean response for the importance of

Student Growth and Development goals as measured by the Small

College Goals Inventory.


5. There are no significant differences among student, faculty, and
administrator respondent groups at the College of the Bahamas

regarding the "SHOULD BE" mean response for the importance of

Support goals as measured by the Small College Goals Inventory.


6. There are no significant differences among student, faculty, and

administrator respondent groups at the College of the Bahama3


_











1
regarding the "SHOULD BE" mean response for the importance of
Service goals as measured by the mall College Goals Inventory.

Setting of the Problem

The Bahamas is a group of islands entailing 5,380 square miles

(slightly larger than New Jersey and Connecticut combined) located 60
miles west of Palm Beach, Florida and 380 miles from Cay Sal Bank off

Cuba in the south. The country, which has many scattered cays and rocks,
was used as a haven by pirates involved in shipwrecking and rum-running
during the prohibition era, 1919-1924. It was discovered in 1492 by
Christopher Columbus. The first permanent European settlement occurred

in 1647. The country became a British colony in 1717 and remained under
British control until July 10, 1973 when it gained its independence (U.S.
Department of State, 1981). The Bahamas' first black government was

formed in 1967 under the leadership of Prime Minister Lynden 0. Pindling
and his Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) with a democratically elected
bicameral parliament consisting of a House of Parliament and a Senate.

Approximately 250,000 residents live in the Bahamas. Eighty-five
percent of the population are of Negroid descent with the remainder being
Caucasian. The main religions of its residents are Baptist, Anglican
(Episcopalian), Roman Catholic and Methodist. English is the official

language. The literacy rate of its people is 93 percent. The Bahamian
population's life expectancy is 67 years. Ninety-one percent of the
work force is engaged in tourism and commerce with the remaining nine

percent involved in agriculture (U.S. Department of State, 1981). In













comparison to its Caribbean neighbours, the Bahamas has a stable economy.

It has an annual growth rate of two percent. A 1975 World Bank study

estimated the per capital income to be $3,310. More than 70 percent of

the Bahamian gross national product (GNP) cones from the tourist

industry. Banking and insurance account for about 12-14 percent of the

GNP (U.S. Department of State, 1981).

The educational system of the Bahamas is a hybrid of the British and

American systems. Nine years of education are compulsory. After 12

years of schooling students qualify for a high school diploma. During

the first six years, the students receive their "primary" education.

The next three years are the "junior high" years and the last three years

are the "senior high" years, wherein, the students are enrolled in high
school. In addition, students are required to take the "General Certi-

ficate of Education" (GCE) examination at the ordinary level, which is

equivalent to the level of education attained by an American high school

graduate. This examination is administered by the University of London.

Students are tested in each subject on material presented during their

five years of "senior high" school. Individuals who pass tests in five

or more subjects are eligible to take the "advanced" level curriculum -

which requires an additional two years of studies after receiving the

high school diploma. Usually, 50 percent of the students take six or

seven ordinary level subjects and three (sometimes four) advanced-level

subjects. Upon completion of high school, students with a diploma

apply to various colleges in the United States; those who have completed










7

the advanced level (an extra two years) have the pr-requisite for
admission into colleges and universities in the United Kingdom, Jamaica,
and Canada.

Study Institution
The College of the Bahamas is a publicly-financed, multi-purpose
institution. It is the only tertiary-level institution in the Bahamas,
representing thereby the acme of the education system. It was created

by amalgamating the advanced level classes of the Government High
School, the Bahamas Teachers' College, San Salvador Teachers' College,
and the C.R. Walker Technical College. The College's first class was
admitted in September, 1975.

The College is located on two campuses, both of which are on the
island of New Providence on which is the town of Nassau. The main
campus, the Oakes Field campus, is located 3.5 miles away from its
satellite Soldier Road Campus. In addition, there is a satellite center

in Freeport, Grand Bahama, one of the northern islands of the Bahamas.
A housing complex accommodating 50 students is a 15 minute walk from
the main campus. Presently, there is no transportation between the
two campuses.

In December, 1974, the College of the Bahamas Act was passed by
Parliament. The Act gave a council the authority to govern the adminis-
trative and academic affairs of the College. The Council is the
governing body of the College of the Bahamas. It has nine members who













are appointed annually and who serve under the direction of the Minister

of Education. The principal of the College is an ex-officio member.

Other members include a public officer from the Ministry of Education, a

student, and six persons appointed by the Minister of Education. The

Minister has the authority to revoke the appointment of any member at any

time. The Act states that the purposes of the College are: (1) to be a

place of education, (2) to assist in the advancement of knowledge, and

(3) to enter in association or affiliation with other institutions of

learning. It also stated that the College's expenditures must be

approved by the Minister of Finance (Bahamas Government Gazette, 1974).

The principal and the registrar are the only two administrators

mentioned in the Act. Other administrators at the College are: the

Vice-Principal, Academic Dean, Provost of the Soldier Road Campus,

Coordinator of Student Services, Librarian, Coordinator of Counselling,

Chairpersons, Business Officer, Personnel Officer, Admissions Assistant,

and Record Officers.

The Academic Board is responsible for administering the policies of

the College. It has nine members with the principal as its chairperson.

The remaining members consist of the chairpersons of each of the teach-

ing divisions, the Librarian of the College, a student, and two other

persons selected by the Principal and appointed by the Council.

There are eight divisions at the College. Six are academic:

Humanities, Natural Science, Social Science, Education, Business













Studies and Technology; and two are service: Extension Services and

the Library. Each division is coordinated by a chairperson.

The College's year is divided into two semesters of sixteen weeks

each and a Sumer Session of an eight week duration. During these

sessions, the College offers eight programmes leading to a certificate,

10 to a diploma, and 24 to the Associate of Arts degree. In addition,

programmes on the advanced level leading to the General Certificate of

Education are offered in 11 subject areas.

In September, 1981, the College enrolled 1,230 students, 70 percent

of whom were part-time. Seventy percent of the students were women and,

for the most part, Bahamian (95%). About half (47%) were enrolled in

the Business Studies curriculum (Records Office). As of the same date,

there were 106 full-time faculty members at the College. Forty-eight

percent of the faculty (51) were Bahamians (Personnel Office).

The initial goals of the College of the Bahamas were developed by a

team of educational consultants who visited the Bahamas during December

of 1974. These goals have remained unchanged. As stated in the College

of the Bahamas' Handbook (1979), the College would provide:

1. Career, vocational, and technical education at post-high school
level to prepare persons for the labor force or to improve their
skills relative to their present employment.
2. General education for all interested students of post-secondary
school age.
3. Collegiate-level transfer and pre-professional transfer
programmes for the Baccalureate-degree-oriented student.


I













4. Pre-College, upgrading, or remedial programmes so that persons
can develop the basic knowledge, skills, and attitudes for self-
improvement, employment, or entry into other College programmes.
5. Adult and Continuing Education programs for both part-time
adult students and out-of-school youths.
6. Community education and development to assist the community in
identifying and assessing its needs, and in the promotion of a
greater sense of community and national awareness.
7. Research and evaluation programmes to determine the effective-
ness of its own programme offerings as well as to ensure that
all caoponents of the community educational system are being
used effectively.
8. Counselling, guidance, and information services to provide
fully for the varied needs of its heterogeneous clientele, and
to make known to camunity residents the range of educational
opportunities available to them, and to assist them in select-
ing the programmes most appropriate to their needs (College of
the Bahamas Handbook, 1979, p. 1).

Assumptions of the Study

The following assumptions were made for this study.

1. Response to the SCGI constitutes a reasonably authentic

representation of the opinions of the study participants on the

goals of the College of the Bahamas.

2. The goal statements presented on the SCGI represent a synthesis

of goals for post-secondary institutions in the United States.
It is assumed that the statements represent goals that are

appropriate for the College of the Bahamas.

Limitations

The goals considered for the College of the Bahamas in this study

are limited to those on the Small College Goals Inventory. Another

limitation may be the unfamiliarity of the respondents in completing a













standardized instrument which requires multiple-choice responses.

Furthermore, the study is limited to an evaluation of the perceptions

of samples of the College of the Bahamas' student, faculty, and admin-

istrator constituencies as determined during the Fall of the 1982-83

academic year.

Definition of Terms

Terms used in this study that have unique connotations are defined

below.


Administrator. An administrator is a person who holds supervisory

rank and is responsible for administering the College's programmes and

policies. Administrators in this study are principal, vice-principal,

registrar, academic dean, provost, Coordinator of Student Services,

librarian, counsellor, division chairperson, records officer, admissions

assistant, Coordinator of Conmunity Relations, finance assistant,

personnel officer, and personnel assistant. Council members (the

counterparts of the members of the Board of Trustees in the United

States) are responsible for the governance, control, and administration

of the College's facilities, and, therefore, are considered to be

administrators in this study.

Faculty. An employee of the College of the Bahamas contracted both

to teach a minimum of sixteen credit hours per semester and hold a

minimum of five office hours per week. Such individuals carry the

academic rank of lecturer.


I













Goal. A future state of affairs that is seen as desirable and worth

striving for as an end or output by the total college organization.

Ninety such goals are presented on the SCGI.

Goal Area. The aggregate of four individual goals, which an

institution attempts to realize, each of which is related to the same

specific theme as developed through the SCGI.

Objectives. The desired ends of the various subunits within a

particular college or university, that aid in the attainment of that

college or university's unique total organizational goals.

Preferred ("SHOULD BE") Goal. A future state of affairs or output

that is perceived for a college as determined through the "SHOULD BE"

response to the SCGI. "Preferred" and "SHOULD BE" are used

interchangeably.

Present ("IS") Goal. The importance of a specific end or output

as it is perceived now for a college as determined through the "IS"

responses to the SCGI. "Present" and "IS" are used interchangeably.

Service Goals. A classification of SCGI goals that are concerned

with "the services a college provides as part of the local community to

its own faculty and staff and to non-traditional students" (SCGI,

Summary Data Report, 1981). It entails three goal areas which in turn,

consist of 12 goal statements.












SMALL COLLEGE GOALS IVENORY (SCGI). An instrument developed by

the Educational Testing Service in 1979 to help college communities

identify the relative importance of an institution's present ("IS") and

preferred ("SBOULD BE") goals.

Student. An individual enrolled at the College of the Bahamas
during the period of this study, who was admitted to the College between

September 1975 and September 1981.

Student Growth and Development Goals. A classification of SCG

goals that are concerned with the academic and personal development of

students, their vocational preparation, and their social and political
responsibility. It entails 11 goal areas which in turn, consist of 44

goal statements.

Support Goals. A classification of SCGI goals that are concerned

primarily with the climate or environment of the college (SCGI, Summary

Data Report, 1981). It entails six goal areas which in turn, consist

of 24 goal statements.

Organization of the Study

Chapter II
The review of literature has two main foci. The first is on

pertinent information about higher education in the Bahamas. A cursory
review of organizational goals is made. The second major emphasis is a














review of studies similar to the one undertaken and a review of contem-

porary thoughts on the problem.


Chapter III

This chapter describes the method of the study. In addition, the

survey instrument, the Snall College Goals Inventory (SCGI) is

described, highlighting the twenty goal areas. The reliability and

validity of the SCGI is discussed and the procedure for the data

collection is described. Finally, the method for the data analysis is

stated.

Chapter IV

Analysis of study data, results of hypothesis testing and relevant

discussion form the content of this chapter.

Chapter V

The final chapter includes a summary of the study, conclusions,

recarmendations and suggestions for future studies.














CHAPTER II


REVIEW OP LITERATURE

Review of Related Bahamian Literature

The literature reviewed provides a historical perspective which

can serve as an invaluable data resource for educational policy makers

with a need to resolve Bahamian educational problems. In scope, the

literature reviewed ranges from that describing the precipitating events

that lead to higher education in the Bahamas to that which deals with

its current organization and goals.

Many educators feel that education should focus on the development

of tools for good citizenry, while others feel that its focus should

be on changing the world. In developing countries, such as the Bahamas,

educational goals must incorporate both schools of thought. In these

countries, education is preeminently a product of historical,

political, and economic factors. In the Bahamas, as in many developing

countries, education is used as a vehicle of upward social mobility;

however, what is seemingly lacking is an emphasis on technical and

agricultural areas. Therefore, developing countries can not afford to

debate the global issues of educational goals, but, must incorporate

both schools of thought for successful educational institutions.

Many political scientists have called educators in developing

countries "century-skippers", which suggests a desire of developing













nations to achieve greater results in a shorter time than was achieved

by developed nations in their earlier stages (Adams and Bjork, 1969).

However, the reality of such a definitive process places educators in

these countries in a policy-making dilemma because these "century-

skippers" usually avoid long-range planning. Long-range planning must

be implemented by policy-makers in order to secure effective educational

goals. These educators must cease to view educational planning as a

static and non-continuous process which would ensure that all planning

will be continuous with periodic evaluations.


The present goals of the College of the Bahamas were shaped by

numerous reports, the first was submitted in 1967. (In this year, the

Bahamas elected its first black government.) This report was authored

by Professors C. T. Leyes, W. J. Waines, and G. E. Watts from the

University of the West Indies. The report recommended, "the establish-

ment and development of a Bahamas College which would eventually become

a multi-function University of the West Indies" (Leyes, et. al., 1967).

It also stated that the College should meet the special needs of the

Bahamas and efforts should be made to include hotel, technical,

business, education, arts and science in its curriculum. The authors

advocated a closer relationship with other institutions of higher

education.


In 1974, the idea of the College of the Bahamas was further refined

in a report submitted by J.A. Maraj, R.O. Fletcher, J.W. Greig, and J.D.

Turner. These authors envisioned the College as a "multi-purpose


_










17

institution, serving as far as possible, every important need of the
Bahamas" (Maraj, et. al., 1974). They stressed that the College should
meet the changing needs of the Bahamas by exercising flexibility in its
admissions and curricula and, also, suggested that the administrators
of the College should be given some degree of autonomy especially with
regards to its academic and training programmes.

Maraj (et. al., 1974) emphasized the need for a systematic
relationship between the College's objectives and government's policy
in the areas of social and economic development. With this premise

in mind, the following objectives were recommended for the College of
the Bahamas:

1. To advance the intellectual, social, and cultural life of all
Bahamians.
2. To advance knowledge about and promote an understanding of
the Bahamian society.
3. To provide a center for research and development in the
Bahamas.
4. To define post-secondary education in Bahamian terms.
5. To continue the educational process of promoting the personal
growth and career potential of Bahamian students.
6. To provide on-the-job training programmes.
7. To ensure that further education in the College of the Bahamas
is geared to the manpower requirements of the country.
8. To ensure its own professional growth through a planned staff
development programme.
9. To involve students at the College in a work/study experience.
10. To provide educational progranmes and courses relevant to the
natural resources of the Bahamas.
11. To raise the status of vocational and technical programmes to
the level of academic programmes.
12. To assist in the overall improvement of primary and secondary
education.
13. To provide qualified mechanisms for the job market.
14. To provide training in all specialist areas.
15. To provide a mechanism for the rational development of
continuing education in the Bahamas.
is gare tothemanpwerreqireentsof he ounry.I
8. T enureits wn rofssioal rowh houg a lannd saffi,













16. To provide a comprehensive program of continuing education
opportunities which are accessible to all Bahamians.
17. To ensure a high standard of functional literacy throughout
the adult sector of the Bahamas.
18. To encourage the development of community schools.
19. To provide training programmes in community leadership.
20. To ensure quality education for mature learners (Maraj et. al.,
1974, pp. 152-174).


In 1976, Dr. M. Kazim Bacchus, the second Principal of the College

of the Bahamas and the Adviser on Higher Education to the Bahamas'

government submitted a report entitled, A Suggested Policy for Higher

Education in the Bahamas. In this report Dr. Bacchus suggested that,

"the great emphasis of the College should be on producing graduates

who are well equipped with the necessary job skills and attitudes which

will make them valuable citizens of the Commonwealth" (Bacchus, 1976).

In addition, he restated the multi-purpose character of the College.

Bacchus differed from previous consultants by stressing that the College

actively pursue an egalitarian philosophy. He believed that this

feature would give Bahamians from all backgrounds a chance to benefit

from the College's programmes.

Organizational Goals


Educational institutions may be viewed as organizations, as such,

they pursue specific goals. Organizations may be regarded as systems

which gain their meaning and direction from their function. The

support rationale for these systems embraces two positions; utopian

and realistic. When a disparity occurs between the two positions,













competing or new goals more compatible with the interest of the

constituencies should evolve.

Parsons defines an organization as a "system which, as the attain-

ment of its goals, 'produces' an identifiable something which can be

utilized in some way by another system....the output of the organization
is, for some other system, an input" (Parsons, 1969). He views the term

"goal" as a central concept of organizations. Furthermore, he defines

goal attainment as the fulfillment of specific requirements the organi-

zation has set for itself (Parsons, et al.). However, he stressed that

there must be a clear understanding of what must be accomplished.

Perrow's viewpoint is that, "organizations are tools designed to

achieve various goals. To understand them fully, one must understand

the goals they pursue." He also adds that usually the "goals are multi-

ple and conflicting and thus the character of an organization is never

stated." He felt that the conflicting goals may be helpful for an
organization's growth (Perrow, 1970).

Thompson and McEwen stated that it was important to view organiza-

tions as ever changing entities. They believed that recurring problems

occur because of the relationship of the organization to the larger

society. Hence, one of the biggest problems an organization faces is

reappraising its goals. This process can be very complex if its goals

are intangible and difficult to measure (Thompson and McEwen, 1969).













Etzioni feels that recruitment is an important procedure which

helps an organization to attain its goals. Its recruitment efforts

should result in the acquisition of personnel who are committed to its

goals (Etzioni, 1969). The more personnel who are committed, the more

effectively the institution's goals will be attained.

Institutional Goals

The study of goals is relevant to all organizations and

institutions. Over the past ten years, educators have been constantly

confronted with charges of lack of purpose and relevance. Higher

education is often under pressure to identify and articulate its

purposes. Various constituencies are demanding accountability and

seeking clarity for ambiguous goals.

Sir Eric Ashby along with others feel that an "an institution

cannot be governed unless each of its components clearly recognize its

obligations as well as its rights in the promotion of the caomon end"

(Dobbs, 1968). Many educators realize that goals are continually

changing or need changing. However, they neglect to undergo self-

assessment which is needed to provide a necessary focus and direction

(Winstead and Hobson, 1971). With this neglect in mind, it would

appear that an enormous amount of attention needs to be devoted towards

defining goals of organizations. Sanford urged educators to study

institutional objectives and to emphasize that in those studies

observation should be paid to the real, operative goals, their origins













and consequences (Sanford, 1962). Several research efforts along this

line are cited subsequently.

Gross and Grambsch, in 1964, produced the first significant
empirical study defining the goals of a sample of post-secondary insti-

tutions in America. These investigators developed an inventory which

contained 47 goal statements. They classified the goals into two broad

headings, "output" and "support" goals. One third of the 47 goal

statements were "output" goals which included teaching, research and

service to the community. They defined "output" goals as those goals

that immediately or in the future are reflected in some product, service

or skill that affect the society. The "support" goals are those goals

that help the organization to achieve the "output" goals.

The participants were asked to indicate the relative importance of

each goal statement ranging from "of absolutely top importance" to "of

no importance" with three steps in between. The respondents were asked

to indicate his/her evaluation as to present ("IS") and future ("SHOULD
BE") importance of each goal statement. The researchers assigned a

weighted answer of one to five for each of the responses. This procedure

was done to attain a rank order for each individual respondent.

Gross and Grambsch surveyed 6,756 faculty and 8,828 administrators

from 68 non-dencminational doctoral-granting universities in the United

States. The questionnaires were mailed in late Spring of 1964 to

presidents, vice-presidents, academic deans, non-academic deans,













department heads, and programme directors. A 10 percent sample of the

faculty members at each institution also received a questionnaire. The

return rate was 46.4 percent.

The result of the study indicated that the respondents collectively

agreed that the university is one of the most important institutions in

the society and they perceived the president, the vice-president, and

the regents as having the most power. However, there was no consensus

on what the roles and purposes of each institution were or should be

(Gross and Grambsch, 1968).

Another important study of institutional goals was sponsored by the

Danforth Foundation in 1969. The Foundation revised the Gross and

Grambsch instrument for application to private liberal arts colleges.

The forms were administered to the administrators, a 20 percent sample

of faculty and 100 students at 14 private liberal arts colleges. The

purpose of the study was to assist the institutions in determining if

differences existed between universities and small, private, liberal arts

colleges with limited resources. Faculty, administrators, and students

were in agreement regarding college goals and governance. The findings

reveal, in part, that small institutions emphasized teaching and not

research (Danforth Foundation, 1969). There were differences between

"IS" and "SHOULD BE" responses which indicated that the three groups did

not hold cannon views on the direction of many of the desired changes.













The Delphi Method is a procedure devised to assess institutional
goals by encouraging consensus or convergence of opinions. Its purpose

is to elicit opinions from different individuals without causing face-
to-face confrontation. This method was first used in the field of

education at the School of Education at the University of Virginia
under the supervision of Frederick R. Cyphert and Walter L. Grant in

1968. The participants received a survey four times and rated it
anonomously. After each rating feedback was given on the way others

responded. The additional iterations were administered to encourage

a consensus of opinion (Cyphert and Grant, 1971). In 1969, a modified

version of the Delphi Technique was used in a survey study for a planned

university. During the planning stages of Governor's State University

this technique was used to solicit input for the intended goals of the
new institution (Norton, 1970).

In 1969, the National Laboratory for Higher Education (NLHE) began
a project to aid institutions in planning and decision-making. This

project was the clarification and understanding of the goals of an

institution. The NLHE and the Educational Testing Service co-sponsored
a study which investigated what the various constituents perceived the

institutional goals should be; and it evaluated the Delphi Technique as

a reliable means for gaining consensus among different groups on

institutional goals; it also gave administrators a quick accurate reading
on what degree of support to expect from various groups concerning













specific institutional planning and decision-making process. Norman P.

Uhl directed the study.

The study included five institutions in Virginia and the Carolinas.

The study's design compared five public versus private, small versus

large, predominantly black versus predominantly white colleges and

universities.

The instrument contained a series of 150 goal statements which

covered the broad range of college and university operations.

The respondents included members of the community, parents, alumni,

trustees, faculty, students, and administrators. Each participant was

mailed a 150 goal statement questionnaire. Convergence was encouraged

by additional administrations of the instrument with feedback to allow

the respondent an opportunity to either move toward a consensus or state

a reason for divergence. In the first questionnaire, a five-point scale

ranging from "of extremely high importance" to "of no importance" was

used for the participants to indicate which goals they thought the

institution "SHOULD BE" emphasizing (Uhl, 1971).

During the second administration, the respondents answered the

same questions with two exceptions. They received a summary of model

responses from the first questionnaire; they were asked to give an

explanation if their response did not agree with the model rating of

the first administration. In the third and final administrations, the

same procedures were followed. However, this time, the respondents












also received a summary of the reasons given by those who did not agree

with the model goal ratings. The results from the four administrations

indicated that there was a similarity in the institutional profiles.

Also, it indicated that the Delphi technique did encourage convergence

both within and among groups. Furthermore, it was showed that this

technique was a useful communicative medium among constituent groups.

The results of the Uhl study produced some heuristic values.

Attaining a consensus from diverse groups is the first step in planning.
Second, the instLument used would be useful as a means of collecting

valuable data for an institution's decision-making process. Third,

the Delphi Technique did encourage convergence both within and among

groups. Most importantly, the results showed that an institution's
goals or objectives can only be valid if the constituent groups reach

some agreement on them.

To date, 1982, the most comprehensive study of institutional goals

located by the writer was that conducted by Richard Peterson with the

Committee on the Master Plan for Higher Education in California in the

Spring of 1972. The purpose of this research was to identify the goals
of higher education in California. The Committee looked into all aspects
of higher education by surveying more than 24,000 participants which

included faculty, students, administrators, board members, and community

persons from 116 post-secondary (University of California eight

campuses, California State University, and Colleges 16 campuses;

community colleges 69 campuses) Californian institutions. The major













objectives were to compile information about the beliefs of the people

in the state's academic communities regarding the goals of their

respective institutions.

The finding of the study showed that all constituencies valued the

goal of "Community" (open communication, trust, and mutual respect and

that of "Intellectual Orientation" (commitment to learning). At the

University of California. "Advanced Training" was rated in the top five

by all constituent groups, whereas all of the community colleges'

respondents (except the faculty) rated "Vocational Preparation" as the

number one goal. "Social Criticism/Activism, "Social Egalitarianism"

and "Off-Campus Learning" were in the bottom 17 in every institutional

category for institutional importance.

The Peterson study is important because it supplied most of the

background data for the Institutional Goal Inventory (IGI). The

theoretical framework of the instrument consists of 20 goal areas,

divided into two categories: "outcome" and "process" goals. The

inventory consists of 90 goal statements, four relating to each of the

20 goal areas, plus 10 miscellaneous goal statements. Using a five-

point Likert scale of importance, respondents gave two judgments for

each goal statement: how important "IS" the goal presently at the campus
and how important "SHOULD" the goal be. Furthermore, the data and

rationales from the IGI were used to develop a second instrument, the

Small College Goals Inventory (SCGI), that which was used in the study

of the goals of the College of the Bahamas.












An exhaustive review of the literature on the use of the

Institutional Goals Inventory (IGI), revealed that prior to 1975 it had

never been used at a non-American institution. In 1975, Sunday Udoh
used the GI at a Nigerian University. Udoh's study showed that signi-

ficant differences existed among his study participant's preference for
their institutional goals. The Nigerian findings were not similar to

the findings of American institutions. Since 1975, the IGI has been

administered at a number of non-American post-secondary institutions,
for example Korea (Ahn, 1980), Kenya (Mukuni, 1980), and Nigeria

(Iruka, 1980). In this writers review, the consistent findings for the

international studies were: (1) goals were not perceived to be clearly
articulated; (2) more significant differences existed between students

and academic administrators than any other groups, and (3) the preference

in the rank ordering of the goal area were usually different among the
participant groups.

It is fitting to keep in mind that to date, the Small College Goals

Inventory, has never been used at a non-American institution (Conversa-

tion with Ms. Nancy Beck Educational Testing Service, December, 1981).
Likewise, no self-evaluation instrument for higher education has ever

been used in the Bahamas. Consequently, the data obtained from this
study may be considered prototypical for small colleges in developing
countries and more so for those in the Caribbean.














CHAPTER III


METBOIDLGY

The Survey Instrument

The instrument used to elicit data for this study was the Small

College Goals Inventory (SCGI). It was created by the Council for the

Advancement of Small Colleges and the Educational Testing Service (ETS)

in 1979. It is a hybrid of the Institutional Goals Inventory which was

developed in 1972 by the Educational Testing Service. In 1978, the

instrument was revised by Edwin Potts and Stanley Frame to specifically

serve the needs of small colleges.


The Small College Goals Inventory has grown from many years of study

and adaptation. In 1970, Norman P. Uhl using the Gross and Grambsch

response format, developed the first version of the Institutional Goals

Inventory for ETS and tested it at five institutions in the South (Gross

and Grambsch, 1968). The following year, Uhl and Peterson revised the

instrument and tested it at 105 colleges and universities in the West.

The purpose of this revision was to serve the needs of small colleges.

Field tests were then conducted at 26 colleges within the United States,

thus producing the new instrument known as the Small College Goals

Inventory (Peterson and Uhl, 1977).


The Small College Goals Inventory is a 90-question instrument. It

was developed to "assist" faculty and administrators in identifying and


I












developing campus goals and a healthy campus climate (Council for the
Advancement of Small Colleges, 1979, p. XI). Eighty of the ninety goal

statements are grouped into twenty goal areas (See Appendix D). Each

goal area contains four statements. The remaining ten statements are
miscellaneous.

The first eleven goal areas in the SCGI are identified as "student

growth and development" goals and cover such areas as the academic and

personal development of students, their vocational preparation and their
social and political responsibility (EIS Summary Data Report, 1978).

The next three goal areas pertain to the "services" a college provides as

part of the local community, to its own faculty and staff and to non-

traditional students. The last six goal areas are referred to as

"support" goals. These goals are concerned with the campus environment
and the campus relation with other agencies.

The theoretical framework of the instrument consists of twenty

goal areas categorized under three goal classifications Student Growth

and Development Goals, Service Goals, Support Goals as follows:

Student Growth and Development Goals

1. Academic Development has to do with acquisition of general and
specialized knowledge and maintenance of high intellectual stan-
dards on campus. (Questions 1, 4, 6, 9)
2. Intellectual Skills relates to developing abilities in
research and problem-solving methods, study skill, and the
ability to organize, synthesize and integrate new knowledge.
(Questions 2, 5, 7, 10)
3. Personal Growth means growth in such non-academic areas as
self-discipline, independence, adaptability, and personal
responsibility. (Questions 3, 8, 11, 13)













4. Ethical/Mral Orientation has to do with understanding of
moral issues and emotional and behavioral responses to these
issues. (Questions 14, 17, 20, 23)
5. Cultural and Aesthetic Awareness entails a heightened appre-
ciation of a variety of art forms, exposure to arts and
customs of other cultures, and active participation in artistic
activities. (Questions 15, 18, 21, 24)
6. Religious Orientation means an openness to religious beliefs
and issues, a personal religious stance, and appreciation of the
religious positions of others. (Questions 16, 19, 22, 25)
7. Vocational Preparation entails assessing personal goals and
abilities and preparation for a particular field of work and/or
for advanced academic work. (Questions 26, 30, 36, 38)
8. Preparation of Life-Long Learning means developing under-
standings, attitudes and habits that will result in active
participation in the learning process throughout life.
(Questions 27, 31, 32, 41)
9. Self Understanding relates to an awareness of personal
qualities, goals, beliefs, attitudes and values. (Questions 28,
34, 35, 37)
10. Inter-personal Skills involves developing the abilities to
relate, communicate, understand, and work effectively with other
persons. (Questions 29, 33, 39, 40)
11. Social/Political Responsibility means engaging in a critical
evaluation of social and political systems and development of
personal positions on those issues that affect social/political
behaviour. (Questions 44, 47, 50, 51)

Service Goals

1. Meeting Local Needs is defined as service to the community in
which the institution is located through committing institu-
tional resources or the efforts of college personnel to the
solution of local problems. (Questions 42, 45, 48, 52)
2. Assistance for Faculty and Staff refers to fostering profes-
sional development of college faculty and staff. (Questions 43,
46, 49, 53)
3. Continuing Education is defined as providing for the educa-
tional needs of non-traditional students such as local towns-
people, alumni, and others. (Questions 54, 57, 60, 63)


Support Goals
1. Democratic Governance and Freedom means wide participation by
campus groups in the decision-making process, governance that
is responsive to the concerns of everyone at the institution,
freedom of the faculty to present unpopular points of view, and










31

freedom of students to govern their personal lives. (Questions
55, 58, 61, 64)
2. Campus Community means maintaining a climate that enhances
faculty commitment to the general welfare of the institution,
open and candid communication, open and amicable airing of open
differences, and mutual trust and respect among students,
faculty, and administrators. (Questions 56, 59, 62, 65)
3. Intellectual Environment is defined as maintaining campus
climate where experimentation with new procedures is common,
where students spend some free time in intellectual and cul-
tural activities, where freedom of inquiry prevails, and where
students and faculty can easily interact informally. (Questions
66, 69, 73, 76)
4. Student Social Environment refers to a campus climate in which
students may develop healthy, social contacts and lasting
friendships in which the living situation supports learning
and social goals. (Questions 67, 70, 74, 77)
5. Cooperation with Outside Agencies involves working with
governmental agencies in social and environmental policy
formation, responding to regional and national priorities in
planning educational programmes, and working with other educa-
tional institutions for mutual strength. (Questions 68, 72,
75, 78)
6. Planning is defined as engaging in regular process of identi-
fying needs, setting goals, and providing programmes to meet
needs and evaluating and reporting goal achievement. (Questions
79, 81, 83, 87)

Special permission obtained for the reproduction of the description

of the 20 goal areas. See Appendix C. (SCGI Data Report, 1981).

Miscellaneous Goal Statements
These goal areas refer to concerns which deserve special attention,

such as remedial education, learning styles, physical fitness, foreign

language study, and institutional fairness with respect to students.
(Questions 12, 71, 80, 82, 84, 85, 86, 88, 89, 90).

The SCGI uses a five-point rating (Likert) scale for each goal

statement. It directs each respondent to render two judgements: (1) how













important IS the goal, presently, at the subject's campus; and (2) how

important SHOULD the goal be. Response alternatives and the numerical

value assigned to each in this study are:

Of no importance, or not applicable 1.00

Of low importance = 2.00

Of medium importance = 3.00

Of high importance 4.00

Of extremely high importance = 5.00

In addition, the inventory elicits seven items of demographic

nature. These are: campus role, teaching or field of study, age,

faculty's rank, faculty's teaching arrangement, student's year in college

and a student's current enrollment status.

Reliability of the Small College Goals Inventory

The Educational Testing Service accepts and recommends the

reliability data for the Institutional Goal Inventory (IGI) as appro-

priate to the SCGI. Estimates of the reliability of each goal area,

established for group responses were based by Peterson and Uhl upon

ratings of the perceived and preferred responses of each constituent

group of 105 institutions. Peterson and Uhl's report (1977) indicated

that:

Academic Development had more low co-efficient alphas than any

other goal area, with a median value of .69 for ratings of present

importance. Of the 49 median reliability estimates, based on













ratings of present and preferred importance for each goal area,

all are above .65, 38 are above .70, 33 are above .80, and 11 are

.90 or above. Traditional Religiousness had the highest median
alphas; .98 (Peterson and Uhl, 1979, p. 48).

The standard error of measurement is another measurement of reli-

ability. It measures the degree of variation with regard to the statis-

tical unit in question.

The median standard error of measurement for the present importance

ratings ranges from .08 for Individual Personal Development (alpha -

.90). For the "SHOULD BE" ratings, they range from .06 for Democratic

Governance (alpha = .89) to .20 for Social Egalitarianism (alpha -

.89). The median of these standard errors of measurement is .13

for the IS responses and .11 for the "SHOULD BE" responses. Conse-

quently, it is unlikely that for any goal area, the "true" mean of

any of the comparison groups varies much from the respective

obtained groups. Even for the goal area having the lowest internal

consistency, Academic Development, an institution's present

importance mean can be expected to fall within .26 of a score

point from the "true" mean about 95 percent of the time, assuming

a normal distribution of goal area means (Peterson and Uhl, 1974,

p. 49).

An interconnection matrix was found which showed that about 10 to

15 percent of the 190 correlations in the tables for faculty, students,













administrators and total carunity have correlations of .60 or greater.

Peterson and Uhl concluded that about five factors explain most of the

response variation, but suggested the following three reasons for

retaining the 20 goal areas:

(1) Important conceptual differences between two highly correlated

variables necessitate separate measurement.


(2) Very few goal areas' correlations even approach the magnitude

of the internal consistency reliability of the goal area; hence

this is an indication that each goal is contributing something

unique.

(3) The twenty goal areas comprising the conceptual framework of

the IGI were settled upon only after extensive deliberation

on the structure of goals that would be of use to user

colleges (Peterson and Uhl, 1974, p. 56).

Validity of the Small College Goals Inventory

The concept of validity indicates whether a test or instrument

measures what it is supposed to measure. The Small College Goal

Inventory's validity is based upon the validity of the IGI which was

determined by Peterson and Uhl after studying 105 institutions.

Specific information about the SCGI's validity is not available from the

Educational Testing Service at this time. Nevertheless, Peterson and

Uhl provide evidence to support the construct validity of the IGI and

the SCGI.












The purpose of both the above instruments is to assist institutions

of higher education assess beliefs held by their constituent groups

about the IS and SHOULD BE importance of goals. Consequently, two
questions were asked to validate the IGI.

1. To what degree do the 20 goal areas, as defined in the IGI

actually measure what they purport to measure in terms of both

present and preferred importance?

2. To what degree do the goal areas have the same meaning to the
different constituents of the institution?

The above questions refer to construct validity. The IGI's goal

areas repLesent a taxonomy of higher education goals and do not present

a formal nonological network. Various procedures were used to assess
the construct validity as a guide for the analysis of data in attempting
to support intuitive exceptions (Peterson and Uhl, 1977, p. 57).

Institutional data such as number of volumes in the library, income

per student, and selectivity in admissions were correlated with mean
ratings of the present importance of those items by constituent groups.

All except three goal areas were supported. No institutional data

related to (1) Social criticiam/activism, (2) Democratic governance, and
(3) Accountability/efficiency.

Judgements by educationists about goal areas expected to be most

and least important at different types of institutions were compared to













responses by constituent group ratings at 116 institutions. Agreement

was found on all goal areas except Democratic governance, Off-campus

learning and Accountability/efficiency (the judges could not agree on

those three goal areas), and Humanism/altruism. Consequently, support

was provided for the validity of more goal areas.

Respondent groups identified institutional types with highest and

lowest importance ratings for each goal area. Very close agreement with

ratings of constituent groups was obtained on all but the Accountability/

efficiency area. Furthermore, ETS reasoned that institutions rated

lowest and highest in present importance would also rate lowest and

highest in preferred importance of goal areas. The agreement was found

on all but three goal areas: Accountability/efficiency, Social

criticism/activism and Community.


The magnitude of goal area correlations between ratings of present

and preferred goals was predicted to be less than the magnitude of the

reliabilities. ETS found that to be true of all goal areas except

Vocational preparation, Traditional religiousness, Research and advanced

training. A factor analysis of those intercorrelations provided support

that the two types of ratings measured different concepts and had similar

meanings to different subgroups (Peterson and Uhl, 1977).


After a series of analyses of variance all F-scores were significant

at the .01 level except Accountability/efficiency, Social criticism/

Activism and Democratic governance, for which there were discrepancies


L










37

for at least 50 percent (Peterson and Uhl, 1977). Goals and profile
studies for single institutions as well as for other types of institu-
tions also support the validity of each goal area, as well as ratings of
present and preferred importance. Consequently, Peterson and Uhl con-
cluded that "These varied procedures have provided support for the
validity of the IGI. However, one goal area, Accountability/efficiency,
seems to hold different meanings for different groups and, therefore
should be interpreted with caution" (Peterson and Uhl, 1977).

Study Participants
The institution studied was the College of the Bahamas. Data
needed to test study hypotheses were elicited from samples of faculty,
students, and administrators therein. Table I reports the distribution
of study participants by their sample classifications and the percentage
of the total population that were drawn in each.

Study participants were chosen in the following manner.

Faculty. The names of all 106 full-time faculty members of the
College of the Bahamas were obtained from the College's Personnel
Office. Faculty on this list were divided into two categories,
Bahamians (N a 46) and non-Bahamians (N 60). Seventeen Bahamian and
23 non-Bahamian faculty were randomly chosen for study participation.
This procedure was undertaken to insure that there was a representative

input by the Bahamian faculty into the results of the study. After
these two subgroups were selected, the SCGI was delivered to faculty













within each for completion. Thirty-seven instruments properly

completed were returned, of these 17 were selected randomly for analysis

in this study. The sample size of 17 was chosen because it represents

a 16 percent sample of the total faculty population at the College of

the Bahamas. The main reason for choosing a 16 percent sample size was

that this size (16 percent) was recommended by Richard Peterson in his

study of the Goals for California Higher Education (1972). In his

study of 116 academic communities of different sizes, he concluded that

a 16 percent sample for each participant group provided reliable

statistical data for an institution's goal study (Peterson, 1972).

Administrators. The names of the 25 administrators and nine council

members of the College of the Bahamas were obtained from its Personnel

Office. The study instrument was administered to all 34, and six were

randomly selected from the completed instrument for inclusion in the

study. The sample size of six was chosen because it represents a 17.6

percent sample of the total administrative population at the College

of the Bahamas. The preceding rationale given by Peterson was used

to determine the sample size.

Students. The 202 full-time and part-time students enrolled in the

upper-level English courses at the College of the Bahamas constituted

the study sample of student participants. This student group was chosen

because all students at the College are required to take "at least" two

semesters of English to obtain either a certificate, diploma or an asso-

ciate degree. Consequently, students in the upper-level English courses













would have attended the College for at least one semester prior to the

study, thus making them knowledgeable about the goals of the institution.

Robert Pace in his research related to the College and University

Environment Scales endorses the preceding viewpoint of the researcher

in selecting a population that is familiar with the institution (Pace,

1969).

The 202 students represent a 16 percent sample of the total student

population at the College of the Bahamas. The rationale previously

stated by Peterson was used to determine the sample size. Seventy percent

of the students are part-time. Seventy percent of them are also women.

These percentages reflect respectively the same portion of part-time and

female students in the total student population (Records Office).

TABLE 1

DISTRIBUTION OF TOTAL POPULATION AND STUDY PARTICIPANTS
BY CAMPUS ROLE

CAMPUS TOTAL STUDY SAMPLE
ROLE POPULATION N ta

Faculty 106 17 16.0

Student 1,230 202 16.4

Administrator 34 6 17.6

TOTAL 1,370 225 16.4

a Percent of total population













Data Collection

Faculty. Each of the six divisional chairpersons at the College
of the Bahamas was provided, by the investigator, with a packet of

study materials (letter from the researcher, letter from the principal,

SCGI, and a number two pencil) for each faculty member from her/his

division selected to be a study participant. The chairpersons were

instructed to distribute these materials to the selected faculty at the

mandatory divisional staff meetings which are held the first day of each

semester before registration. Faculty participants were instructed to

return the completed SCGI to the chairpersons' mailboxes. The chair-

persons collected the completed SCGIs from their campus mailboxes, and

sent them via campus mail to the Principal's Office. The researcher

collected the completed SCGIs from the Principal's Office.

Administrators. The researcher personally delivered the study

materials to each administrator participant. Each administrator parti-

cipant was instructed to complete and to return the SCGI to the

Principal's Office personally or via campus mail. The researcher

collected the returned SCGIs at the Principal's Office two weeks after

their having been distributed.

Students. Permission was obtained from the chairperson of the

Humanities division to distribute the SCGI booklets to the study sample

of students.













The investigator made a brief presentation at the Humanities

division's mandatory faculty meeting informing them of the study and the

specific times to expect him at their classes to distribute the SCGI

booklets.

During the third week of the 1981-82 Spring semester, the researcher

distributed the study materials to students in each of the twenty

regularly scheduled English classes. The researcher remained in the

class room while the students completed the SCGI booklets, answered

students' questions, then collected the completed booklets.

The study materials given to each study participant included a

SCGI booklet, a number two pencil, an information sheet, and two cover
letters. One letter was signed by the Principal of the College and

the other by the researcher. The letters were written specifically

for each respondent group, and stated the purpose of the study, and

the directions as to where and how to return the completed SCGI booklets

(See Appendix B).

Follow-up memoranda were sent two weeks after the initial distri-

bution of study materials to all faculty and administrator respondents at

their campus address (See Appendix B). Also, verbal follow-up to the

above respondents was made through announcements at several faculty and

administrative meetings. This procedure increased the percentage of

response from 90 to 98.4 percent. All respondents were asked not to write

their names on the SCGI booklets. This request was made to maintain













anonymity. In a similar light, the Principal collected the completed

SCGIs of faculty, administrators and then gave them to the researcher.


The over 95 percent response rate for each respondent group mini-

mizes the possibility of nonresponse bias (Table 2).


TABLE

RATE OF RETURN OF SOGI


BY STUDY POPULATION


CAMPUS SENT RETURNED
ROLE N N %


Faculty 40 37 92.5

Student 202 202 100.0

Administrator 10 9 90.0


TOTAL 252 248 98.4


a Percent of Study Population


Data Analysis

The purposes of this study were: to survey a sample of the

College of the Bahamas' community as to the nature of the College's goals,

as assessed through the Small College Goals Inventory (SCGI), both as

they are perceived and preferred. Thus the data were analyzed as

follows:










43

1. Descriptive Statistics

a. For each of the 90 SCGI goal statements the means and

standard deviations were calculated for faculty, students

and administrators as well as for the aggregate of study

participants for each "IS" and "SHOULD BE" response.

b. For each of the 20 goal areas of the SCGI the mean was
calculated for faculty, students and administrators as well

as for the aggregate of study participants for each "IS"

and "SHOULD BE" response.

c. For each of the 20 goal areas of the SCGI a rank order was
calculated for faculty, students and administrators as

well as for the aggregate of study participants for each

"IS" and "SHOULD BE" response.

d. Discrepancy scores were computed for each of the 20 goal

areas of the SCGI for faculty, student and administrator

samples as well as for the aggregate of study participants

by subtracting the means of the "SHOULD BE" from the means

of the "IS" responses.

The mean score and standard deviation for each study sample,

student, faculty, and administrator was computed for each of 20 goal

areas.













A given goal area mean can be interpreted within the context of

the SCGI response format ("Of No Importance", "Of Medium Importance",

etc.). The higher the "IS" mean, the greater the importance a respondent

group feels the goal presently is compared to other goals on campus.

The higher the "SHOULD BE" mean, the more importance that goal "should"

have in the eyes of the respondent group.

The standard deviation for the 20 goal areas of the SCGI indicates

the relative degree of variability or range within the respondent group.

Thus, the smaller the standard deviation, the smaller the variability

within the respondent group regarding the importance of the goal area

in question.

The goal area discrepancy indicates the difference or gap between

the mean of the "SHOULD BE" and mean "IS" scores. Discrepancies could

indicate possible priorities for institutional change. The goal area

with the highest discrepancy figures indicates that the respondent groups

feel that greater or lesser emphasis should be given to that goal area

than it is presently receiving.

2. Inferential Statistics

a. For each of the three goal categories (Student Growth and

Development, Service, and Support) a Kruskal-Wallis test

was completed to determine if any differences) exist

between the participant groups on both the "IS" and "SHOULD

BE" responses. The .01 alpha level was the standard set













for statistical significance in this study. This procedure

applied for hypotheses one through six.


The Kruskal-Wallis test was employed to test the null hypotheses 1

for the following reasons:

1. The samples in this study have three different numeric sizes.

2. The variables of interest for the study (mean and standard

deviation) are continuous.

3. The data in this study were elicited through an instrument

that employed an ordinal scale of measurement, hence the data

are of an ordinal nature.

4. 'he observations of the respondents are both independent
within and among the sample (Chao, 1974).



















____________________













CHAPTER IV


ANALYSIS OF THE DATA


This chapter presents descriptive and inferential analyses of the

data of the study collected in accordance with the design and proce-

dures outlined in Chapters I and III. It reports the results of a survey

of the College of the Bahamas' cmnnunity as to the nature of the

College's goals as assessed through the Small College Goals Inventory,

both as they are perceived and as they are preferred. The analysis of

data is presented and discussed under the headings of: (1) Individual

Goal Area; and (2) Rank Order and Discrepancies of Goal Areas.

Individual Goal Area Data


Student Growth and Development Goals

Student Growth and Development goals are concerned with the

academic and personal development of students, their vocational

preparation, and their social and political responsibility. These

goals entail 11 goal areas which, in turn, consist of 44 goal state-

ments (four per goal area). Two hypotheses were formulated and tested

in dealing with these goals.

The first:

There are no significant differences among student, faculty, and

administrator respondent groups at the College of the Bahamas












regarding the "IS" mean response for the importance of Student
Growth and Development goals as measured by the Small College

Goals Inventory.

The second:

There are no significant differences among student, faculty, and

administrator respondent groups at the College of the Bahamas

regarding the "SHOULD BE" mean response for the importance of

Student Growth and Development goals as measured by the Small

College Goals Inventory.

Neither hypothesis could be rejected in that no differences were

found at the .01 level or better (Tables 3 and 4, See Appendix F).

Beyond the results of hypothesis testing, the responses of faculty,

student and administrator respondents to the present ("IS") and preferred

("SHOULD BE") importance of Student Growth and Development goals accord-

ing to 11 goal areas are reported through a series of tables and

discussed subsequently.

Academic Develogment. The Academic Development goal area is

concerned with the acquisition of general and special zed knowledge as

well as the maintenance of high intellectual standards on campus.

A review of the data contained in Tables 5, 6, and 7 reveals that

the SCGI "IS" mean response for administrators (X 3.58) was higher

than that for students rX 3.32). The importance assigned to this













TABLE 3

RESPONSES OF 201 STUDENTS, 17 FACULTY, AND SIX ADMINISTRATORS
TO THREE CATEGORIES OF THE SCGI WITH "IS" MEANS AND H-VALUES


CATEGORY FACULTY Xa STUDENT X ADMINISTRATOR X H-VALUE


Student Growth
and Development 2.77 2.81 2.53 3.85

Service 2.82 2.61 2.71 4.04

Support 2.58 2.79 2.44 6.06

a Goal area mean is based on a response continuum of 1.00 not appli-
cable or of no importance; 2.00 of low importance; 3.00 of
medium importance; 4.00 of high importance; 5.00 of extremely
high importance.

* Significant at the .01 level or better (H > 9.210).

TABLE 4

RESPONSES OF 201 STUDENTS, 17 FACULTY, AND SIX ADMINISTRATORS
TO THREE CATEGORIES OF THE SCGI WITH "SHOULD BE" MEANS AND H-VALUES


CATEGORY FACULTY a STUDENT X ADMINISTRATOR X H-VALUE


Student Growth
and Developnent 3.12 3.92 3.87 5.90

Service 3.72 3.66 3.75 1.80

Support 3.67 3.86 3.82 1.90

a Goal area mean is based on a response continuum of 1.00 not appli-
cable or of no importance; 2.00 of low importance; 3.00 of
medium importance; 4.00 of high importance; 5.00 of extremely
high importance.

* Significant at the .01 level or better (H > 9.210).



















-- .a* *.a .
S3 ,
-I- M VMm M-0 m
la y



m 4eNNm N N C4 's C4 A C C4 A.4


H o I 3





l' 1
^a2i 3S 81




F
I:



r





jr
I





i


w in

"^-aas^'^'sa






paq~s~~"aaa
N GIN !00 4 Uw1
aas.4-4.4 -sa


sIasA IAs


iOj


i1


lip


(NW NMWM4f1


819
NN NfnfnN







J l
t -











uIm ut
t**in- wv w




-4 t 14 4-




A A A N N4 N C N
-<"a ";a 1a
s^^a.2^.35a


I





ii'
91k



I ir

i'


COLLEGE OF BAMJAAA
S,,--* -, UBRARY


a" al0a C









4n W MNIn M
Ul r OT 4~ nq'










52

goal area by each respondent group was in the range of medium to high

(3.00 4.00). With regards to the "SHOULD BE" importance of goals in

the Academic Development area, administrators assigned more importance

((X 4.33) than did faculty (X = 4.16) or students (X 4.16). The

mean response for each respondent group fell between high and extremely

high (4.00 5.00) importance regarding the preferred importance of the

aggregate of goal statements in this area.

It was expected that faculty would assign the highest importance

to the Academic Development goal, in line with the findings of Peterson

(1973) concerning a national sample of faculty in the United States.

This goal area was also expected to be of greatest importance in the

opinion of the faculty because of their presumed scholarly interests

and their academic responsibilities at the College of the Bahamas.

Respondents in each campus role assigned this goal area the highest
"IS" importance but none assigned it highest preferred importance.


Compared with goal area rankings based on responses of preferred

goal area importance by faculty, students, and administrators in
national samples of community colleges in studies by Peterson (1973)

and Cross (1981), the College of the Bahamas constituents viewed

Academic Development as more important (See Table 18, p. 103). This

goal was not among the top five for the national sample, whereas

it was fourth for the COB respondents.


L












Academic Development is usually viewed as the primary purpose of
higher education. The study data indicate that the study respondents
do not feel that it should be among the top five goal areas in its
importance. This finding is indicative of the multi-purpose dimension
of the College of the Bahamas. In addition, it indicates that the
College is more aligned with community colleges in the United States
regarding its assignment of goal importance, than with traditional
four-year liberal arts institutions.

Intellectual Skills. This goal area involves developing abilities
in research and problem solving methods, study skills, and the ability
to organize, synthesize and integrate new knowledge.

Perusal of Tables 5, 6, and 7 (pp. 49, 50, 51) reveals that the
ScI "IS" mean response for students rX 3.27) is higher than that for
faculty (X 3.16) or administrators (X = 3.00). The importance assigned
to this goal area by each respondent group was in the range of medium
to high (3.00 4.00). With regards to the "SHOULD BE" importance of
goals in the Intellectual Skills area, administrators assigned
more importance (5 4.25) than did faculty (X = 4.24) or students
(X 4.14). The mean response for each respondent group fell between
high to extremely high (4.00 5.00) importance regarding the preferred
importance of the aggregate of goals in this area.

Based on the "SHOULD BE" mean response for all respondents, this
goal area is ranked second in importance among the 20 considered.



I













Similarly, the mean response for respondents by each role classification

ranked this goal area second in terms of preferred importance. Thus,
this finding suggests that there is overall agreement on the emphasis

which should be given to the skills entailed in Intellectual Skills.

Historically, educators in the Bahamas have focused on the cognitive

development of students. Hence this finding is surprising in that

administrators want as much emphasis on cognitive development of students

as do faculty.

Personal Development. This goal area involves growth in important

non-academic areas such as self-discipline, independence, adaptability,

and personal responsibility.

According to the data in Tables 5, 6, and 7 (pp. 49, 50, 51) the

student mean "IS" response (X = 2.78) is higher than that for faculty
(X = 2.69) or administrator UX = 2.37) regarding the importance of this

goal area at the College of the Bahamas. Collectively these respondent

groups assigned an importance in the range of low to medium (2.00 -

3.00). Furthermore, the administrators mean "SHOULD BE" response was

higher (3 = 4.12) than that of the students (X = 4.00) and faculty (X -

3.79). The mean response for all of the respondent groups fell between
medium to extremely high (3.00- 4.00) importance regarding the preferred

importance of the total goals in this goal area.

Based on mean responses of respondents by campus role classification

for the "SHOULD BE" importance, this goal area ranked ninth among the













20 SCGI goal areas. However, it received a rank of tenth based on the

mean "IS" mean response. This result indicates that all respondents

felt more emphasis should be given to this goal area at the College of

the Bahamas.

Table 8

RESPONSES OF THE AGGREGATE OF 202 STUDENTS, 17 FACULTY
AND SIX ADMINISTRATORS
RANK ORDERED BY TWENTY SGI GOAL AREA "IS" AND "SHOULD BE" MEANS

"IS" "SHOULD BE"

GOAL AREA Ea ankb X Rank

Academic Development 3.38 1 4.15 4
Intellectual Skills 3.26 2 4.19 2
Vocational Preparation 3.21 3 4.32 1
Continuing Education 3.20 4 4.07 6.5
Planning 2.97 5 4.17 3
Preparation for Lifelong Learning 2.94 6 4.09 5
Campus Community 2.90 7 4.04 8
Self-Understanding 2.87 8 4.04 6.5
Democratic Governance and Freedom 2.86 9 3.82 13
Personal Development 2.77 10.5 3.99 9
Interpersonal Skills 2.77 10.5 3.95 10
Cooperation with Outside Agencies 2.66 12 3.83 11.5
Intellectual Environment 2.64 13 3.72 14
Ethical and Moral Orientation 2.59 14 3.83 11.5
Assistance for Faculty and Staff 2.57 15.5 3.60 15
Student Social Environment 2.57 15.5 3.51 17
Social and Political Responsibility 2.55 17 3.53 16
Cultural/Aesthetic Awareness 2.40 18 3.39 19
Meeting Local Needs 2.22 19 3.33 20
Religious Orientation 2.13 20 3.41 18

a Goal area mean is based on a response continuum of 1.00 not appli-
cable or of no importance 2.00 of low importance; 3.00 of
medium importance; 4.00 of high importance; and 5.00 of extremely
high importance.
b Rank of one indicates greatest importance (highest mean).













This researcher was not surprised at the mean "SHOULD BE" response

for this goal area. Only during the past ten years have efforts been

exerted to attend to the affective concerns of the student. Thus, these

findings may be an indicator for more emphasis to be given to the

Student Services division to possibly obtain additional personnel to

provide more services for this goal area.

Religious Orientation. This goal area refers to an openness to

religious beliefs and issues, a development of a personal religious

stance, and appreciation for the religious position of others.

According to the data in Tables 5, 6, and 7 (pp. 49, 50, 51) the

mean SCGI "IS" response for faculty (1 = 2.35) was higher than that for

administrators (X 2.12) and students (X 2.11). Each respondent

group, by role classification, assigned this goal area an importance in

the range of low to medium (2.00 3.00). In reviewing the "SHOULD BE"

importance of this goal area at the College of the Bahamas, administra-

tors assigned more importance (I = 3.62) than did students i( 3.46)

and faculty rX = 2.71). The mean response for each respondent group

fell between low to medium (2.00 3.00) concerning the preferred

importance of the total of goals in this area.

This result is not surprising for an institution of higher

education that is not church affiliated. Peterson's study (1973) of

community colleges in California in the United States reported Religious

Orientation to have low priority in "SHOULD BE" importance among 20


L













goals considered for these colleges. He found that this goal area did

not rate higher than eighteenth in importance. Similarly, at the

College of the Bahamas, based on mean responses, this goal area was

eighteenth for present ("IS") importance and twentieth for "SHOULD BE"

importance. This reflects a strong secular orientation among

constituents of the College of the Bahamas.

Ethical and Moral Orientation. This goal area involves the

understanding of moral issues and a serious personal response to them

which affects behaviour and actions.

A review of the data contained in Tables 5, 6, and 7 (pp. 49, 50,

51) reveals that the mean SCGI "IS" response for students (X 2.61)

was higher than that for faculty (X = 2.47) or administrators X -

2.25). The importance assigned to this goal area by each respondent

group was in the range of low to medium (2.00 3.00). With regards to

the "SHOULD BE" importance of goals in the Ethical and Moral Orientation

area, administrators (I 4.00) assigned more importance than did

students (X 3.85) or faculty (X = 3.51). The mean response for each

respondent group fell between medium to high (3.00 4.00) regarding

the preferred importance of the goals in this goal area.

The mean response for the total respondent sample at the College

of the Bahamas for Ethical and Moral Orientation goals ranked fourteenth

(Table 6) among the 20 SCGI goal areas for "IS" importance and eleventh

for "SHOULD BE" importance. This suggests that the respondent groups


1 _













felt that more emphasis should be placed on goals in this area. In this

regard, it is suggested that administrators, because of their position

of leadership at the College of the Bahamas take the initiative at more

extensive programming focused on promoting the understanding of moral

and ethical issues.

Cultural and Aesthetic Awareness. Goals comprising the Cultural

and Aesthetic Awareness goal area involves a heightened appreciation of

a variety of art forms, exposure to arts and customs of other cultures,

and active participation activities.

Tables 5, 6, and 7 (pp. 49, 50, 51) show that the SOGI "IS" mean

response for faculty (X' 2.43) is higher than that for students (X =

2.40) or administrators (-X 2.29). The importance assigned to this
goal area by each respondent group was in the range of low to medium

importance (2.00 3.00). With regards to the "SHOULD BE" importance

faculty assigned more importance (X = 3.53) than did students (X =

3.37) or administrators (X = 3.33). The mean response for each respon-

dent group fell between medium and high (3.00 4.00) regarding the

preferred importance of the aggregate goals in this area.

The goal of Cultural and Aesthetic Awareness, based on the mean

response for the total of goals in this area was ranked eighteenth for

"IS" importance and nineteenth for "SHOULD BE" importance (Table 6).

This finding implies that the respondent groups collectively would prefer

eighteen SCGI goal areas over this goal area in importance at the College













of the Bahamas. However, since they assigned low current ("IS") and

preferred ("SHOULD BE") importance (ranking) to this goal area in terms

of institutional mission, any attempts to increase its importance very
likely would meet resistance from faculty, student, and administrator
constituents at the College of the Bahamas. The preferred importance

assigned this goal area for community colleges by faculty, students and
administrators in a national sample of community colleges (Cross, 1981)

is about the same as its preferred importance as a goal for the College

of the Bahamas' as assigned by comparable persons therein.

Vocational Preparation. The Vocational Preparation goal area is
concerned with assessing personal goals and abilities and preparing for

a particular field of work including preparation for advanced academic

work.

A review of the data contained in Tables 5, 6, and 7 (pp. 49, 50,
51) reveals that the SCGI "IS" mean responses for faculty and students

(X 3.22) were higher than that for administrators (7 2.87). The
importance assigned to this goal area by each respondent group was in
the range of low to medium (2.00 4.00). With regards to "SHOULD BE"

importance of goals in this goal area, students assigned more importance

(i 4.35) than did administrators TX 4.12) or faculty (X 3.99).
The mean response for each respondent group fell between medium to

extremely high regarding the preferred importance of the aggregate
goals in this area.













Vocational Preparation, based on the "IS" mean response for all

respondents ranked third among the 20 SCGI goal areas and first for the

"SHOULD BE" mean response (Table 8). This finding was anticipated by

the researcher since one of the stated goals of the College of the

Bahamas is "to prepare persons for the labour force." Likewise, a

national study of eighteen geographically dispersed community colleges

(Cross, 1981) obtained a similar finding (see Table 18, page 103).

Thus, vocational preparation, although currently viewed as an important

goal area at the College of the Bahamas by the study sample of

respondents, should be given more importance in the future.

Preparation for Lifelong Learning. Included in this goal area is

the development of understandings, attitudes, and habits which results

in continuing as an active participant in the learning process through-

out life.

An analysis of the data in Tables 5, 6, and 7 (pp. 49, 50, 51)

indicates that the mean "IS" response for students is higher (I = 2.98)

than that for faculty X = 2.56) or administrators (X = 2.33) regarding

the importance of goal in this goal area. All respondent groups viewed

"IS" importance to be low to medium (2.00 3.00). With regards to

"SHOULD BE", importance of goals in the Preparation of Lifelong Learning

goal area, students assigned more importance (X = 4.12) than did admin-

istrators (X = 4.04) or faculty (- = 3.76). The mean response for each

respondent group fell between medium to extremely high importance (3.00










61

- 5.00) regarding the preferred importance of the goals in this goal

area.

Based on the "IS" mean response for all respondents, this goal area
is ranked sixth in importance among the 20 considered (Table 8, p. 55)

and fifth for the "SHOULD BE" mean response. This result indicates a
belief among respondent groups that more emphasis should be given to
this goal area at the College of the Bahamas.

Interpersonal Skills. This goal area involves developing the

abilities to relate, camnunicate, understand, and work effectively with

other persons.

Study data pertaining to the goal area Interpersonal Skills are
reported in Tables 5, 6, and 7 (pp. 49, 50, 51). The SCGI "IS" mean for
faculty was higher (9' 2.85) than that for students r( 2.78) or

administrators (X 2.33). The importance assigned to this goal area

by each respondent group was in the range of low to medium (2.00 -

3.00). With regards to the "SHOULD BE" importance of this goal area

students assigned more importance (X = 3.97) than did faculty (X -
3.76) or administrators TX 3.46). The response for each respondent
group fell between medium to high (3.00 4.00) regarding the preferred

importance of the total goals of this goal area.

Based on the mean response for all study participants at the
College of the Bahamas this goal area ranked eleventh (Table 8, page

55) among the 20 SCGI goal areas for its "IS" importance and tenth for





F-




62


"SHOULD BE" importance. This finding indicates that the emphasis given

towards providing services that would increase a student's Interpersonal

Skills at the College of the Bahamas carries about the same importance

P currently as the study sample feels it should have in the future.

Self-Understanding. This goal area involves an awareness of

personal qualities, goals, beliefs, attitudes, and values.

According to the data contained in Tables 5, 6, and 7 (pp. 49, 50,

51) the student and faculty mean "IS" responses (X 2.87) are higher

than that for administrators CX = 2.58) regarding the importance of

Self-Understanding goals at the College of the Bahamas. Each respondent

group assigned importance in the range of low to medium (2.00 3.00).
With regards to the "SHOULD BE" importance of goals in this area, the

students' mean was higher X = 3.72). The mean response for all of the
respondent groups fell between medium to extremely high (3.00 5.00)

regarding tha preferred importance of the aggregate of goals in this

area.

Based on mean responses of respondent by campus role classification

for "IS" importance, Self Understanding ranked eight among the 20 SCGI

goal areas. However, it ranked sixth based on "IS" mean responses.

This result indicates that all respondents felt that this goal area

should be given more emphasis than it is currently receiving at the

College of the Bahamas.













Social and Political Responsibility. The last of the Student
Growth and Development goals, Social/Political Responsibility, involves

engaging in a critical evaluation of social political systems and

developing positions on those issues which affect social/political
behaviour.

Perusal of Tables 5, 6, 7 (pp. 49, 50, 51) reveals that the SCGI

"IS" mean responses for faculty and students (X 2.55) are higher than

that for administrators (X 2.08). The importance assigned to this
goal area by each respondent group fell in the range of low to medium

(2.00 3.00). With regards to the "SHOULD BE" importance of goals in
Social/Political Responsibility area, students assigned more importance
(X 3.54) than did faculty (X 3.42) or administrators (X 3.25).

The mean response for each respondent group fell between medium to high

(3.00 4.00) regarding the preferred importance of the aggregate goals
in this area.

The goal area of Social/Political Responsibility, based on the

mean response of the total of goals in this area, ranked seventeenth

for "IS" importance and sixteenth for "SHOULD BE" importance. This

result indicates that the institutional emphasis given students towards

evaluating and developing positions on social and political issues at

the College of the Bahamas carries about the same importance currently

as the study participants feel it should carry in the future-low.










64


Service Goals

Service Goals are concerned with the services a college provides,

as part of the local community, to its own faculty and staff, and to
non-traditional students. Service Goals entail three goal areas which,

in turn, consist of 12 goal statements (four per goal area). Two

research hypotheses were formulated and tested dealing with these goals.

The first:

There are no significant differences among students, faculty, and

administrator respondent groups at the faculty, and administrator

respondent groups at the College of the Bahamas regarding the "IS"

mean response for the importance of Service Goals as measured by

the Small College Goals Inventory.

The second:

There are no significant differences among students, faculty, and

administrator respondent groups at the College of the Bahamas

regarding the "SHOULD BE" mean response for the importance of
Service goals as measured by the Small College Goals Inventory.

Neither hypothesis was rejected in that no statistical differences

were found at the .01 level or better (Tables 3 and 4, p. 48, See

Appendix F).

Meeting Local Needs. The goal area, Meeting Local Needs involves
giving services to the community in which the institution is located




*(





65

by committing institutional resources to the solution of local problems

or by contributing the personal efforts of college personnel.

Inspection of Tables 5, 6, and 7 (pp. 49, 50, 51) reveals that the
SCGI "IS" mean response for faculty (6 2.53) is higher than that for
students (X 2.19) or administrators (X 2.17). The importance
assigned to this goal area by each respondent group was in the range of
low to medium (2.00 3.00). With regards to the "SHOULD BE" importance
of Meeting Local Needs goals, administrators assigned more importance

(1 3.54) than did faculty (6 = 3.53) or students (X6 3.30). The
mean response for each respondent group fell between medium to high
(3.00 4.00) regarding the preferred importance of the aggregate of
goals in this area.

Among the 20 SCGI goal areas, based on "IS" mean response, Meeting
Local Needs ranked nineteenth and last (twentieth) in the "SHOULD BE"
importance. This would appear to run counter to the stated mission of
the College of the Bahamas which would have it assist the community in
"identifying and assessing the community's needs." (College of the
Bahamas handbook, 1979, p. 1, Item 6.)

Assistance for Faculty and Staff. This goal area involves foster-
ing professional development and providing services to college faculty
and staff.

Perusal of Tables 5, 6, and 7 (pp. 49, 50, 51) reveals that the
SOGI "IS" mean response for faculty (X 2.84) is higher than that for










66


administrators (X 2.67) or students (X = 2.54). The importance
assigned to this goal area by each respondent group fell in the range

of low to medium (2.00 3.00). With regards to the "SHOULD BE" impor-
tance of Assistance for Faculty and Staff goals, faculty assigned more

importance (I = 3.96) than did administrators (X = 3.67) or students

(X 3.56). The mean response for each respondent group fell between
medium and high (3.00 4.00) regarding the preferred importance of the

aggregate goals in this area.

The mean response for all study participants at the College of the

Bahamas for the goal area, Assitance for Faculty and Staff, ranked
fifteenth (Table 8) among that for the 20 SCGI goal areas both for "IS"
and "SHOULD BE" importance. This finding indicates that the emphasis

given towards fostering professional development and providing services

to the College's faculty and staff carries the same importance currently

as the study sample feels it should in the future.

Continuing Education. Continuing Educational goals involve

providing for the educational needs of non-traditional students such as

local townspeople, alumni, and others.

Tables 5, 6, and 7 (pp. 49, 50, 51) show the administrators "IS"

mean response (X = 3.29) to be higher than that for students (X = 3.20)

or faculty (X I 3.09) regarding the importance of Continuing Education
goals at the College of the Bahamas. Each respondent group assigned

importance of medium to high (3.00 4.00). With regards to the "SHOULD





-1



67

BE" importance of goals in this area, the mean response for faculty was

higher (I 3.67) than administrators or students (=- 3.56). The mean

response for all of the respondent groups fell between medium to high
(3.00 4.00) regarding the preferred importance of the aggregate goals
in this area.

Based on the "IS* mean response for all respondents, this goal

area ranked fourth in importance among the 20 considered (Table 8,
page 54) and sixth, based on their mean "SHOULD BE" response. This

difference in rank for perceived and preferred importance indicates
respondents believe that slightly less emphasis than is given currently
should be given to this goal area at the College of the Bahamas.


Support Goals
Support Goals are concerned primarily with the climate or
environment of the college. They entail six goal areas which, in turn,
consist of 24 goal statements (four per goal area). Two research
hypotheses were formulated and tested dealing with these goals.

The first:

There are no significant differences among student, faculty, and
administrator respondent groups at the College of the Bahamas
regarding the "IS" mean response for the importance of Support

goals as measured by the Small College Goals Inventory.










68

The second:

There are no significant differences among student, faculty, and

administrator respondent groups at the College of the Bahamas
regarding the "SHOULD BE" mean response for the importance of
Support Goals as measured by the Small College Goals Inventory.

Neither hypothesis was rejected in that no differences were found

at the .01 level or better (Tables 3 and 4, p. 48 and see Appendix F,
pp. 128-130).

Democratic Governance and Freedom. Democratic Governance and

Freedom goals involve the participation by all campus persons in the
decision-making process, governance which is responsive to the concerns
of everyone at the institution, freedom of the faculty to present
unpopular points of view, and freedom of students to govern their

personal lives.

Inspection of the data in Tables 5, 6, and 7 (pp. 49, 50, 51)
reveals that the SCGI "IS" mean response for students (i = 2.90) is
higher than that for faculty (-R 2.62) or administrators rX = 2.37).

The importance assigned to this goal area by study participants by each
role classification was in the range of low to medium (2.00 3.00).

With regards to the "SHOULD BE" importance of goals in the Democratic
Governance and Freedom area, students assigned more importance i- =
3.86) than did faculty (X 3.51) or administrators (X = 3.46). The

mean response for each respondent group fell between medium to high













(3.00 4.00) regarding the preferred importance of the aggregate of

goals in this area.

The goal of Democratic Governance and Freedom, based on the mean

response for the total of goals in this area ranked ninth among the 20

goal areas considered for "IS" importance and thirteenth for "SHOULD

BE" importance (Table 8, p. 54). This finding indicates a belief among

respondent groups that more emphasis is currently being given to Demo-

cratic Governance and Freedom goals at the College of the Bahamas than

they feel should be given. This finding is surprising to this inves-

tigator in light of the relatively recent (1978 and 1981) demonstrations

by (COB) faculty and students seeking academic autonomy (Nassau Guardian,

September, 1980 and April, 1982).

A possible explanation for this finding may be that the College is

a community commuter institution. As such many of the constituents only

visit the campus and don't identify with it. Also, within the British

system of education faculty and student participation in the governance

of an institution is uncommon. Hence, the previous protests are likely

to represent the sentiments of a minority within the College's community.

Campus Comaunity. This goal area entails maintenance of a climate

in which there is faculty commitment to the general welfare of the

institution, open and candid communication, open and amicable airing of

differences and mutual trust and respect among students, faculty, and

administrators.


I













Study data pertaining to the goal area Campus Community are reported

in Tables 5, 6, and 7 (pp. 49, 50, 51). The SCGI "IS" mean response for

students (X 2.92) is higher than that for administrators rX = 2.75)

or faculty (X 2.66). The importance assigned to this goal area by

each respondent group was in the range of low to medium (2.00 3.00).

With regards the "SHOULD BE importance of this goal area, administrators

assigned more importance (X = 4.17) than did faculty (X 4.03) or
/-
students (X = 4.03). The mean response for each study participant

group fell between high to extremely high (4.00 5.00) regarding the

preferred importance of the aggregate of goal statements in this area.

Campus Community, based on the "IS" mean response for all

respondents, ranked seventh among the 20 SCGI goal areas and eighth for

the "SHOULD BE" response. This researcher did not expect these findings

in that during the year 1978, 1980, and 1981, students and faculty have

engaged in numerous protests focusing on the lack of "campus community"

at the College of the Bahamas (Nassau Guardian, 1982). Surveys by

Cross (1981) and Arter (1981) involving campus constituents at national

samples of community colleges found this goal area to carry more pre-

ferred importance than was projected by the constituents at the College

of the Bahamas.

The goal area of Campus Community was not assigned high importance/

priority at the College of the Bahamas. A possible explanation for the

status of this goal may be that the majority of the respondents do not

get involved with non-academic activities at the College, hence they












are indifferent to the lack of communication, trust or respect (Campus

Community) that may exist at the College. Another consideration may be

that respondents just do not wish to invest their time in what may deem

a futile confrontation.

Intellectual Environment. Goals comprising the Intellectual

Environment goal area entail maintaining a campus climate where experi-

mentation with new procedures are common, where students spend some
free-time in intellectual and cultural activities, where freedom of
inquiry prevails, and where students and faculty can easily interact

informally.

An analysis of the data in Tables 5, 6, and 7 (pp. 49, 50, 51)

indicates that the mean "IS" response for students is higher (O 2.65)

than that for faculty (X 2.44) or administrators (X = 2.37) regarding
the importance of goals in this goal area. All respondent groups viewed

"IS" importance to be low to medium (2.00 3.00). With regard to

"SHOULD BE" importance of goals in the Intellectual Environment goal

area, administrators assigned more importance (X 3.96) than did

faculty (X 3.75) or students (X" 3.70). The mean response for each

respondent group fell between medium to high importance (3.00 4.00)
regarding the preferred importance of the aggregate of goals in this
area.

Based on the "SHOULD BE" mean response for all respondents, this

goal area ranked fourteenth in importance among the 20 SCGI goal areas










72

and thirteenth for the "IS" mean response. This suggests a belief

among respondents that maintaining an intellectual environment carries

about the same importance currently as it should carry in the future

at the College of the Bahamas.

Student Social Environment. This goal area involves a campus

climate where students may develop healthy social contacts and lasting

friendships, and where the living situation supports learning and
social goals.

Study data pertaining to the goal area Student Social Environment

are reported in Tables 5, 6, and 7 (pp. 49, 50, 51). The SCGI "IS"
mean for students was higher (X = 2.69) than that for faculty (X =
4-
2.39) or administrators (X 2.08). The importance assigned to this
goal area by each respondent group was in the range of low to medium

(2.00 3.00). With regards to the "SHOULD BE" importance of this goal
area, students assigned more importance (X = 3.56) than did adminis-
trators (X = 3.17) or faculty (5 = 2.95). The response for each

respondent group fell between low to high (2.00 4.00) regarding the

preferred importance of the total goals of this goal area.

The mean for all study participants ranked sixteenth for "IS"

responses and seventeenth for "SHOULD BE" when considered among those for
the 20 SCGI goal areas (Table 8, page 55). This finding indicates that

the constituents do not wish for the importance given to this goal area

to be changed significantly.












It is interesting to note that the dimension of Student Social
Environment is given low importance by the student respondents. This

may have occurred because many of the students are part-time, hence
they do not rely on the College to augment their social life. Another
reason may be that the social aspect of the Bahamian culture which would

place this goal in a low priority. Equally possible, may be the
Bahamian notion that College is a place to learn and not to socialize.

Cooperation with Outside Agencies. Working with governmental
agencies in social and environmental policy, information, being respon-
sive to regional and national priorities in planning educational
programs, and working with other educational institutions for mutual
strength are entailed in this goal area.

Perusal of Tables 5, 6, and 7 (pp. 49, 50, 51) reveals that the
SCGI "IS" mean responses for students (X 2.69) is higher than that

for faculty (X 2.46) or administrators (X = 2.21). The importance
assigned to this goal area by each respondent group fell in the range
of low to medium (2.00 3.00). With regards to the "SHOULD BE" impor-

tance of goals in Cooperation with Outside Agencies area, students
assigned more importance x =- 3.85) than did administrators (Xr 3.58)

or faculty ?X 3.55). The mean response for each respondent group
fell between medium to high (3.00 4.00) regarding the preferred impor-
tance of the aggregate of goals in this area.













Based on mean response of respondents by campus role classification
for "IS" importance, Cooperation with Outside Agencies, ranked twelfth

and eleventh (tied) for "SHOULD BE" importance. This result suggests

that this goal area be given approximately the same emphasis that it is

currently receiving at the College of the Bahamas.

Planning. Engaging in a regular process of identifying needs, along

with setting goals, providing programmes to meet needs and evaluating and

reporting upon goal achievement are entailed in this goal area.

Inspection of the data contained in Tables 5, 6, and 7 reveals that

the SCGI"IS" mean response for students is higher ZX = 2.97) than that

for faculty (X = 2.91) or administrators (X = 2.87) regarding the impor-

tance of Planning at the College of the Bahamas. Each respondent group
assigned importance in the range of high to extremely high (4.00 -

5.00). With regards to the "SHOULD BE" importance of goals in this

area, administrators' mean was higher (X = 4.58) than that for faculty

(X 4.22) or students (X = 4.15). The mean response for all of the

respondent groups fell between high to extremely high (4.00 5.00)

regarding the preferred importance of the aggregate of goals in this area.

Based on mean "IS" responses for the total of students, faculty, and

administrators study participants, Planning ranked fifth in importance

among the 20 SCGI goal areas and third for "SHOULD BE" responses. This

finding implies that these respondents believe that this goal area should

be even more important at the College of the Bahamas than it currently is.












Compared with the importance assigned to this goal area by campus

constituents drawn from a national sample of community colleges, the

goal area, Planning, did not appear in the national sample's top five

(See Table 10, p. 88). It is understandable that the College of the

Bahamas' constituents regard Planning as a high priority goal area in

that planning is the catalyst for an institution's growth. Furthermore,

the College of the Bahamas has always been one step behind in planning

since it usually anticipates the directions the Ministry of Education

would lead it. The assignment of high importance to this goal area is

a clear indication that the College's constituents would prefer Planning

issues to be engaged in vigorously.

Item Analysis

Tables 19 through 62 (Appendices G and H) report mean "IS" and

"SHOULD BE" response for respondent groups by campus role classification

for each of the 90 items, categorized by goal area, in the Small College

Goals Inventory. The mean responses for the "IS" and "SHOULD BE" scales

are indices of the present and preferred importance placed on particular

items by each study participant group.

Based on the "IS" mean response for each faculty, student, and

administrator respondent groups, higher importance (X 3.77) was

assigned to Item 1 than to any other of the 90 goal statements in the

SCGI (See Table 19, p. 134). The focus of this item (goal statement)

is on helping students acquire an understanding of the basic concepts

within one academic discipline.













Based on mean "IS" response for each classification of respondents,

the goal statements considered lowest in Importance among the 90

considered are: (a) by faculty Item 19, (Table 24, page 139)

(encouraging students to give a hearing to diverse religious views),

(b) by students Item 52, (Table 29, page 144) (helping local residents

improve the conditions in their own community), and (c) by

administrators Item 77, (Table 36, page 151) (maintaining a campus

climate that facilitates lasting friendships among students).

In a similar determination for lowest "SHOULD BE" importance for

each constituent grouping are: (a) by faculty Item 22, (Table 46,

page 162) (helping students come to know God and relate to God

personally), (b) by students Item 24, (Table 45, page 161)

(encouraging students to participate in the cultural life of other

people), and (c) by administrators Item 39 and 47, (Tables 49 and 50,

pp. 165 and 166) (encouraging students to develop an active interest in

activities and values of people around them; and encouraging students

to develop a personal political philosophy, respectively).

The items for which the mean "SHOULD BE" responses were assigned
the highest importance among the 90 goal items were Items 11, 38, and 83,

Tables 43, 47, and 60, pp. 159, 163, 176). These items involve: (1)

helping students become more independent and self-directed, (2) helping

prepare for advanced, vocational or professional study, and (3) creating

a climate in which systematic evaluation of college programmes and

personnel are accepted.













Rank Order of Goal Areas

This section reports the rank ordering of importance of the 20 SCGI

goal areas at the College of the Bahamas as determined from the mean

response for the goal areas for each respondent group considered sepa-

rately and together (Tables 5, 6, 7, and 8, pages 49, 50, 51, and 52).

A rank of one represents highest importance, whereas a rank of 20

indicates lowest importance.

As a means of calling reader attention to the goal areas seen as

most and least important from both "IS" and "SHOULD BE" prespectives, the

investigator arbitrarily labelled those ranked one through five as "most

important" and those ranked sixteenth through twentieth as "least

important."

Based on "IS" mean responses, Academic Development was assigned the

highest importance among the 20 SCGI goal areas by each of the three study

participant groups. Faculty, students, and administrators Intellectual

Skills, Vocational Preparation, Continuing Education, and Planning as

goals that currently are most important at the College of the Bahamas,

whereas Assistance for Faculty and Staff, Student Social Environment,

Social and Political Responsibility, Cultural/ Aesthetic Awareness,

Meeting Local Needs, and Religious Otientation were viewed as goals that

are least important (See Table 8, p. 55).

In a similar determination for "SHOULD BE" responses, Vocational

Preparation, Intellectual Skills, Planning, Academic Development and













Preparation for Lifelong Learning emerge as goals study participants

feel should be most important and Social Responsibility, Student Social

Environment, Religious Orientation, Cultural/Aesthetic Awareness and

Meeting Local Needs as goals that should be least important (See Table

8, page 55).

Table 9

RANK ORDER OF "IS" AND "SHOULD BE" MFAN DISCREPANCIES
BY SCGI GOAL AREA FOR THE AGGREGATE OF 202 STUDENTS, 17 FACULTY,
AND SIX ADMINISTRATORS

"IS" "SHOULD BE" MEAN Ranka

GOAL AREA X X Discrepancy

Religious Orientation 2.13 3.41 +1.28 1
Ethical/Moral Orientation 2.59 3.83 +1.24 2
Personal Development 2.77 3.99 +1.22 3
Self Understanding 2.87 4.07 +1.20 4.5
Planning 2.97 4.17 +1.20 4.5
Interpersonal Skills 2.77 3.95 +1.18 6
Cooperation with Outside Agencies 2.66 3.83 +1.17 7
Preparation for Lifelong Learning 2.94 4.09 +1.15 8
Campus Community 2.90 4.04 +1.14 9
Vocational Preparation 3.21 4.32 +1.11 10.5
Meeting Local Needs 2.22 3.33 +1.11 10.5
Intellectual Environment 2.64 3.72 +1.08 12
Assistance of Faculty and Staff 2.57 3.60 +1.03 13
Cultural/Aesthetic Awareness 2.40 3.39 +0.99 14
Social/Political Responsibility 2.55 3.53 +0.98 15
Democratic Governance and Freedom 2.86 3.82 +0.96 16
Student/Social Environment 2.57 3.51 +0.94 17
Intellectual Skills 3.26 4.19 +0.83 18
Continuing Education 3.20 4.07 +0.87 19
Academic Development 3.38 4.15 +0.77 20

a Rank of one indicates greatest importance.












Total Group Goal Discrepancy

A goal area discrepancy is the difference between "SHOULD BE8 and

"IS" mean response for each goal area. Such discrepancy scores for the

20 _G goal areas are presented in Table 9. A plus (+) sign before a
discrepancy score indicates that the "SHOULD BE" mean response is higher

than the "IS" mean response. The goal areas are listed in the table

according to ascending order in terms of the size of the discrepancy
figure. The largest discrepancy was for the goal area, Religious

Orientation (+1.28). This implied that respondents feel more importance

should be given to the goal area than is currently the case. But it
only refers to discrepancy in importance on these two dimensions ("IS"

and "SHOULD BE") and does not suggest that Religious Orientation should

be given more or less importance than the other 19 goal areas. The
goal areas with discrepancy scores of less than one imply that the

institution (College of the Bahamas) is more on target with the goal

area's priority (Peterson, 1979).

Among the 20 SCGI goal areas, it is noteworthy that the largest
discrepancy scores were for Religious Orientation (+1.28), Ethical/Moral

Orientation (+1.24) and Personal Development (+1.22). The goal areas

with the smallest discrepancy scores were Academic Development (+.77),
Continuing Education (+.87), and Intellectual skills (+.93).

Goal Area Discrepancy by Respondent Groups
Goal areas are considered overemphasized when the perceived ("IS")

rank, based on the mean response, exceed the preferred ("SHOULD BE")













rank. On the other hand, an underemphasized goal area is one whose

preferred ("SHOULD BE") rank, based on the mean response, exceed the

perceived ("IS") rank. Thus, the discrepancy between the perceived and

the preferred ranking of goal areas, based on the mean response, may be

a useful measure of possible organizational conflict and may assist in

identifying important issues at the College of the Bahamas (Table 10).

Student and Administrator respondent groups felt more emphasis

should be placed on understanding moral issues and responding seriously

to them as they affect an individuals behaviour and actions (Ethical and

Moral Orientation, Table 10) than is currently given this goal area.

Students and Administrator respondent groups indicated that

Intellectual Skills currently receives about the same importance that

they would prefer it to receive in the future.


The three study groups were in agreement that the goal area of

Continuing Education was overemphasized in importance at the College of

the Bahamas. Faculty and administrators indicated that Democratic

Governance and Freedom was also overemphasized.

Table 10 represents a synopsis of underemphasized and overem-

phasized goal areas at the College of the Bahamas based on the study

sample's SCGI responses. Administrators at the College of the Bahamas

should note that the goal area, Continuing Education, was determined to

be overemphasized. This finding should be of serious concern because









Is I P ' 11
Ir4I




9 a 8 1 i''
im ii I f


dIs Ih
a ll Eaa .r

44.1
0 2
N I

II~