Influences of student characteristics profiles upon community college faculty perceptions of their instruction

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Influences of student characteristics profiles upon community college faculty perceptions of their instruction
Physical Description:
ix, 123 leaves. : ; 28 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
Miller, Herbert Lynn, 1923-
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
College teaching   ( lcsh )
Student records   ( lcsh )
Educational Administration and Supervision thesis Ph. D   ( lcsh )
Dissertations, Academic -- Educational Administration and Supervision -- UF   ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis--University of Florida.
Bibliography:
Bibliography: leaves 119-122.
Statement of Responsibility:
H. Lynn Miller.
General Note:
Typescript.
General Note:
Vita.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 029478744
oclc - 14277867
System ID:
AA00013523:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text










INFLUENCES OF STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS
PROFILES UPON COMMUNITY COLLEGE
FACULTY PERCEPTIONS OF THEIR INSTRUCTION









By

H. LYNN MILLER


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE
GRADUATE COUNCIL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY








UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA














ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


The writer is grateful to numerous individuals for their

inspiration and assistance in conjunction with this study.

Dr. James L. Wattenbarger, chairman of the Supervisory Committee,

provided much time and expertise in directing the study and made many

suggestions for improving the presentation. Dr. John M. Nickens,

cochairman of the Supervisory Committee, developed the computer

program needed to process the student characteristics data and guided

the writer through each phase of the study. Dr. Albert Smith and

Dr. Clement H. Donovan made numerous suggestions regarding both

the scope of the study and the analysis of data. Dr. Katie D. Tucker

-identified the framework for the student characteristics profile study

and facilitated that phase of the study utilizing class profile data.

Mrs. Sandra K. Bullock should be cited for her typing and suggestions

for improving the presentation of data. Finally, the writer thanks his

wife, Joyce, for her patience and encouragement throughout the

preparation of this report.















TABLE OF CONTENTS


Page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..................................... ii

LIST OF TABLES .......... .. ........... ... ................ v

ABSTRACT ............................................... vii

CHAPTER

I INTRODUCTION .............................. 1

Statement of the Problem ...................... 2
Delimitations and Limitations .................. 3
Definition of Terms : .......................... 4
Justification for the Study ...................... 5
Method ......... ............................ 8

Review of Literature .......................... 10

Student Characteristics and Their
Relationship to College Enrollment ..... 11
Cognitive Mapping and its Relationship
to Instructor Knowledge of Student
Characteristics ...................... 16
The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ...... 20
Recent Research Regarding the Use of
Student Characteristics Data in the
Improvement of Instruction ............ 23

II PRESENTATION OF DATA .................... 27

Presentation of Results of the Survey of Students
Admitted to the College between 1971 and 1973.. 27

Analysis of Data Covering the Entire
Sample of 2,905 Students .............. 28
Comparison of Associate of Arts
Students and Associate of Science
Students .......... ................... 30








Comparison of the Characteristics of
Students Enrolled in Specific
Programs ox Major Fields of Study ....... 43

Faculty Questionnaire Data ...................... 58

III RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF DATA ............ 64

Discussion and Analysis of Data on Associate
of Arts and Associate of Science Students,
by Characteristics ......................... 67
Class Profiles ....... ............. ... ........... 100

IV SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND
IMPLICATIONS .......... ..................... ... 109

Concept and Scope of the Study ................... 109
Conclusions .............. ....................... 110
Implications .................................. 114
Suggestions for Additional Research at
Central Florida Community College ............ 116

APPENDIX ................................................. 118

Questionnaire on Student Characteristics
Profiles ..................................... 118

BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................. .......... 119

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................... 123















LIST OF TABLES


Table Page

1 Students Entering Central Florida Community
College ................... .................... 31

2 Students Enrolled in Associate of Arts Programs ... 37

3 Students Enrolled in Associate of Science
Program s ................... .................. 40

4' Students Enrolled in Specific Associate of Arts
Program s ........................ ............. 45

5 Students Enrolled in Specific Associate of
Science Programs ............... .......... 55

6 Completeness of Characteristics Data ............ 65

7 Distribution by Sex of Students Enrolled in
Associate of Arts Programs .................... 68

8 Distribution by Sex of Students Enrolled in
Associate of Science Programs ................ 70

9 Marital Status of Students Enrolled in Associate
of Arts Programs ........ ........ ............. 71

10 Marital Status of Students Enrolled in Associate
of Science Programs ......................... 73

11 Racial Distribution of Students Enrolled in
Associate of Arts Programs .................... 75

12 Racial Distribution of Students Enrolled in
Associate of Science Programs ................. 76

13 Education of Fathers of Students Enrolled in
Associate of Arts Programs .................... 78

14 Education of Fathers of Students Enrolled in
Associate of Science Programs ................. 79








15 Educational Level of Mothers of Students
Enrolled in Associate of Arts Programs .......... 81

16 Educational Level of Mothers of Students
Enrolled in Associate of Science Programs ....... 82

17 FTGT Total Scores of Students Enrolled in
Associate of Arts Programs ............. ......... 83

18 FTGT Total Scores of Students Enrolled in
Associate of Science Programs ................. 85

19 Rank in High School Graduating Class of Students
Enrolled in Associate of Arts Programs .......... 86

20 Rank in High School Graduating Class of Students
Enrolled in Associate of Science Programs ....... 87

21 Comparison of Marital Status and Primary
Source of Financial Support of Students
Enrolled in Associate of Arts Programs .......... 89

22 Comparison of Marital Status and Primary
Source of Financial Support of Students
Enrolled in Associate of Science Programs ....... 90

23 Age of Students Enrolled in Associate of Arts
Programs ............... .. .............. ..... 91

24 Age of Students Enrolled in Associate of
Science Programs ............................. 92

25 Occupations of Fathers of Students Enrolled in
Associate of Arts Programs ..................... 93

26 Occupations of Fathers of Students Enrolled in
Associate of Science Programs ................. 95

27 Occupations of Mothers of Students Enrolled in
Associate of Arts Programs ..................... 97

28 Occupations of Mothers of Students Enrolled in
Associate of Science Programs .................... 99

29 Identifiable Variances in Faculty Intentions to
Utilize Class Profile Data in Modifying
Instructional Methods .......................... 107










Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate Council
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy


INFLUENCES OF STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS
PROFILES UPON COMMUNITY COLLEGE
FACULTY PERCEPTIONS OF THEIR INSTRUCTION

By

H. Lynn Miller

December, 1974

Chairman: James L. Wattenbarger
Cochairman: John M. Nickens
Major Department: Educational Administration and Supervision

The characteristics of the 2, 905 students admitted to Central

Florida Community College between August 1971 and May 1973 are

tabulated, and student characteristics profiles are developed showing

the kinds of students who tend to enroll in the college's Associate of

Arts and Associate of Science areas, as well as in each of the 16 major

programs or fields of study offered by the college. Additionally,

characteristics profiles are prepared for each of the 54 classes being

taught at the college during Term III-B, 1974, utilizing the same 15

characteristics used in the 1971-1973 phase of the study. Those

characteristics include sex, marital status, number of dependents,

race, full-time or part-time status, father's occupation, father's

education, mother's occupation, mother's education, student's round-

trip commuting mileage, source of financial support, family income,

total score on the Florida Twelfth Grade Test, rank in high school

vii








graduating class, and age. The study is designed to determine how

faculty, having been provided with characteristics profiles of the classes

they teach, perceive the usefulness of the profiles, how the profiles can

be improved, and how the profiles can be utilized in the modification of

instructional strategies and in the improvement of instruction. The

results of the study indicate that there are differences between the

characteristics of the students who enroll in Associate of Arts

programs and of those who enroll in Associate of Science programs.

Associate of Arts students tend to score higher on the Florida Twelfth

Grade Test, rank higher in their high school graduating classes, have

parents who have higher educational attainments and who are engaged in

professional, technical, or managerial occupations, tend to rely more

on their parents for financial support, are more likely to be single, and

are about three years younger than Associate of Science students.

Within the Associate of Arts and the Associate of Science areas there

are differences in the characteristics of the students who enroll in

specific programs. Regarding the class characteristics profiles,

virtually all of the faculty review the profiles with interest, 50%

attempt to relate the data to their preconceptions of their classes'

strengths and weaknesses, 66. 7% feel the data indicate a need for

specific changes in their instructional strategies, 30% feel the data

suggest a need for other than instructional changes in their relationships

with their students, 41% suggest modifications in the class profiles, and

70% indicate a desire to continue to receive class profiles at the


viii








beginning of each semester. The most frequently made suggestions for

the modification of instructional methods are increased help for individual

students (51.9%), increased tutoring (45.4%), more laboratory time

(29. 6%), greater emphasis on self-paced instruction (29. 6%), increased

use of audio-visual aids (29. 6%), greater use of taped lectures for

review purposes (25.9%), more individual study projects (22.2%),

increased class discussion (18.5%), and a greater variety of instructional

methods (55. 5%).














CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION


There seems little doubt that every college has as one of its

primary goals the improvement of instruction within the institution. In

conjunction with the continued realization of such a goal the college must

provide its instructors with as much useful data and information as it

can, particularly as such information relates to a better understanding

on the part of the instructor regarding both the characteristics and the

learning preferences of his students.

Although much is known regarding the relationships between

student ability and learning, there does not exist as extensive a body of

knowledge concerning the relationships between the personal and socio-

economic characteristics of students and their propensity to learn

better under some methods of instruction than under others. Many

colleges have collected masses of socio-economic data on their

students, but relatively few colleges have learned how such information

can best be utilized in improving instruction.

The focus of this study was directed toward the compilation and

analysis of student characteristics data for the purpose of preparing

profiles of groups enrolled in all of the major fields of study at Central

Florida Community College. The profiles were utilized by instructors









at the college for the purpose of better understanding the classes they

teach. An integral part of this study was a summary of the views of

instructors regarding the usefulness of student characteristics profiles

in their instructional situations.

With a heterogeneous student population, but with a relatively

small total enrollment, the college may well find it difficult to segment

students by learning preference groups. Nevertheless, the instructor

who possesses an understanding of the learning preferences of a

majority of his students should be able to adapt his teaching style to

accommodate many of them much more than would otherwise be the

case.

Although the results of this study may lead to some rather

tentative conclusions, it is hoped that this research will open the way

for college instructors to utilize student characteristics data in the

improvement of instruction. Should this approach prove feasible, it is

quite conceivable that the ultimate result may be the adoption by a

college of a comprehensive program of cognitive mapping as related to

students possessing similar personal and socio-economic character-

istics.

Statement of the Problem

The purpose of this study is to determine the potential for the

improvement of instruction based on instructors' knowledge of the

characteristics of their students. Through the development of student









characteristics profiles and the analysis of information from

instructors regarding the usefulness of these data, the study attempts

to answer the following questions:

1) In choosing their instructional methods, will faculty
make use of student characteristics profile data?

2) As a result of having such data available, will the
faculty change their teaching methods?

3) Will the faculty make changes other than those involving
their teaching methodologies?

4) Among the disciplinary areas are there identifiable
variances in the use of profile data?

5) What data do the faculty want included in the profile
information?

Delimitations and Limitations

Delimitations

1) This study was confined to one community college.

2) The instructors who were asked about the usefulness of the

profiles were those who taught during Term III-B, 1974.

Limitations

1) Class profiles furnished instructors were group profiles

only and did not involve a comparison of individual student differences.

2) The data utilized in developing the profiles were limited to

the following student characteristics: sex, marital status, number of

dependents, race, full-time or part-time status, father's occupation,

father's education, mother's occupation, mother's education, student's

round-trip commuting mileage, source of financial support, family









income, total score on the Florida Twelfth Grade Test, rank in high

school graduating class, and age.

Definition of Terms

Authoritarian. Favoring subjection to authority as opposed to

individual freedom.

Cognitive mapping. A testing-interviewing process whereby

students are classified according to their learning style preferences,

with their being assigned to learning situations in which the mode of

instruction is most compatible with their own cognitive preferences.

Cognitive style. Any one of several stylistic preferences or

characteristic modes of behavior as-revealed by research regarding

student learning preferences.

Disciplinary area. A group of courses encompassing a branch

of knowledge or instruction.

Individual study. A mode of learning which permits the student

to complete one or more courses with a minimum of instructional

assistance.

Instruction. The imparting of knowledge or skill, both in a

classroom or laboratory situation, or outside the classroom. The

concept encompasses all of the relationships between teachers and

students insofar as those relationships contribute to the imparting of

knowledge, skill, or understanding.

Instructor-centered instruction. That type of instruction based

on the instructor's judgment of what the students should learn and how








they should go about learning it.

Major field of study. Any of 16 individual fields of study

comprising all of the study areas in which students are enrolled at

Central Florida Community College.

Permissive instruction. That instructional mode whereby

students are provided with several options for carrying out the work of

a course.

Profile. A graphic or numerical representation of various

characteristics of a person or group as indicated on a linear scale.

Self-paced instruction. That mode of instruction which permits

each student to progress at his own pace, usually under the guidance of

an instructor.

Socio-economic factor. Any one of numerous characteristics or

measures of social as well as economic status.

Student-centered instruction. That type of instruction which

focuses largely on student interests and concerns, with a tendency for

such instruction to involve loosely-organized classes unconstrained by

texts or formal assignments, informal seminars at the expense of

instructor contact, and classes tied more closely to students' interests

rather than to the organization of the course content.

Justification for the Study

It has long been recognized that community college students are

heterogeneous and that special efforts should be made to relate class-

room instruction to the needs of this diverse clientele. Too, the









literature suggests a relationship between cognitive mapping and

student characteristics profiles. However, most faculty members are

not aware of how student profiles can be used in improving instruction,

nor have most colleges developed a program for the systematic collec-

tion, analysis, and dissemination of such data.

Many community colleges are characterized by large classes,

a lack.of counseling, and a teaching faculty which does not provide for

heterogeneous student groups. Although the college may recognize

the need for salvaging as many students as it can who otherwise might

become disillusioned with their progress and their ability to adapt to

the college classroom environment, its attempts to salvage such

students may be sporadic at best. Thus, on the premise that

instructors who are informed regarding the characteristics of their

students may become better instructors, this study may be able to

make a significant contribution to the science of teaching.


Further justification for the study lies in the fact that other

uses may be made of the same data utilized in preparing student character-

istics profiles. One use of the data would be to identify areas of study

which have attracted few, if any, students possessing a particular

combination of characteristics. For instance, a program may be found

to be serving very few black students, female students, students from

low-income families, or students representing a combination of these or








other characteristics. Thus, knowledge of this kind would enable a

college to encourage the enrollment of a greater diversity of student

types within specific programs.

Another use of the data would be to identify significant groups

either being served minimally by the college, or not being served at all.

The college then should attempt to determine whether those groups have

any educational needs which should be met.

An additional use of the data would be to compare the profile of

beginning students in a program with the profiles of the groups which

complete various segments of the program. Such a procedure need not

be used as a selective device but would enable the college to learn more

about those characteristics which tend to relate positively to students'

progress in a program.

This study, however, will not focus on these additional problems.

Its primary thrust will be the appraisal of the potential for the improve-

ment of instruction through the use of student profile characteristics.

As Smith, Irey, and McCaulley (33, p. 439) have noted, "A

major weakness in college teaching appears to lie in the teacher's and

student's lack of recognition of each other's preferences and needs for

different learning activities. "

With respect to students' preferences and their needs for

different learning activities, several investigators, particularly

Monroe (22), have categorized students as reflecting either authori-

tarian or non-authoritarian traits. Trent and Medsker (37, p. 218)









have noted that authoritarian traits tend to be associated more with

"below-average ability, a limited educational background, restricted

economic opportunities, and an authoritarian religious subculture. "

Concomitantly, the Educational Testing Service (38) in a recent study

has found that community college students tend to be either instructor-

centered or student-centered. Students who are instructor-centered

tend to exhibit more authoritarian traits than do those who are student-

centered. However, Monroe (22, p. 196) has noted that "there are two

schools of thought regarding the authoritarian personality. Whereas

one group of social psychologists attributes authoritarian traits to

psychological factors in the development of personality, another group

of social psychologists and sociologists argues that these traits arise

from environmental conditions. "

Thus, the literature suggests certain relationships between

students' socio-economic characteristics and their tendency to relate

more favorably to some methods of instruction than to others. It would

appear that there is a need for additional research regarding both the

significance of those relationships, as well as whether instructors who

have been provided with student characteristics profiles not only

perceive a need for changing their instructional methods, but are

willing to initiate such changes.

Method

This study involved the identification of the personal and socio-

economic characteristics of the 2,905 students admitted to Central









Florida Community College during the period from 1971-1973. Student

characteristics data were utilized in developing a profile for each of the

major programs or fields of study available at the college, as well as

profiles for both the Associate of Arts and the Associate of Science

study areas.

The initial phase of the study focused on whether there were

significant differences between the characteristics profiles of the

Associate of Arts and the Associate of Science students, as well as

between the profiles of the students enrolled in the 16 major fields of

study.

The second part of the study involved the development of a

student characteristics profile for each of the credit classes being

offered by the college during Term III-B, 1974. The purpose of this

phase of the study was to determine how instructors perceived the

usefulness of the profiles, whether they would like to have them modified,

and in what ways they were able to use the profiles in changing their

instructional techniques.

The data regarding the personal and socio-economic character-

istics of the students admitted to the college between 1971 and 1973 have

been taken from student admission forms, have been coded and key-

punched, and are stored in the college's data banks.

As the first step in the treatment of the data a computer program

was written which permitted the student characteristics data to be cross-

tabulated against the 16 major fields of study; against the Associate of








Arts and the Associate of Science degree students separately; and

against the entire sample of students. There were 15 student character-

istics used in this study, and, utilizing the data covering those

characteristics, a profile was developed for each of the study areas as

well as for the Associate of Arts and the Associate of Science students.

The profiles were compared tabularly, and significant differences as

well as similarities were noted. This completed the first part of the

study.

In the second part of the study each instructor teaching a credit

class during Term III-B, 1974, was provided with the student character-

istics profile relevant to his area of instruction. Also, he was given

a profile of each class he was teaching, with the profiles having been

completed during July 1974, utilizing the same techniques as were used

in the initial 1971-73 survey. A questionnaire on student characteristics

profiles was sent to each instructor, and the results were analyzed to

determine the usefulness of the profiles.

Review of Literature

This section is divided into four parts. In the first part there

are reviewed a number of recent studies regarding student socio-

economic characteristics and their effect on, or relationship to, college

enrollment overall, as well as enrollment in specific program areas.

The second part of the review includes a survey of the recent literature

pertaining to cognitive mapping, particularly as it relates to instructors'









knowledge and perceptions of their students' characteristics. The third

part of the review pertains to research regarding the use of the Myers-

Briggs Type Indicator, and the fourth part includes recent research

regarding the use of student characteristics data in the improvement of

instruction.

Student Characteristics and Their Relationship to College Enrollment

Many experienced teachers are aware of the variables that tend

to determine what kinds of students are likely to attend college. On the

other hand, fewer teachers may have some conception of why students

choose one area of study over another, particularly as their choices may

be related to socio-economic factors.

Sewell and Shah (31) surveyed 100, 000 Wisconsin students who

graduated from high school in 1957, and followed that up with a survey

of one-third of those students seven years later. They found that both

socio-economic status and intelligence have impacts on the student's

decisions on whether to consider college, on whether to attend college,

and on whether to remain in college until graduating. For the females,

socio-economic status seemed to have a greater effect than intelligence,

while for the males the intelligence factor seemed to be the dominant

influence. Socio-economic status appeared to have the greatest effect

on who actually attended college, while intelligence was more significant

in determining who will graduate.

The findings of Sewell and Shah bore out the earlier conclusions

reached by Wolfle (42, p. 163). In a 1954 study he had concluded that:









The probability of enrolling in college decreases
more sharply as one goes down the ability scale for
children from economically and socially less favored
homes than it does for children from more favored homes.
After entering college, the situation changes. The student
by then has overcome most home environment handicaps,
and from then on his likelihood of graduating depends much
more on his ability and much less on his family background.

Within the broad range of socio-economic factors and their

effect on college attendance, there have been numerous studies. Sewell

and Shah (32) in a 1968 follow-up study of the Wisconsin students

previously cited, attempted to determine the effect of parents' education

on their children's college plans. Regardless of the level of the child's

intelligence, the educational achievements of both of his parents tended

to affect positively his encouragement, actual attendance, and graduation

from college. It appeared that, overall, the educational attainment of

one parent was no more significant than that of the other. Based on

socio-economic levels, however, there were some exceptions. For

instance, with respect to families where the educational attainment of

the parents was low to middle, any discrepancy between the educational

attainments of the parents seemed to be reflected more significantly by

the father's educational attainment, with that attainment exerting the

greatest influence on the child's college plans. Again, it was the

father's education which carried the greatest influence on high-intelli-

gence children in families where there existed a discrepancy between

parents where one had a high level of attainment and the other either a

low or middle level of attainment. However, a similar discrepancy

seemed to lead to the mother's educational level's exerting greater








influence on a low-intelligence child. For the entire sample, the male

children were affected more by the father's level of education, while

female children were equally affected by both mother's and father's

educational levels. The educational attainments of both parents seemed

to have a slightly greater effect on the female children than on the males.

In another study Adams and Meidam (1) found that fathers

representing white-collar occupations seemed to have an influence on

their children's college plans in 76% of the white-collar families,

while blue-collar fathers influenced their children's college plans in only

27% of those families. They found that the first-born in white-collar

families were the most likely of the children to attend college, and that

the female child's likelihood of attending college decreased with each

additional brother in her family. However, those investigators were not

able to identify any consistent pattern of birth order differences with

respect to college attendance, noting that four other studies had yielded

four different results.

Regarding the socio-economic status of community college

students, Schoenfeldt (29), in sampling some 400, 000 students on a

random basis, found that community college students were characterized

either by high socio-economic status, but below-average ability, or by

low socio-economic status, but above-average ability. Males were

fairly evenly distributed over the entire range of socio-economic

quartiles, while more females were represented by the highest socio-

economic quarter than by any other quarter. The measure of








socio-economic status included such factors as family income, value of

the home, number of books in the home, number of appliances,

television sets, and radios in the home, the father's occupation and

education, the mother's education, and whether the student had been

provided with his own room at home.

In a similar study, Cooley and Becker (9) compared community

college students with university students as well as with non-college

persons. Socio-economically the community college students seemed to

fall somewhere between the non-college group and the university group,

but were more like the university group. In predicting whether a

student would attend a community college the investigators identified, in

the order of their importance, such factors as whether the student had

his own room with a desk and a typewriter; the student's father's occu-

pation; and the student's mother's educational level. Of lesser importance

were the father's education, the number of books in the home, and the

number of electrical appliances.

Cooley and Becker concluded that, although much is known

regarding student ability as it relates to college attendance, not too much

is known about socio-economic factors and their effect on college attend-

ance. It was their hope that additional research regarding the latter

would someday permit inferences to be made regarding which factor --

ability or socio-economic status -- is the more important.

With respect to the student's choice of a career, and thus of a

specific educational program, a great deal of research has been









conducted. Roe (27) has noted that a person's choice of an occupation

reflects a whole complex of genetic and experiential variables, with

environment playing an important role. Roe contended that individuals

seem to be attracted either to vocations which are persons oriented,

such as the service, business, general cultural, or arts and entertain-

ment fields; or to vocations which are non-persons oriented, such as

organizations, technology, science, or outdoor occupations.

Drawing heavily on the work of Roe and several other

researchers, Holland (13) developed a theory of cognitive styles related

to vocational interests. He concluded that the occupational world is

divided into six cognitive styles: realistic, investigative, artistic,

social, enterprising, and conventional. Campbell (5) modified the

Strong Vocational Interest Blank so that students can be measured with

respect to their tendency toward any one of the six cognitive styles.

After using those test items on students on four separate campuses,

Johansson (15) was able to identify specific occupations relative to

each of the cognitive areas.

Through such testing and associated counseling, the student may

be provided with a useful means of choosing an occupational field. How-

ever, do there appear to be any relationships between the student's

socio-economic background and his choice of an occupation?

Berelson and Steiner (3) have noted that lower-class youths seem

to be much more restricted in their occupational choices than are upper-

class youths, largely as a result of differences in education, expectations,








awareness of alternatives, and their need for immediate employment.

To test the assumption that the occupational aspirations of high school

graduates are related to their socio-economic status, Trent and

Medsker (37) compared the occupational aspirations of 582 students

representing three levels of socio-economic status, with status being

based on father's occupation. Their findings, however, indicated "no

statistically significant relationship between socio-economic status and

occupational choice for any of the groups" (37, p. 59). They concluded

that "the relationship between socio-economic status and vocational

choice was nominal compared with the relationship between ability and

vocational choice" (37, p. 59).

Though not denying the importance of intelligence in the occu-

pational aspirations of college-age youths, Sewell, Haller, and

Strauss (30) concluded that the social status of the family tends to have

an equally strong bearing on such aspirations. On the other hand,

Rosen (28), although noting that social class is consistently related to

achievement motivation, cautioned against singling out any one demo-

graphic factor as the sole determinant of such motivation.

Cognitive Mapping and its Relationship to Instructor Knowledge of
Student Characteristics

Although the literature regarding students' reasons for attending

college as well as for their making specific vocational choices is rather

extensive, not quite so much is known about preferred cognitive styles

as they relate to the socio-economic characteristics of students. The








teacher, faced with a heterogeneous class, soon realizes that no one

teaching method will suffice for all kinds of students. Thus, it has

become apparent that students may be taught more effectively if they can

be assigned to groups which are likely to be receptive to one cognitive

style or another.

Cognitive styles themselves have been subjected to considerable

scrutiny over the years. Ranging at least as far back as Hudelson's

1928 experiment (14) in which he concluded that class size had little

bearing on the ability of students with diverse learning preferences to

assimilate information, the experiments have by no means been

consistent in their results. Guetzkow, Kelly, and McKeachie (11) in

1954 also found that the use of three separate teaching methods resulted

in few learning differences among students of diverse intelligence and

learning preferences.

More recent experiments, however, indicate that there may well

be justification for regrouping students on the basis of their learning

preferences. For instance, Calvin, Hoffman, and Harden (4), in

experimenting with authoritarian teaching versus permissive teaching,

found that the less intelligent students performed problem-solving tasks

more effectively under authoritarian conditions than under a permissive

teacher. The more intelligent students performed equally well under

both conditions, and it was implied that brighter students tended to

adjust more readily to changed conditions. Brighter students also

seemed to perform better under the discussion method of instruction








than did the less intelligent students.

Students' ability to do independent study has been investigated

thoroughly in recent years. Wisp6 (40) and Patton (24) have concluded

that students who were willing to assume responsibility in independent

study situations probably were independent of authority figures and were

high in their need for achievement. Koenig and McKeachie (16) reached

the same conclusion with respect to female students in 1959. Thus, it

seems likely that some students -- probably those who are independent,

in need of high achievement, and adaptable to instructional alternatives --

may prefer self-directed learning situations.

Cognitive styles as such were first identified 20 years ago by

Witkin (41) in a series of experiments in which the subjects were asked

to distinguish a discrete perceptual stimulus from its surrounding

perceptual field. Classified as field-dependent were those whose

perceptions were influenced by the total field, and classified as field-

independent were those who perceived the stimulus separately from the

field. As a result of these experiments, field-dependent students can

be classified as those who require more direction in their studies,

either from instructors or from peers. Too, such students tend to be

more undecided about their careers and place greater importance on

interpersonal relations. Field-independent students, on the other hand,

are likely to be analytically inclined, are oriented more toward the

sciences than to the humanities, prefer lectures to discussions, and are

more certain of their career choices.








In an effort to identify students who are either instructor-centered

or student-centered, the Educational Testing Service (38) has developed

a 200-item student attitude questionnaire, with ten of the items designed

to determine the student's instructional preferences. Students under 21

tended to be student-centered, and those 22 or older tended to be

instructor-centered, based on a sample of 6, 500 community college

students in 27 colleges across the nation. Those who were heavily

student-centered were enrolled in the behavioral sciences, the fine arts,

the social sciences, and the humanities, whereas those who were

instructor-centered were enrolled in the business programs, health

services, technology, trade and industry, and the physical sciences.

Not showing a strong preference for either instructional style were those

students in education, engineering, public services, and natural

resources.

Wasser (39) has suggested that there is a tendency for those

students who share more communication channels or cognitive style

elements with their teachers to be more successful, grade-wise, than

those students who do not possess elements in common with their

instructors. At the same time Hill (12, p. 15), one of the most avid

disciples of cognitive style mapping, has noted that "the cognitive

style of an individual is a relative concept, and depends not only upon

the age, educational level and cultural background of the person

involved, but upon the level and conditions of the educational task to be

accomplished. "








Instructors, aware of cognitive styles of different groups of

students, thus could be encouraged to adapt their teaching methods to

the learning styles preferred by those groups. Better yet, the instructor

could be asked to teach only groups of students who relate best to the

style through which the instructor performs best. Thistlethwaite (36)

has noted that National Merit Scholars consider the instructor's

enthusiasm to be of critical importance in influencing students to enter

a particular field of study, and such enthusiasm is more likely to be

apparent if the cognitive styles of students and instructors are matched

as closely as possible.

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

An additional field in which rather extensive research and

experimentation have been conducted is that pertaining to the relation-

ships between personality and learning preferences. Although the

findings of the Educational Testing Service (38) showed that students can

be classified as either instructor-centered or student-centered in terms

of their instructional preferences, an extensive series of experiments

utilizing the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (M-BTI) also has provided a

basis for some conclusions in that same field.

The M-BTI is an extension of the work done by Jung in the early

1920's. Jung had compared psychological types on the basis of

perception and judgment, and, according to Myers (23, p. 1), "The gist

of his theory is that much apparently random variation in human

behavior is actually quite orderly and consistent, being due to certain








basic differences in the way people prefer to use perception and

judgment. "

The M-BTI, the development of which began more than 30 years

ago, makes possible the categorization of individuals on the basis of

four polarized pairs: extraversion or introversion; sensing or intuition;

thinking or feeling; and judgment or perception. By utilizing these

polarized pairs, further classification can be implemented on a 16-grid

basis, and individuals as well as groups can readily be compared with

respect to their personality differences.

McCaulley (20) has noted that through such comparisons,

dominant personality characteristics can be ascribed both to students

enrolled in specific programs, as well as to faculty teaching in certain

fields. For instance, students classified as INTP (an Introverted

Thinking Type with Intuition) scored best on the Florida Twelfth Grade

Test, ranked highest in 30 high schools in Pennsylvania, and preferred

such college programs as those in science, medicine, and engineering.

So far as faculty-dominant personality characteristics are concerned,

Smith (34) has noted that instructors with certain traits (again, such as

INTP) tended to receive higher student evaluations when their students

were of the same type as the instructor.

On numerous occasions the reliability of the M-BTI has been

tested, and McCaulley and Tonesk (21) have found that the test's internal

consistence reliabilities of continuous scores fall generally in the 70s

and 80s. Carlson and Levy (6) in a 1973 experiment with black students








at Howard University found a high degree of reliability with 88% of those

students showing either no, or small, variations in outcome from one

testing period to the next.

The M-BTI also has been used as a predictive device. For

instance, Stricker, Schiffman, and Ross (35) tested students at the

California Institute of Technology, and at Wesleyan, and found the test

to be useful in predicting students' grades and dropouts, with even

greater accuracy resulting when the M-BTI results were combined with

Scholastic Aptitude Test scores and with the students' ranks in their high

school graduating classes.

Although many experiments utilizing the M-BTI are still being

conducted CMcCaulley (20)1, there are many aspects of the M-BTI

results that are in need of clarification. Levy, Murphy, and Carlson (18),

for instance, have noted that the sizeable differences between the black

students they tested, and other groups, probably can be explained only

by delving into the mores, backgrounds, and traditions of the various

groups. Too, Smith (33) has noted that instructors tend to gain from

understanding their personality types in relation to those of their

students, and he has recommended that "future projects examining the

influence of type on learning obtain data on both the instructor and his

students" (33, p. 439). With this in mind, Smith (34), in a separate

publication, has recommended a procedure for colleges to follow in their

attempts to improve instruction. The process makes use of the M-BTI

both with faculty and students and is designed to identify and bring








together both groups on the basis of similarities of personality traits

and compatibilities of instructional and learning styles.

Recent Research Regarding the Use of Student Characteristics Data in
the Improvement of Instruction

A comprehensive review of the Educational Resource Information

Center (ERIC) literature completed in July 1974 (17) indicated very few

studies of the type represented by the present research, and none which

closely paralleled this study. Rayder (26), in a 1967 study conducted at

Colorado State College, attempted to determine whether student

characteristics had a bearing on the evaluations received by the faculty

at that institution. Students were asked to rate their instructors on

three seven-point continuums: (1) aloof, egocentric, restricted

behavior versus friendly, understanding behavior; (2) evading, unplanned,

slipshod behavior versus responsible, systematic, businesslike behavior;

and (3) dull, routine behavior versus stimulating, imaginative,

enthusiastic behavior. The rating scales were administered to 4,402

students in classes taught by 87 different instructors.

The younger instructors with less experience and lower academic

rank consistently were rated as being more friendly, sympathetic,

understanding, businesslike, stimulating, imaginative, enthusiastic, and

responsible. On the other hand, the rankings of faculty varied from one

department to another, and there were no indications that grades

previously earned under an instructor had any bearing on that

instructor's ranking. Regarding other student characteristics, such as








sex, age, major, and level of education, the study did not indicate what,

if any, influence such characteristics may have had on faculty rankings.

Fink (10) has documented a 1971 study related to the use of

student characteristics data in modifying the manner in which a spatial

organization course was being taught. In that instance a pre-course,

14-page questionnaire and a pre-test were distributed to all members of

the class. Compiled data were related to such factors as sex, age, year

in college, major, related courses taken, travel preferences, and

expected outcomes from having taken the course.

Data were analyzed, and by mid-term it was decided to make

several changes in the way in which the course was being taught, as well

as in the emphasis given to various aspects of the course. For instance,

the background of the class indicated a need for more discussion of

urban problems, as well as for the minimization of the use of mathe-

matics. Although the changes were considered beneficial, Fink has

questioned whether the professor might well have modified the course

without utilizing such an extensive questionnaire and pre-test.

Student characteristics data have been used in planning high

school curricula. Cogswell (7) has noted that in 1964 a simulation model

was developed for the purpose of designing self-paced instructional

programs, using students in five widely dispersed high schools as the

experimental subjects. Preliminary results have indicated that students

did not progress as rapidly as they were expected to, and that it became

necessary to revert to more, and larger, study groups as the program

was implemented.








Other studies of the use of student characteristics data in the

assessment of instructional techniques include those of Cohn (8) and

Lumsden (19). In the Cohn study each student's performance in a class

in economic statistics was related to his grade point average, sex,

major field, graduate or undergraduate status, and background in the

fields of economics, mathematics, and statistics. The class included

16 undergraduate and 27 graduate students. Cohn concluded that an

academic background in economics was not significant in a course in

economic statistics, but that students with better mathematics back-

grounds did best in his class.

In the Lumsden study a questionnaire was completed by each of

4, 996 students in the Stanford University Graduate School of Business.

Students were asked to evaluate their courses as well as their

instructors, and student opinion of the instructor was found to be the

most significant factor influencing opinion of the course. The most

important characteristics of the instructors were how clearly they

presented their material and how enthusiastic they were about their

courses. Also important were respect for student opinion, knowing the

subject, being well prepared, and being able to relate complex theories

to practical applications. Of least importance were such factors as the

use of visual aids, the avoidance of being sidetracked by students, and

making pertinent comments on homework and tests. In connection with

these evaluations it was found that the amount of time the student spent

on the course was directly related to how favorably he ranked the course.









Another use of student characteristics daita occurred in 1967

when the Pittsburgh Technical Health T-rainig Institute (25) began

developing programs in the fields of surgical technician, practical

nurse, and nurse aide. The institute utilized such characteristics as

age, marital status, highest grade completed, reading level, and scores

on the Otis I. Q. Test in developing the programs, and planned to relate

those characteristics to students' success both in the programs and in

their work experiences.

Anderson and Tissier (2), in a 1973 study, examined the possible

causal relationships between social class, school organization structure,

and student aspira-iions for further education. Although they found that

bureaucratization and alienation from school contribute to the student's

level of aspiration, they concluded that of greater importance to the

student's success in school are such factors as his past success, the

type of program in which he is enrolled, and his socio-economic status.

Thus, although the literature reveals some recent studies which

have attempted to relate student characteristics data to the assessment

or the improvement of instruction, there seems to have occurred a

relatively small amount of research in this field. Particularly there has

been virtually no research designed to ascertain whether student charac-

teristics profiles can be used advantageously by faculty in assessing

their instructional methods and in making those changes in their teaching

strategies which seem most appropriate. That is what this study will

attempt to accomplish.














CHAPTER II
PRESENTATION OF DATA


The survey results are presented in two sections, the first of

which comprises the data related to those students admitted to the

college between 1971 and 1973, and the second of which includes the

data derived from the survey of classes conducted during the summer of

1974. The data in each case are presented tabularly, and the significant

aspects of the data are discussed on pages adjoining the relevant tables.


Presentation of Results of the Survey of Students
Admitted to the College between 1971 and 1973

In presenting the data and analyzing the results of the character-

istics survey covering the students admitted to Central Florida

Community College between 1971 and 1973, three separate approaches

were used. These included:

1) An analysis of the characteristics of the entire sample of
2,905 students,

2) A comparison of the characteristics of those students who
intended to obtain the Associate of Arts degree and those
who planned to obtain the Associate of Science degree, and

3) An analysis of the characteristics of students enrolled in
each of the 16 program or major field of study areas, with
a comparison of their characteristics and those of all
students enrolled in either Associate of Arts or Associate
of Science programs, whichever was appropriate for the
smaller group being analyzed.








Analysis of Data Covering the Entire Sample of 2, 905 Students

Of the 2,905 students who entered Central Florida Community

College between August 1971 and May 1973, 53% were male and 47%

were female. There were established no separate classifications

for widowed, separated, or divorced students, all such individuals

having been designated as single. On that basis some 65% of the

students were single, and 35% were married. With respect to the

number of dependents per student, the survey showed that 72% of the

students claimed no dependents, 9. 4% had one dependent, 8. 9% had

two dependents, 4. 6% had three dependents, and 5. 1% had more than

three dependents.

Regarding race, 81.2% of the students were white, 16. 6% were

black, and 2.2% were members of other races. Also, the tabulation

showed 59. 9% of the students as full time, and the remaining 40. 1%

as part time.

The survey divided the occupations of the students' fathers into

11 categories. Among the more significant categories were profes-

sional, technical, and managerial (19%); farming (5%); and

structural (10. 2%). A sizeable group of retired fathers accounted for

an additional 16%.

In contrast, the mothers of the students were segmented as

follows: in the professional, managerial, and technical group (13.2%);

clerical and sales (15. 5%); and service occupations (14. 4%). The

remaining 57% of the mothers were shown either with no occupation








at all (50. 1%); retired (4. 4%); or engaged in a variety of other occu-

pations (2. 4%).

Education-wise, some 45% of the fathers of the students had not

graduated from high school; 30.9% had completed high school; 12.4% had

attended college but had received no degree; 6. 5% had received degrees

from four-year institutions; and 4.4% had done work beyond the

bachelor's degree. It is noteworthy that only 8% of the fathers had

received the Associate of Arts or the Associate of Science degree.

Among the mothers of the students, on the other hand, only

21. 4% had not completed high school; 53. 4% had finished high school;

15. 5% had attended college on a non-degree basis; 6. 9% had received a

bachelor's degree; and 1.4%0 had studied beyond the bachelor's level.

As with the fathers, only a small percentage of the mothers (1. 5%)

had received Associate of Arts or Associate of Science degrees.

The data reveal that 24% of the students reported a family income

of less than $7, 500 per year; 19. 3% had a family income between $7, 500

and $12, 000; and 22. 2% had a family income in excess of $12, 000.

There were 34. 5% of the students who were unable to estimate their

family income. Insofar as their own sources of financial support were

concerned, 46. 8% of the students relied primarily on their parents;

38. 1% were essentially self-supporting; and the remaining 15. 1%

received their support from the government through such sources as

veterans' benefits, social security payments, pensions, and disability

benefits.








With respect to their ages, 1.2% of the students were 17 or

younger; 43. 5% were between 18 and 20; 50% were between 21 and 44;

and 5. 3% were 45 or older. The average age of the incoming students

was 24.5 years.

With respect to their total scores on the Florida Twelfth Grade

Test (FTGT), 22. 7% of the students scored less than 150 (out of a

possible 495), while 26. 7% scored over 350. Thus about half of the

students scored between 150 and 350. It should be noted that there were

no scores available on 1,291 of the 2,905 students; however, the 56%

sample represented here is considered quite adequate for statistical

analysis.

Insofar as their ranks in their high school graduating classes

were concerned, the survey indicates that 46.2% of the students ranked

in the lower 40% of their classes; 16.7% were in the 41-60 range;

13.3% were in the 61-80 range; and 23. 8% ranked in the top 20% of

their graduating classes.

Finally, the survey shows that 32% of the students drove more

than 20 miles a day in commuting to the college.

Comparison of Associate of Arts Students and Associate of Science
Students

Of the 2,905 students surveyed, 1,539 considered themselves

Associate of Arts degree students, while 963 intended to obtain

Associate of Science degrees. The remaining 403 did not indicate any

degree preference but were included in the preceding presentation of

data covering all 2, 905 students.










Table 1


Characteristics of Students Entering
Central Florida Community College
August 1971 to May 1973
(N = 2, 905)


Relative Adjusted
Absolute Frequency Frequency
Student Characteristic Frequency (Percent) (Percent)



1. Sex
female 1.361 46.9 47.0
Male 1,537 52. 9 53.0
Missing data 7 0.2 ----

2. Marital Status
Single 1,869 64.3 65.0
Married 1,007 34.7 35.0
Missing data 29 1.0 ----

3. No. Dependents
None 2,093 72.0 72.0
One 272 9.4 9.4
Two 258 8.9 8.9
Three 134 4.6 4.6
More than three 148 5.1 5.1

4. Race
white 2,357 81.1 81.2
Black 482 16.6 16. 6
Other 63 2.2 2.2
Missing data 3 0.1 ----

5. Student Status
Full time 1,691 58.2 59.9
Part time 1,130 38.9 40.1
Missing data 84 2.9 ---

6. Father's Occupation
Professional 617 21.2 28.6
Clerical 247 8.5 11.4
Service 411 14.1 19.0
Farming 109 3.8 5.0
Processing 21 0.7 1.0
Machine 77 2.7 3.6
Bench 12 0.4 0.6
Structural 220 7.6 10.2
Miscellaneous 60 2. 1 2.8
None 40 1.4 1.9
Retired 346 11.9 16.0
Missing data 745 25.6 ----

7. Father's Education
Less than hi.n school 1,258 43.3 45.0
High school 864 29.7 30.9
Some college 347 11.9 12.4
A.A. or A.S. degree 22 0.8 0.8
4-year degree 183 6.3 6.5
4-year degree-plus 124 4.3 4.4
Missing data 107 3.7 ---









Table 1 continued


Relative Adjusted
Absolute Frequency Frequency
Student Characteristic Frequency (Percent) (Percent)



8. Mother's Occunation
Profess sionl 310 10.7 13.2
Clerical 364 12.5 15.5
Service 340 11.7 14.4
Farming 11 0.4 0.5
Processing 9 0.3 0.4
Machine 3 0. 1 0. 1
Bench 4 0. 1 0.2
Structural 7 0.2 0.3
Miscellaneous 22 0.8 0.9
None 1,179 40.6 50.1
Retired 104 3.6 4.4
Missing data 552 19.0

9. Mother's Education
Less than high school 492 16.9 21.4
High school 1.228 42.3 53.4
Some college 356 12.3 15.5
A.A. or A.S. degree 34 1.2 1.5
4-year degree 158 5.4 6.9
4-year degree-plus 33 1.1 1.4
Missing data 604 20.8 ----

10, Round-trip Mileage
20 miles or less 1.650 56.8 68.0
More than 20 miles 778 26.8 32.0
Missing data 477 16.4 ---

11. Financial Support
Parents 982 33.8 46.8
Self and family 801 27.6 38.1
Government 317 10.9 15.1
Missing data 805 27.7 ...

12. Family Income
Less than $7,500 642 22.1 23.9
$7,500 $12,000 518 17.8 19.3
$12,000 and over 597 20.6 22.2
Unable to estimate 927 31.9 34.5
Missing data 221 7.6 ---

13. FTGT Total Scores
1- 50 82 2.8 5.1
51-100 138 4.8 8.6
101-150 145 5.0 9.0
151-200 172 5.9 10.7
201-250 216 7.4 13.4
251-300 198 6.8 12.3
301-350 232 8.0 14.4
351-400 231 8.0 14.3
401-450 151 5.2 9.4
451-495 49 1.7 3.0
SMissing data 1,291 44.4 ---









Table 1 continued


Relative Adjusted
Absolute Frequency Frequency
Student Characteristic Frequency (Percent) (Percent)



14. Rank in high school
graduating class
0- 40 851 29.3 46.2
41- 60 307 10.6 16.7
61- 80 245 8.4 13.3
81-100 439 15.1 23.8
Missing data 1,063 36.6 ----

15. Age
17 or under 35 1.2 1.2
18 to 20 1,263 43.5 43.5
21 to 44 1,453 50.0 50.0
45 or older 154 5.3 5.3


Source: Central Florida Community College admission applications,
August 1971 to May 1973.








Between the two degree areas there were virtually no differences

either in the sex or racial distribution of the students. However, a

comparison of single students and married students revealed that the

single students comprised 75% of those in Associate of Arts programs,

but only 50% of those in the Associate of Science programs.

Some 79.4% of the Associate of Arts students, and 62.4% of the

Associate of Science students claimed no dependents, while only 6.8%

of the Associate of Arts students as compared with 12. 4% of the

Associate of Science students claimed three or more dependents.

The Associate of Arts students were about twice as likely to be

full time as were the Associate of Science students (76. 5% vs. 37. 5%),

and the Associate of Arts students tended to rely more on their parents

for financial support than did the Associate of Science students

(51. 2% vs. 37. 6%). Concomitantly, the Associate of Arts students were

less likely to be self-supporting than were the Associate of Science

students (34% vs. 47. 5%), while about 15% of each group derived their

support primarily from government benefits or payments. The

distribution of family income within the ranges cited earlier, i. e., less

than $7,500; between $7,500 and $12,000; and over $12, 000, was the

same for each group of students.

Regarding the educational backgrounds of the two groups, the

data show that the Associate of Arts students scored somewhat higher

as a group on the FTGT than did the Associate of Science students. For

instance, scoring less than 150 on that test were 21% of the Associate of








Arts students and 24. 7% of the Associate of Science students. By the

same token, scoring over 350 were 29.8% of the Associate of Arts

students and 23. 6% of the Associate of Science students. There were

56. 6% of the Associate of Arts students who scored higher than 250 on

the test, compared with 46. 9% of the Associate of Science students.

The students' rank in their high school graduating classes

follows a pattern similar to that shown by their scores on the FTGT.

For instance, 42. 5% of the Associate of Arts students ranked in the

lowest 40% of their high school graduating classes, compared with 53. 1%

of the Associate of Science students. By the same token, ranking in the

top 20% of their high school graduating classes were 28. 9% of the

Associate of Arts students and 14.5% of the Associate of Science students.

With respect to the educational backgrounds of the students'

parents, it is noteworthy that not having completed high school were

39. 7% of the fathers of the Associate of Arts students, and 50. 6% of the

fathers of the Associate of Science students. In this same category were

17. 7% of the mothers of the Associate of Arts students, and 24.8%0 of

the mothers of the Associate of Science students. Having had some

college training (but not necessarily having received a degree) were

26.8% of the fathers of the Associate of Arts students and 21.2% of the

fathers of the Associate of Science students. Again, in the same

category were 26. 5% of the mothers of the Associate of Arts students

and 25. 2% of the mothers of the Associate of Science students.








Regarding the occupations of the parents of the students, there

were several differences worth noting. For instance, the fathers of

the Associate of Arts students were more likely to be employed in a

professional, technical, or managerial capacity (30. 3%) than were the

fathers of the Associate of Science students (25.7%). Also, fathers of

Associate of Arts students tended more toward clerical occupations

(12. 3%) than did the Associate of Science students' fathers (9. 6%). On

the other hand, the fathers of the Associate of Science students seemed

a bit more inclined toward agricultural and machine occupations than

were the Associate of Arts students' fathers.

With respect to the students' mothers, those of the Associate

of Arts students were more often employed in a professional,

technical, or managerial capacity (15. 3% vs. 10. 3%) or in a clerical

occupation (16. 1% vs. 14%). The differences within other occupations

were insignificant. However, the mothers of Associate of Arts

students were more often employed in some capacity that were the

mothers of the Associate of Science students (47.6% vs. 41.4%).

Finally, 34.4% of the Associate of Arts students commuted

more than 20 miles each day, compared with 28. 7% of the Associate

of Science students. On the other hand, the Associate of Science

students were older, with their average age being 25. 9 compared with

an average age for the Associate of Arts students of 22. 7.









Table 2

Characteristics of Students
Enrolled in Associate of Arts Programs
1971-73 at Central Florida Community College
(N = 1,540)


Relative Adjusted
Absolute Frequency I Frequency
Student Characteristic Frequency (Percent) (Percent)

1. Sex
-Female 726 47. 47.2
Male 813 52.8 52.8
Missing data 1 0.1 ---
2. Marital Status
Single 1.149 74.6 75.0
Married 382 24.8 25.0
Missing data 9 0.6 -

3. No. De-cndents
None- 1,222 79.4 79.4.
One 119 7.7 7.7
Two 95 6.2 6.2
Three 44 2.9 2.9
More than three 60 3.9 3.9

4. Race
White 1,252 81.3 81.4
Black 248 16.1 16.1
Other 39 2.5 2.5
Missing data I 0.1 ..

5. Student Status
Full-time 1.151 74.7 76.5
Part-time 354 23.0 23.5.
Missing data 35 2.3 -.3

6. Father's Occunation
Professional 372 24.2 30.3
Clerical 151 9.8 12.3
Service 232 15.1 18.9
Farming 52 3.4 4.2
Processing 12 0.8 1.0
Machine 35 2.3 2.9
Bench 4 0.3 0.3
Structural 134 8.7 10.9
Miscellaneous 30 1.9 2.4
None 18 1.2 1.S
Retired 186 12.1 15.2
Missing data 314 20.4 ---

7. Father's Education
Less than hiln school 595 38.6 39.7
High school 502 32.6 33.5
Some college 211 13.7 14. 1
A.A. or A.S. degree 10 0.6 .7
4-year degree 103 6.7 6.9
4-year degree-plus 77 5.0 5.1
Missing data 42 2.7 ....









Table 2 continued


Relative Adjusted
Absolute Frequency Frequency
Student Characteristic Frequency (Percent) (Percent)


8. Mother's Occuo-tion
ProfessTonal 202 13.1 15.3
Clerical 212 13.8 16.1
Service 186 12. 1 14. 1
Farming 6 0.4 0.5
Processing 5 0.3 0.4
Machine 2 0.1 0.2
Bench 3 0.2 0.2
Structural 2 0.1 0.2
Miscellaneous 9 0.6 0.7
None 648 42.1 49. 1
Retired 43 2.8 3.3
Missing data 221 14.4 --

9. Mather's Education
Less than high school 227 14.7 17.7
High school 718 46.6 55.9
Some college 195 12.7 15.2
A.A. or A.S. degree 22 1.4 1.7
4-year degree 10Q 6.5 7.8
4-year degree-plus 23 1.5 1.8
Missing data 255 16.6 --

10. Round-trio Mileage
20 miles or less 888 57.7 65.6
More than 20 miles 466 30.2 34.4
Missing data 186 12. 1 --

11. Financial Supoort
Parents 635 41.2 51.2
Self and family 422 27.4 34.0
Government 183 11.9 14.8
Missing data 300 19.5 --

12. Family Income
Less than 57,500 344 22.3 24.3
$7,500 $12,000 278 18.1 19.7
$12,000 and over 341 22.1 24.1
Unable to estimate 450 29.2 31.8
Missing data 127 8.3 --

13. FTGT Total Scores
1- 50 51 3.3 4.9
51-100 89 5.8 8.5
101-150 79 5.1 7.6
151-200 104 6.7 9.9
201-250 132 8.6 12.6
251-300 123 8.0 11.8
301-350 157 10.2 15.0
351-400 160 10.4 15.3
401-450 119 7.7 11.4
451-495 32 2.1 3.1
Missing data 494 32.1 --

14. RarJ in high school
graduating class
0- 40 507 32.9 42.5
41- 60 203 13.2 17.0
61- s0 139 9.0 11.6
81-100 345 22.4 28.9
Missing data 366 23.8 -









Table 2 continued


Relative Adjusted
Absolute Frequency Frequency
Student Characteristic Frequency (Percent) (Percent)


15. Age
17 or under 22 1.4 1.4
18 to 20 826 53.6 53.6
21 to 44 656 42.6 42.6
45 or older 36 2.3 2.3


Source: Central Florida Community College admission applications,
August 1971 to May 1973.









Table 3

Characteristics of Students
Enrolled in Associate of Science Programs
1971-73 at Central Florida Community College
(N = 963)


Relative Adjusted
Absolute Frequency Frequency
Student Characteristic Frequency (Percent) (Percent)

1. Sex
-'emale 452 46.9 46.9
Male 511 53.1 53.1
Missing data

2. MIrit'l Status
Single 485 50.4 50.5
Married 476 49.4 49.5
Missing data 2- 0.2 -

3. No. Deoendents
None 601 62.4 62.4
One 118 12.3 12.3
Two 125 13.0 13.0
Three 73 7.6 7.6
More than three 46 4.8 4.8

4. Race
White 793 82.3 82.4
Black 156 16.2 16.2
Other 13 1.3 1.4
Missing data .1 0.1

5. Student Status
Full-time 348 36.1 37.5
Part-time 80 60.2 62.5
Missing data 35 3.7 --

6. Father's Occu.ation
SProfessional 172 17.9 25.7
Clerical 64 6.6 9.6
Service 124 12.9 18.5
Farming 45 4.7 6.7
Processing 7 0.7 1.0
Machine 31 3.2 4.6
Bench 6 0.6 .9
Structural 58 6.0 8.7
Miscellaneous 22 2.3 3.3
None 18 1.9 2.7
Retired 123 12.8 18.4
Missing data 293 30.4 -

?. Father's Education
Less thin htni school 472 49.0 50.6
High school 263 27.3 28.2
Some college 100 10.4 10.7
A.A. or A.S. degree 10 1.0 1.1
4-year degree 54 5.6 5.8
4-year der ee-plus 34 3.5 3.6
Missing data 30 3. 1 --









Table 3 continued

Relative Adjusted
Absolute Frequency Frequr ncy
Student Characteristic Frequency (Percent) (Percent)


S, Mother's Occ-dation
Proe ssor. al 77 8.0 10.3
Clerical 105 10.9 14.0
Service 106 11.0 14.2
Farming 3 0.3 0.4
Processing 3 0.3 0.4
Machine 1 0. 1 0.1
Bench 1 0.1 0.1
Structural 3 0.3 0.4
Miscellaneous 11 1.1 1.5
None 393 40.8 52.5
Retired 46 4.8 6.1
Missir.g data 214 22.2 ---

9, .., .' r-
L 180 18.7 24.8
High school 364 37.8 50.1
Some college 126 13. 1 17.3
A.A. or A.S. degree 10 1.0 1.4
4-year degree 39 4.0 5.4
4-year degree-plus 0.8 I. 1
Missing data 236 24.5 ...

10. Round-tri, Mileal e
20 miles or less 541 56.2 71.3
More than 20 miles 218 22.6 28.7
Missing data 204 21.2 ---

11. Financial Suooort
Parents 230 23.9 37.6
Self and family 290 30.1 47.5
Government 91 9.4 14.9
Missing data 352 36.6 ---

12. Family Income
Less than 7.,500 214 22.2 23.5
$7.500 $12,000 177 18.4 19.4
$12,000 and over 182 18.9 20.0
Unable to estimate 339 35.2 37.2
Missing data 51 5.3 ....

13. FTGT Total Scores
1- 50 19 2.0 5.1
51-100 31 3.2 8.3
101-150 42 4.4 11.3
151-200 49 5. 1 13.1
201-250 57 5.9 15.3
251-300 44 4.6 11.8
301-350 43 4.5 11.5
351-400 48 5.0 12.9
401-450 28 2.9 7.5
451-495 12 1.2 3.2
Missing data 590 61.3 ---

14. Rank in high school
graduating class
0- 40 344 35.7 53.1
41- 60 104 10.8 16.0
61- 80 106 11.0 16.4
81-100 94 9.8 14.5
Missing data 315 32.7 --









Table 3 continued


Source: Central Florida Community College admission applications,
August 1971 to May 1973.


Relative Adjusted
Absolute Frequency Frequency
Student Characteristic Frequency (Percent) (Percent)


15. Age
17 or under 7 0.7 0.7
18 to 20 288 29.9 29.9
21 to 44 585 60.7 60.7
45 or older 83 8.6 8.6









Comparison of the Characteristics of Students Enrolled in Specific
Programs or Major Fields of Study

Utilizing the Higher Education General Information Survey

(HEGIS) classification system, the 79 program and study areas revealed

by a preliminary survey were grouped under 16 standard HEGIS cate-

gories -- 10 in the Associate of Arts area and six in the Associate of

Science field.

Although the characteristics of the students in those two broad

areas have already been compared, it appears that even within those

fields the specific programs or fields of study tend to attract different

kinds of students. In the following analyses of the major fields of study

the characteristics of the students in each field are compared with the

characteristics of all students in either the Associate of Arts area or

in the Associate of Science area, whichever is appropriate.

Associate of Arts programs and fields of study

Business and Management. In this area the males outnumbered

the females four to one, and about three-fourths of the students were

single. Enrollment was largely white (85%), and 78.4% of the students

were full time. Both mothers and fathers of these students were more

likely to have completed high school and were more likely to be engaged

in professional, technical, or managerial occupations than were the

parents of the composite Associate of Arts student. Students in this

field tended to rely more than normally on government as their primary

source of financing, though parental assistance was still the most

important source.









Architecture and Engineering. Males outnumbered females

three to one in this field. There was a relatively small percentage of

blacks represented (6. 9%) but a larger than usual percentage of other

races (13. 9%). Both the mothers and the fathers of the students in this

program had a better than average high school completion record, and

family incomes were considerably above average. A below-average

percentage of the students' mothers was employed in any capacity. The

students in this program tended to be a bit older than average. Their

scores on the FTGT were relatively high, and their ranks in high school

were much higher than average.

Fine Arts and Foreign Languages. In this field the female

students outnumbered males 35 to 27, and a relatively high percentage

(82. 3%) were single. Black representation was a bit below average

(11. 3%). The students' mothers seemed more likely to be engaged in

professional, technical, managerial, or clerical occupations than were

those of the average students. The students in this field tended to live

closer to the campus and were considerably younger than average.

There was a strong reliance on parents for financial support, and

family incomes tended to be above average. Scores on the FTGT were

slightly below average, and these students were slightly below average

in their high school graduating class rankings.

Health. About 55% of the students were female and 83. 5% were

single. There was a preponderance of white students (91. 7%), and

almost 90% of the students were full time. The fathers tended toward










Table 4


Characteristics of Students
Enrolled in Specific Associate of Arts Programs
1971-73 at Central Florida Community College





All A.A. -Busines ad Architectur
Defrec M ig)e.Titnt I nd
Student Ch.ractri(l.ic Piogr.ms Ma t Engi during
8 0 1. I *Y.
1. Sex
le 126 47.2 34 20.2 2S 24.
1U0e 813 52.8 134 79.8 76 75.2
2. M-rit; S-at1ii
e- .149 7S.0 123 74.1 75 74.3
.Mrried 382 25.0 43 25.9 26 25.L

1,222 79.4 127 75.1 81 80.2
1-3 258 16.7 35 20.8 16 15.8
dore thn three 60 3.9 T 4.1 4 4.0
4. P-ce
vi'te 1.252 81.4 143 85.1 t0 19.2
Black 248 16.1 19 11. 3 7 6.9
Other 39 2.5 6 3.6 14 13.9

1.-1-5e I1s 76.5 31 78.4 T 71 2.4
PArt-tim 1 54 23.5 36 216 27 27.6
1. rthe '* OEpcugjt i
3'-72 30.3 I2 37.1 26 30.6
Clerlc.l 151 12.3 13 9.3 12 14.1
Service 232 18.9 30 21.4 12 14.1
Structural 134 10.9 13 9.3 16 1.8
Other IS1 12.4 14 10.0 8 9.
Satired 186 1S.2 8 I2.9 11 i12.
.th rtear Egjiof
l cs U.a hii hool SSS 39.7' S5 34.2 34 34.3
logh achol s82 33.S 58 36.0 35 -35.4
om.e coeles 401 36.8 48 29.8 30 30.3
8. Mother'. Occuation
Po o02 15.3 2 IS.8 10 3.3
Cler.icl .1 16.1 T1 11.6 6 8.0
8rvlce 186 14.1 23 I5.8 13 17.3
Other 27 2.1 6 4.1 2 L7
Voi 4648 49.1 T 47.9 42 6. *
D.8Ued 43 3.3 T 4.8 2 .7I
4. 6...er's Ed.ucatio
t a chool 27 17.7 2t 06.7 6 L.6
iaLh .cb.ol TIS 55.9 8 59.7 43 61.4
ome coUe.g. 340 26.4 34 34.6 21 30.0

N. Roo- WIo 57.H.,.
5.00. ....i' 0^ 888 60.6 1A" 71.8 53 62.4
20 6 .. o. mor. 464 34.4 43 &2. 5 32 $7.6

80 !.2 M 47.3 41 SL9.
SeU l U.0fmly 422 34.0 48 32.4 27 34.2
Go0rnmt 183 14.8 30 20.3 1 13.9

12 500 344 24.3 43 27.6 19 19.2
$7.S0 511.99 278 19.7 29 18.6 20 20.2
$l.00oad ov.r 341 a4. 1 41 26.3 30 30.3
Ca't -itu 430 31.0 43 23.6 30 30.3
A& Ia s 219 ZLO 2? 00.8 11 08.1
391-415 311 29.8 34 26.1 2t 1M.
4. Llnk LA high school
I- 4- 507 42. 52 41.9 26 32.
41. 60to 03 7.0 27 21. 8 0.0
61- 80 U3 1;.6 U 1O.5 8 0o.O
81.100 3481 1. U 2.8 38 47.5

O1.62 848 80.0 8 MT.7 46 45.6
O-. 20 602 45.0 8a 47.3 s 54.4











Table 4 continued


All A.A. Wii Ar. .n
Delre* oreign Health
Stude-t ChArlcterltldc P&rogram Lguag a
__ I I k I 91
I. Sex
-3.emale 726 47.2 35 56.5 73 54.9
I.le 813 $2.8 27 43.5 0 45.1
2. Marital Slu-
gc 1.149 75.0 51 82.3 111 83.5
3Srid 382 25.0 11 17.7 22 16.5

3. 1,22 79.4 86 90.4 114 85.7
1-3 258 16.7 6 8.0 18 13.5
.4ore th. three 60 3.9 I 1.6 1 0.8

itlt 1,252 81.4 83 85.5 122 91.7
Black 248 16.1 7 11.3 9 6,8
Othbr 39 2.5 3,2 2 1.5
Student Stau
1-te 1.15 76.5 48 80.0 119 89.5
Pr5t-iime 54 23.5 1 20. 0 14 10.5
. a[ther's Occua-tion
-Pross.ol 172 30.3 38 33.3 .40 35.4
Clerical 151 2.3 7 13.0 12 10.6
Servc- 232 18.9 13 24.1 11 9.7
tlructtl, 134 10.9 6 11.1 15 13.3
Other 151 12.4 12.8 20 17.7
tlUred 186 1.2 9 16.7 IS 13.S
. rither.' Educ L.t u95 39.7 8 37.1 S2 3. 7
3lgh -sb-1l S02 33.5 20 32.3 40 30.5
cS.me oung 401 26,. 19 30.6 339 29.8
I bother's Oc~ltioa.
Proesi-oa 202 15.3 11 19.0 11 8.T
Clr.lc.l 1 12 16.1 0 17.6 2U 22.2
686ch 1" 14.1 1 8.6 8 6.3
Ote5r 27 ? .1 0 0.0 1 1.L
o1 I64 49.1 30 81.7 73 87.9
4L3Ur3d 4 3 3. 31.4 4 3.1








L -- 635 SL2 39 SO.0 74 6L.d
Se.. h .il 42Z 34.0 2AS 7. 34 I 17.
ilgoveh 8. l 183 I. 635.0 13 10.7
CB Ito comitrip Income
U. tii a i0mhlo IU 65.1 8 3 7.8 70 88.3
20o mi.. or mori. 486 34.4 2.8 23.2 00 41.7





L 3 ,00 44 24.3 14 23.7 26 20.6
T7.500 11.999 278 19.7 8 13.6 26 20.6
$12,000 ud over 341 2 4. 33.9 40 317
Co-'s tina 450 31L9 7 21.8 34 27.0

0-Z19 O11.0 0 20.9 10 0.2z
351-495 3 11 19.8 11 23.0 36 36.

t14. cta I e h *chool
94O40' S0 42.1 22 43.1 48 43.3
41- 60 201 17.0 18.7 21 20.7
1. 80 139 11.6 I 1.57 16 14.4
1-lo00 345 28.9 13 IS. 24 21.6

6-0 o 8 SS.o 43 69. 3 90 67.7
Over 20 692 45.: 19 0.7 I 43 2.4






47




Table 4 continued






Al! A. A. Hs co lter. Co
egrte n.lacrr nd municartona ar.j
udln Chlrctri c P .r... Adcton Librry Scn

1. Se
We.1 S13 52. S 119 36.7 1 33.1

S1.149 75.0 227 70.7 57 12.6
3l2rrd 382 25.0 94 29.3 al 1. 4

-'o 1,222 79.4 249 76.9 53 76.8
I-J 25- 16.7 64 19.7 14 23.3
More t.n thr e 60 3. 11 3.4 2 Z.9
4 R.ce
-rtll. 1.252 81.4 20 74. 1 2 75.4
BELck 244 16. I 1 9 25.0 16 03.2
O er 39 2. S 3 0.9 1 1.4


Pi-ime 354 23.5 I 24.6 20 29.4
rLether' Oc-u-,;ia.
3- 372 30.3 32 25.2 14 05.0
CLericl 15 1512. 12.1. 11. IL.
Sei-c. 232 15.9 50 19.6 15 26.8
Ltructurl 134 10.9' 33 12.9 10.6
Other 151 12.4 37 14.6 S I.9
.ltred 166 15.2 33 129 3S .9

S. S9S 39.7 142 43.4 23 34.3
ish -,.coo1 502 33.S 109 34.5 25 41.1
.o.. .leUS. 401 Z6. 62 19.5 16 23.1
L Mee r'. Oc cunlon
102 15.3 V 16.4 13.3
Clr lt.1 212 16.1 2 -11.2 1 18.3
S.ri* 16 1 4.1 57 19.9 10 116.3'
MO-56 27 2.1 10 3.5 1 L7
N.o t4 49.1 114 39.9 29 45.3
lttlr.d 43 3.3 2. 1 1 .7

--L-.. 0 .htl 227 17. ? 15 19. I0 17.
351gh .choL 718 55.9 117 35.7 33 56.9
o*.. ol,.g. 345 0 26.4 10 24.1 15 25.1

I1. 50.-d-ri' Nfil0...
s ..s i -..a 65.6 193 4. 42 73.
0 mluo more 466 34.4 94 32.- 1 24

S6g35 1.2 18 -46.1 2a8 3.8
1Sol.H 1Ty 422 34.0 100 39.4 1 34.
GCe. sOe 1u3 14.a 3 134.2 I6 LS.

Soo.00 344 24.3 350.6 12 19.4
.SOOS $11.999 278 19.7 61 21.0 12 19.4
$12.000 -,da.- 341 24.1 54 15.6 12 19.4
C' t 450 31.9 97 29.? 26 41.9

so 2.19 21.0 65 27.4 12 25.1
351-495 111 29.5 10 21.1 16 3'.4
M4. RoI c 6g" *chool
.00 42.5 9 41.6 20 36.4
41- 60 103 17.0 37 15.5 7 12.7
61- 8O 139 11.6 38 16.0 4 7.3
1-1.10 345 25.9 64 Z6.9 24 4&.6

&5 .-2.0 549 5o 551 4 ,7.' 4 57.9
O. 20 692 45.0 I 150 46.3 29 42.1 1







48




Iabh: 4 continued








All A.A. I t the.rt...lc ncr. Agon-
Student Characltritic Pio- Scne Bl. Science e
__ % I -
1. Sex.
-e mle 726 47.2 21 50.0 20 21.0
Ma'l 813 52.8 21 50.0 71 78.0

3~ g 1,149 75.0 30 75.0 78 85.7
Ma5ied 382 25.0 10 25.0 13 14.3

Son 1.222 79.4 30 71.4 77 84.6
1-3 258 16.7 11 26.3 10 11.0
k(or. tlO three 60 3.9 1 2.4 4 4.4
4. R-ce
W it 1,252 81.4 35 83.3 80 87.9
BL.ck 248 16. 1 6 14.3 7 7.7
Other 39 2.5 1 2.4 4 4.4
L stude-tlSt.-
u e 1,151 76.5 32 84.2 69 79.3
3Prt-tie 354 23.5 6 15.2 18 20.7
6. Fther'3 Occ tnton
3-2i 372 30.3 11 36,7 20 27.8
Clercl l 151 12.3 2 6.7 10 13.9
Service 232 18.9 4 13,3 14 19.4
Structural 134 10.9 2 6.7 5 6.9
Othem 151 12.4 3 9.9 11 15.3
Jl.red IA6 15.2 8 26.7 12 16.7

S.' '. school 995 39.7 13 31.0 33 37.1
High school 502 33.5 15 35.7 37 41.6
Some oloUeg 401 268. 14 33.3 19 21.3

EPos......i. 202 1. 3 7 20.0 17 21.3
Clericl 212 16.1 7 20.0 19 2.3
0Sric- 186 14.1 3 8.6 7 9.6
Oth.r 7 1Z. 1 0 0.0 0 0.0
NoW 643 49.1 i. 4 2.8 38 12.1
Ketie.d 43 3.3 3 f.6 2.7



So oLo2ee 340 26.4 82 3L4 17 23.6






8telf 5 fOmily 422 34.0 11 29.7 26 34.2
Gon.nment 183 14.8 8 21.6 12 15.

.500 344 24.3 16 40.0 19 23.
$7.S00 i5 11.9 278 19.7 13 3. S 9 11.1
$12,000 nd ver 341 24.1 3 7.5 28 34.6
Ca't *e imf 450 31.9 8 20.0 25 30.9
13 TT7r TW. S--
29O- 1 20.0 3 9.7 12 2.1
351-495 311 29.8 l2 3m.7 i1 35.0
14. m-.k la high school
5 307T 42.5 6 23.2 29 41.4
41. 60 203 17.0 6 13.1 15 21.4
61- 80 13 11.6 4 15.4 7 10.0
1-120 345 28.9 10 38.4 19 27.2
tt -20 84 55.0 Zl So. 47 51.7
.vr 20 692 45.0 I S.0 44 48.3






49



Table 4 continued





lP ychology.
AUA.A. p blic I. ar. Inter-
rE-ct &nd dltiphl..y
Studtet Chartcteri*Ec 'ra Social Sciences

1. Sex
-tale 726 47.2 84 56.8 187 46.6
S1le 813 52.8 44 43.2 214 53.4
2. Malital Status
s--.- l.149 75.0 119. 81.0 278 69.3
38rrZid 3 28 S. 0 28 19.0 123 30.7

o1.22 79.4 124 83.8 311 77.6
1-3 258 16.7 1T 11.4 60 16.9
3I. thba three 60 3. 1 4.8 241 .
4. Rce
Wite 1.252 81.4 69 66.9 348 16.8
1Bck 248 16.1 47 31.8 49 12.2
Other 39 2.5 1 4.4 4 1.0
r F
-1 -- .151 76.5 i1 76.2 282 72.1
Patt-tim- 354 23.5 3S 23.8 107 27.5
(. Father's Oc;0-,tion
o o 372 30.3 33 28.0 86 28.4
CLical 151 12.3 .6 45 14.
S"lc 232 18.9 35 29.7 48 15.8
Srctrllal 134 10.9 8 6.8 30 9.9
Olher 151 12.4 14 11.8 38 12.5
tLiUrd 118 15.2 1 16.1 56 18.5
1r. ylrln Er' eulion
50i t ib~ i;Lg i5hool 595 39.7 01 42.1 159 40.9
1igh ch..ol 022 33.5 44 30.3 116 25.8
S4-o11 < 401 26.8 40 27l. 114 9.3

S202 S..3 19 15.3 49 4.6
Cl8ii8l 1128 16.1 t1 8.1 62 18.
0.rrte 166 14.1 14 11.1 16 13.7
OlCte 27 2.1 1 0.8 5 1.4
24 648 49.1 74 9. 7 164 4 8.
r iTd 43 3.3 6 48 10 3.0
S. ot4e,5e'. Idcltl
I-" t-.. ad school 227n 17.7 2S 21.2 66 20.1
llb *tch.ool 718 55.9 63 53.4 166 50.6
Son coll.lg 1m4 26.4 1s I5.4 96 29.3

Ut. 1ond-! 71 tialea93
...2 aa .io.. I 808 65.6 91 68.9 223 64.5
10 il 466 34.4 41 31,1 123 35.5

.4 18 635 S1.2 s8 3.7 161 51.1
e.LU a.d Umily 422 34.0 34 35.2 107 34.0
orjrel 183 14.8 12 11. I 47 14.9
2L lrP..lcv i.co,,e
So 3..,,O44 .14.3 47 35. .5 86.8
-$7.s500 11.95q 278 19.7 11 16.0 79 21.5
$12.000 a.d o..t 341 24.1 25 19.1 88 23.9
C-a't .L m.c 4a530 319. 38 W 2.0 142 38.6

285 219 21.0 27 29.1 42 17.5
331-495 311 29.8 26 28.0 84 34.9
14. k 1 hR'& -ichool
G* 6 42.5 48 44.4 157 47.4
41- 60 203 17.0 17 15.7 55 16.6
61. 0 3 11.6 S 7.4 33 10.0
$1.100 345 28.9 15 32.4 86 26.0
A%8. A.. |
S6-20 48 55.0 I5 7.5 2 1 1 281 3.1
Or 20 692 45.0O t3 42.5l 18 46.8





Source: Central Florida Community College admission applications,

August 1971 to IlMay 1973.









professional, managerial, technical, and structural occupations, and

the mothers tended toward clerical skills. A fairly high percentage

(41. 7%) of these students commuted more than 20 miles a day. There

was an above-average reliance on parents for financial support, and

family incomes were well above average. These students were younger

than average, they scored higher than average on the FTGT, but their

ranks in their high school graduating classes were somewhat below

average.

Home Economics and Education. This area, consisting almost

entirely of education majors, contained a preponderance of female

students (63. 3%), a larger percentage of black students than most areas

(25%), and relatively more married students than other fields. A high

percentage (45.4%) of the students' fathers did not complete high school.

There was an above-average reliance on themselves as a source of

financial support, and family incomes were generally well below

average. Students in this field scored considerably below average on

the FTGT.

Letters, Communications, and Library Sciences. Students in

this area tended to be female (60. 9%) and single (82. 6%). An above-

average percentage (23.2%) of the students were black. Both mothers

and fathers of these students tended more toward service and clerical

occupations and less toward the professional ones. There was a

tendency toward shorter commuting distances among these students. A

high percentage of them (43. 6%) ranked in the upper 20% of their high









school graduating classes, but their grades on'the FTGT were close to

the norm for Associate of Arts students.

Mathematics and Computer Sciences. In this field there was a

tendency for the students to be full time and to have parents who are

engaged in professional, technical,- and managerial occupations. Too,

the parents were more likely to have completed high school, though

there was no strong record of college training. Family incomes for

this group were somewhat low; a higher percentage of the students than

normal derived their financial support from government benefits. Scores

on the FTGT were much higher than the average, and the students

ranked considerably higher in their high school graduating classes than

did the average student.

Physical Sciences, Agriculture, and Biological Sciences. In

these fields the males outnumbered the females almost four to one.

Relatively few (14. 3%) were married, the percentage of blacks in the

program was fairly low (7. 7%), and the students tended to commute

greater distances than did the average student. The mothers of these

students tended to be engaged in professional occupations, but not very

many of them were in the clerical or service fields. Family incomes

seemed considerably higher than normal. The students, who as a

group were a little older than the average student, scored well above

average on the FTGT. However, their high school graduating class

rankings were about average.









Psychology, Public Affairs, and Social Sciences. These fields

of study were characterized by a high percentage (81%) of single students

and a high percentage (31. 8%) of black students. There was a tendency

for the fathers of these students to be engaged in service occupations

and for a large percentage (60%) of the mothers to have no occupation.

The parents' educational backgrounds were about average, but family

incomes were below average. A relatively high percentage (29. 1%) of

the students scored less than 150 on the FTGT.

Interdisciplinary. This group included all of those students who

intended to obtain the Associate of Arts degree but were not prepared to

choose, at the time of their admission, a specific major field of study.

As a group they differed in very few respects from the average

Associate of Arts degree student. A relatively high percentage (30. 7%)

of them were married. The reported family incomes were slightly

above average, but almost 40% of these students were unable to estimate

their family income. As a group their scores on the FTGT were

somewhat below average.

Associate of Science degree programs

Agriculture. The students in this program differed from students

in other,Associate of Science programs on virtually every count. All

were white, almost 90% were full time, and they were younger than was

the average student. Whereas their mothers tended toward clerical

occupations, the fathers (37.5% of them) were engaged in agriculture.

The educational backgrounds of the parents were not very strong, only









one of the 46 parents having graduated from a four-year college. These

students tended to rely heavily on their parents for financial support. A

high percentage (53. 4%) of the students scored less than 150 on the FTGT.

Health. There was a seven to.three preponderance of females in

this field. About 90% of the students were white, 37% were married,

and 83. 5% were full-time students. They tended to be younger than

other Associate of Science students. Their scores on the FTGT were

considerably above average, and their rankings hi their high school

graduating classes were well above average. Family incomes seemed

below average but there was a tendency for these students to rely on

their parents for financial support. A high percentage (40. 2%) of these

students commuted more than 20 miles daily.

Office. In this program area the female students outnumbered

the males three to two. About three-fourths were full time, and the

average age was well below that of the composite Associate of Science

student. A relatively high percentage of the fathers (55. 1%) and of the

mothers (32. 1%) did not complete high school. Commuting distances

were greater for these students and they tended to rely on their parents

for financial support. Their scores on the FTGT were not very high,

with a disproportionate percentage (34. 9%) having scored less than 150

and only 13. 8% having scored over 350. However, these students ranked

higher in their high school graduating classes than did the average

Associate of Science student.








Unclassified Occupational. This group'was characterized by a

high percentage (61%) of married students and by a higher than average

percentage (24%) of black students. Some 95% of these students were

classified as part time. A high percentage (54. 3%) of their fathers did

not complete high school. Only 17. 6% of the students commuted more

than 20 miles daily, and only 15% of them were under 21 years of age.

Not all data on this group of students are complete, especially regarding

family income, scores on the FTGT, and rank in high school graduating

class. Thus, on those factors it would seem inappropriate to make

comparisons or to draw any conclusions.

Technical. Over 95% of these students were male, 87. 5% were

white, and their parents' educational backgrounds were better than

average. A large percentage of them (51. 9%) commuted more than 20

miles daily. On the remaining characteristics this group seemed about

average and in effect epitomized the typical Associate of Science student.

Law Enforcement. These students, one-fourth of whom were

female, varied from the norms in several respects. For instance, the

enrollment consisted primarily of married students (71.4%o) deriving most

of their income from their own employment positions or from government

support programs. Most of the students (88. 3%) were white, and only

18% of them were under 21. The fathers of these students tended more

toward service and structural work, and 25% of them were retired. Some

56% of the fathers did not graduate from high school. The mothers'

educational backgrounds were stronger, however, and 20% of them had







55



Table 5


Characteristics of Students

Enrolled in Specific Associate of Science Programs
1971-73 at Central Florida Community College





AU AS.
DSrree Alricultur* Health%
Sitt Chet.ctr.ltic IP.ce ra.1
___ f T

1L SEI
etma:e 452 46.9 2 8.7 85 70.8
Ale 511 53. I 21 51.3 35 29.2
1. )Marirtl Staus
Snle 4S 50.5 I 78.3 7. 5 63.0
S-tried 476 49.5 S 21.7 44 37.0
$. No. De- .
e 601 62.4 IB 78.3 90 7S.0
1-3 316 32.8 4 17.4 26 21.7
More th.n 3 46 4.8 1 4.3 4 3.3
4. R.-.
-itCe 793 82.4 23 100.0 103 0o.0
S &Bla*ck 156 16.2 6 0.0 .1 9.2
OlUer 13 1.4 0 0.0 3 a.8
.1 0.
S, S,.;..' .
"l -- 348 37.3 IT 89.5 96 83.S
rt-tm 580 62.5 2 0.5 .19 16.5

oe172n 2 5.7 IS.8 26 26.
COriical 64 9.6 0 12.4 II 1.1
S.rIlc 124 18.5 i 6.3 to 20.
Structural so 8.7 I 6.3 11 11.1
Other 129 19.1 I 50.0 16 16.1
d 12 1b.4 1 6.3 I 15.
yhe r' ducati on
S5an h .chool 472 50. 10 43.5 50 43.0
Hi1 School 263 28.2 8 34.8 43 36.1
ColUe.. 198 21.2 21.7 26 21.9
8, Mother. Ocou.-at.oo
"ProtE ot .77 10.3 I 0.3 IS 14.4
Clerical lOS 14.0 S 26.3 18 17.7
Service 106 14.2 1 10.5 12 1L.7
Oh.er 22 2.9 1 5.3 3 Z.9
VW9 393 5Z. 5 10 2.6 52 90.5
eLtUred 46 6.1 0 0.0 3 2.9
9. other's h Ed ucation
L2a thn Ichool 180 24.18 30.0 24 23.5
H18h 8ch-ol 364 50.1 11 59.O 48 47.1
C-u.e 183 25.1 3 13.0 30 29.4

18 Rourd-trip Mile2.e
Le .at oo ,ode 3$41 7 3 12 57.1 55 59.
20 miles r imoxr 212 28.7 9 42.9 37 40.2
It. l10ood.1 Support
& t3I 31.910 2 2. 44 47.3
819 d l4mi 4 220 47.5 3.9 39 41.9
GCov ira-mo 91 141.9 17.IT 10 10.8


7.SII- $.11.9 177 17.4 6 26.1 24 22.4
12.000 ood ov.. lIZ 20.0 6 26.1 21 1 .6
UMbl. to *8.-tr 4339 37.0 7 30.4, 2 2.0.6

Z3. Z~3 92 4. 1" 8 10 211.
351-495 88 23.6 2 3,3 26 30.6
14. Ruk l hlg .choal
-344 3.1 3 1.0 44 43.8
41- 62 124 1,6.0 20.0 16 18.8
61-. 0 106 16 .4 0.0 14 17.9
1.-100 94 14.5 1 35.0 27 26.7

L 029 396 14 60.9 99 .2
S-..0 245 69.46 9 39.1 61 50.8
Ove 20 660 69.4






56



Table 5 continued


All A.S. Unclli lined
P re Officlc Occ..uptionl
% '% IoF %

L male 452 4.9 96 60.0 244 49.7
Ma&l 511 53.1 64 40.0 249 50.3

485 S0.S 116 72.5 193 39.0
lr00ied 476 49.5 44 27.5 302 61.0
1. Mor.t- Pf atut
o3-e 601 62.4 125 80.0 273 53.2
1-3 316 32.8 28 17.5 193 38.9
fl.. lth. 3 46 4.8 4 2.5 29 5.9
4. ILace
7" t 793 1 2.4 111 82.4 386 78.0
92l-k 156 16.2 26 16.4 101 20.4
Olth 13 1.4 2 1.3 8 1.6
S. Student Sats
348 37.5 113 73.9 26 S.4
P*l- im D50 62.5 40 26.1 453 94.6
6. Father a Occupation
rolei 1~o~ 12 25.7 34 21.1 11 26.4
CSoicl 64 9.6 12 9.9 30 9.8
Srctul 58 0 .7 9 7.4 20 6.5
Oslo. 129 19.1 24 19.9 53 17.3
.1t..d US23 18.4 19 .is.T 61 21.8
9. r1.t.er'. Erductip
2elf Bhd iloL472 07 570.6 a6 5.1 2319 4.3
Ih Stool 263 20.Z 40 25.6 110 23.1
Cu.i 191 21.2 3 22.3 108 22.6

Prolf o 10.3 13 9.4 40 11.1
Cl.=lc.l 103 14.0 17 U.S 44 13.4
Ott.. 22 2.9 4 2.9 1 2.1
K .U. 393 SZ.5 7S 57.3 174 40.5
.dU-d 46 6.1 4 9 34 9.

Std0an lcho 180 24.8 42 2 2.2 0 22.6
ool..* 1 m3 2.1 26 19. 100 21. 2
9. mi-tl Md-2 Sl.e..
-5 007 341 3. 64.6 9 5 2 1.4
2o ul. or mo.e. 210 2l.7 12 35.4 63 17.6

I.N 37.6 11 i4.2 619 -.,
1.1 20d Uir 29" 47.5 36 17.1 149 12.1
OCe:*n-ca 91 14.9 24 18.3 22 9.2

i5... li .. 500 114 23.1 43 29.3 73 55.4
7.500 t11.999 177 19.4 26 17.7 8 16.8
102.000 -4 over 182 20.0 26 17.7 101 21.3
0Ubl2. to ..tun0 339 37.2 U 33.4 221 46. 5

12 24.7 1 314.9 7 5I.L
35-495 88 23.6 11 13.81 21 43.

X, LnLi hih -h.bol
o0 i4l-- 344 53.1 5S 4.7 185 66.S
41- 60 104 16.0 28 25.2 31 I0.2
61.- 10 106 6.4 30 22.7 33 11.9
*-10o 94 14. 1 19 1 4.4 29 10.4

L 16-20 295 30.6 93 58.1 73 13.1
0-.- z0 660 67.4 67 4L9 420 14.9






57



Table 5 continued





il A..5. .L
tudlnt Chracterlitle P og mT
Sx 1 % I

emal. 452 446.9 4 4.5 19 24.7
ule. 511 53.1 84 95.5 58 7S.3

-. 455 50.5 61 70.1 22 2a.6
rid 476 49.5 26 2.9 55 7.L4

L r. 601 62.4 61 69.3 31 40.3
1-3 316 32. 25 28.4 40 51.9
Mor than 3 46 4.8 2 2.3 6 7
4, R-ce
-Wite 793 82.4 77 87.5 68 18.3
-lack 1 1 16.2 9. 10.2 9 117
Other 13 1.4 3 2.3 0 S.4
6. tudenOt Sttusa
S348 37.5 63 73.3 33 43.4
Palt-him. u 62.5 3 26.7 43 56.6

o 172 25.7 20 27.0 I f1.
Clri l 64 9.6 4 .4 S 9.4
Sl.e.e 124 18.5 1i 20.3 9 17.o
Strcturos8 8.7 O 13.5 7 13.
Oher 9 129 19.17 23.0 21 Z0.S
Iare.d 123 188.4 a 10.l 13 24.S

1 I~ther's Education
.tha472 50. 2 31.8 39 5 .7
Hg6ch..ol 6263 28.2 41 46.6 21 30.0
CUege S196 21.2 9 21.6 10 14.3
** Mother Occuo 4lon
S.7 10.1 6 8.5 1 2.4
Cle rrt 103 14.0 11 15.5 6 1o.3
Service. 106 14.2 1 7.0 12 20.3
Other 22 2.9 2. 3 15.1
A7Ne 93 2.S 46 64.8 32 34.2
.ared 46 6.1 1 1,4 4 6.8
19. Ranktin h schtlon
L.ss 6 .cil 110 24.1 16 22.9, 1 24.0
|r Cehoil 264 o0.1 40 7.1 28 36.0
5oUg. U)3 25.1 14 2 1 24t.0

$I k 2 ml. S41 71.3 37 48.1 49 73. 1
320 ailU .. a2l 28.7 40 31.9 to 26.9

238 37.6 as 34.2 11 29.3
6.1 wid f-mly a9" 47. 47.9 27 47.4
9o52M4nt 21 14 3 17.11 19 33.3
If ylmtl Incom
21S>.SC 11 24 M23.5 2 30.2 28 37.8
$7.,00 -.11.999 177 19.4 29 22.1 22 29.7
$12,o000 ad o0r 182 2o0.0 2 23.3 a 10.6
2nxb; U t319 37.2 U 2&4.4 1U 21.6
23. fTCT Tois.
92 24.7 II 20.4 17 41.5
351-49 Uas 23.6 U 20.4 5 12.3
14. 3 -t high *ch oa
S4302 344 53.1 33 35.4 34 68.4
41- 60 104 16.0 16 24.6 9 17.
61- 10 106 16.4 LS 13.1 11.4
1-10 94 14.5 11 16.9 1 L.9

96-20 s19 30.6 40 45. 14 14 2
Ovr 2068 668 69.4 48 54.5 63 81.I





Source: Central Florida Community College admission applications,

August 1971 to May 1973.









had some college training as compared with 14% of the fathers. These

students ranked below average in their high school graduating classes,

and their scores on the FTGT were quite low, with 41.5% of them

scoring less than 150.

Faculty Questionnaire Data

During Term III-B, 1974 all faculty were provided with profiles

of the characteristics of the students in their classes. The profiles,

which were in computer printout form, covered the same 15 character-

istics as did the more extensive 1971-1973 study.

The profiles were distributed during the second week of the

term, at which time the instructors were asked to review the data and to

use their own discretion in utilizing the information. They were not

given specific instructions regarding the possible uses of the data in

improving or modifying instruction, though they were informed that they

would be contacted at the end of the term regarding their perceptions of

how the data might be used and how they felt about the adequacy and the

appropriateness of the data.

During the final week of the term each of the 27 faculty members

was asked to complete a questionnaire related to his uses and perceptions

of the data (see Appendix). All 27 faculty members responded, most of

them by completing the questionnaire, and the remainder by answering

the various questions in person or by telephone. As a matter of interest,

each faculty member had also been provided with characteristics profiles

of the student groups covered by the 1971-1973 survey in order that those.








profiles might be compared with the ones covering the classes currently

being taught.

Analysis of Data

The results of the questionnaires related to the student character-

istics profiles covering all of the classes being taught during Term III-B,

1974 are summarized below.

Question Number One: Did you understand the data? Only one

of the 27 respondents indicated he had some difficulty in understanding the

data; the other 26 experienced no difficulty.

Question Number Two: Would you have liked someone to explain

the data to you? Of the 27 faculty members, four indicated that they

would have preferred to have someone explain the data to them; the

remaining 23 instructors did not indicate any such preference.

Question Number Three: What did you do with the profile data

after you received it? A variety of answers was received with respect

to this question, with only one faculty member not providing any specific

information. The replies can be summarized in the following manner:

looked over the data 7

studied the data 7

compared the profiles with prior
assumptions regarding the group 5

reviewed the data and filed it. 4

reviewed the profiles and revised
instructional strategy 1

reviewed the data and shared the
information with the class 1








did not have time to review the
profiles 1

Question Number Four: As a result of having received the data,

have you modified your teaching techniques in any way? Four faculty

members replied in the affirmative, and the other 23 stated that they

had not yet made any changes in their teaching techniques. However,

there were several comments related to this question, e.g.,

I'm already treating my students as individuals.

I attempt to elicit specific responses from my
students.

I feel that my students need more individual
attention, and I'm attempting to provide it.

The class profiles have led me to obtain additional
data from my students' personnel records.

Question Number Five: As a result of having received the data,

are you considering making any changes in your teaching methods? The

responses to this question can be summarized as follows:

Yes. 12

No. 12

Possibly. 1

Not immediately 1

No comment. 1

Total 27

Question Number Six: Do the data suggest a need for any of the

following instructional changes? Of the respondents, 18 faculty members

perceived at least one instructional change which seemed warranted by








the student characteristics profiles of their classes, with some faculty

suggesting several needed changes. Their basic responses can be

summarized as follows:

Number
in favor of
Type of Instructional Change the Change

a) More help for individual students 14

b) Self-paced instruction, with each student
progressing at his own pace 8

c) Increased tutoring 12

d) More laboratory time 8

e) The use of more audio-visuals 8

f) Taped lectures for review purposes 7

g) More individual study projects 6

h) Increased class discussion 5

i) Less class discussion 1

j) Overall, a greater variety of
instructional methods 15

Question Number Seven: Other than in teaching methodology, do

the data suggest any other desirable changes in the relationship between

you and your students? There were eight faculty members who responded

affirmatively to this question, and their responses were accompanied by

the following statements:

I recognize the need for improved relations with my
students in order to take certain characteristics into account.

There is a need for a greater awareness of students'
frustrations as well as their personal problems.








The data have identified, to some extent, students
who need special help and understanding.

The profiles indicate that we need to encourage more
students to come in for personal help.

There seems to be a need for improved instructor
rapport with students.

There is a strong need for classes smaller than the
70 and 80 student classes I'm now teaching.

Question Number Eight: Were there any data you did not find

particularly useful? Eleven of the respondents answered "no" to this

question. The remaining 16 answered "yes" and cited one or more

characteristics which they did not feel were particularly helpful. More

than anything else, they indicated that the profiles might well have

excluded characteristics which could easily be observed by faculty, such

as race and sex. Other characteristics, such as marital status, source

of income, and parents' occupations, were cited by faculty as not

contributing to a better understanding of students' backgrounds. Five

faculty members were unable to perceive how any of the profile character-

istics could be of use to them.

Question Number Nine: Were there additional data you would like

to see included in these profiles? Thirteen faculty members made

suggestions for the inclusion of additional data in future profiles. These

suggestions can be summarized as follows:

Number of
Suggestion Respondents

1) That profiles of individual students
be provided 6








Number of
Suggestion Respondents

2) That the data include the student's
cumulative grade point average 3

3) That the profiles also include data on
courses already taken by the student in
particular fields,.along with the grades
received in those courses 2

4) That there be shown whatever relationship
seems to exist between the student's grades
and his overall characteristics profile 1

5) That these profiles be supplemented by the
student's showing on various tests
administered separately by the college's
counseling department 1

Total 13

Question Number Ten: Would you like to continue to receive

information of this type at the beginning of each term? Nineteen of the

respondents (70. 3% of them) indicated that they would like to continue

'receiving student characteristics profiles at the beginning of each term.















CHAPTER III
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF DATA


Characteristics data were not complete for each of the 2, 905

students admitted to the college from 1971 to 1973. In all cases, how-

ever, a substantial percentage of the student data was available for

analysis, and on two characteristics the data were complete for the

entire sample. Table 6 demonstrates this.

With respect to data on all classes taught during Term III-B,

1974, responses were obtained from all faculty who taught during that

term. The student characteristics data on their classes were somewhat

more complete than were the data on the original 1971-1973 survey, with

data on more recent admissions to the college having reflected some

improvement in the college's data collection procedures. There is little

question, however, that complete data are virtually impossible to

obtain when a 12-page admission application is utilized. Students some-

times either neglect to answer all of the questions provided on the

application form, or in some cases openly refuse to divulge more than

basic information regarding their backgrounds.

In Chapter IIthe characteristics of all 2, 905 students included in

the original sample were reviewed, as were the characteristics of the

Associate of Arts and the Associate of Science students as separate

groups. Also, the characteristics of the students enrolled in the 16

64








Table 6

Completeness of Characteristics Data for Students Entering
Central Florida Community College, August 1971 to May 1973
(N = 2,905)



Student Characteristic % Available Data


Sex 99.8

Marital Status 99.0

Number of Dependents 100.0

Race 99.9

Student Status 97.1

Father's Occupation 74.4

Father's Education 96.3

Mother's Occupation 81.0

Mother's Education 79.2

Round-trip Mileage 83. 6

Primary Source of Financial Support 72.3

Family Income 92.4

FTGT Total Scores 55. 6

High School Graduating Class Rank 63.4

Age 100.0








programs and fields of study were compared, in each case with either

the Associate of Arts or the Associate of Science broad categories,

whichever was appropriate.

In summarizing the characteristics of the Associate of Arts

students, it may be said that they tended to be single, white, and

averaged 23 years of age. They tended to rely on their parents for

financial support and lived farther from the campus than did the

typical Associate of Science student. They tended to be full-time

students, and greater percentages of them scored above 350 on the

FTGT and ranked in the upper 40% in their high school graduating

classes than did their Associate of Science counterparts. Also, their

parents' educational backgrounds were stronger, both in terms of

having graduated from high school and in having attended college. Both

their fathers and their mothers were more likely to be employed in a

professional, technical, or managerial capacity.

The Associate of Science students, on the other hand, tended to

be white, averaged about 26 years of age, and were as likely as not to

be married. They tended to be self-supporting, had more dependents,

and lived closer to the campus than did the Associate of Arts students.

They were more likely to be part-time students, and greater percentages

of them not only scored below 150 on the FTGT but also ranked in the

lower 60% of their high school graduating classes than did the Associate

of Arts students. Their parents were not so likely to have graduated from

high school or attended college as were parents of their Associate of Arts









counterparts. The Associate of Science students' fathers were more

likely to be employed in farming or machine work, and both their

mothers and their fathers were less likely to be employed in a profes-

sional, technical, or managerial capacity.

Discussion and Analysis of Data on Associate of Arts
and Associate of Science Students, by Characteristics

By presenting the 2, 905 student sample data on the basis of

their distribution on a program-by-program basis within each character-

istic, it is possible to show in a somewhat different light the tendencies

of the Central Florida Community College students to have enrolled in

the various program areas. For instance, Table 7 reflects the enroll-

ment of the Associate of Arts students on the basis of their sex.

Although the overall distribution by sex was only slightly biased

in favor of male students, there were three Associate of Arts programs

in which the enrollment was predominantly male, i. e., Business and

Management; Architecture and Engineering; and Physical Science,

Agriculture, and Biological Science (Table 7). On the other hand,

female students tended to enroll to the greatest extent in such programs

as Home Economics and Education; Letters, Communications, and

Library Science; Psychology, Public Affairs, and Social Sciences; Fine

Arts and Foreign Languages; and the Health programs (pre-medical,

pre-dental, etc.). These enrollment tendencies may reflect as much

as anything else the employment opportunities available to the sexes

within specific disciplinary areas, and to a certain extent traditional









Table 7

Distribution by Sex of Students Enrolled in Associate of Arts Programs
at Central Florida Community College, August 1971 to May 1973




Sex

Program Female Male



Business and Management 20.2 79.8

Architecture and Engineering 24.8 75. 2

Fine Arts and Foreign Languages 56.5 43.5

Health 54.9 45.1

SHome Economics and Education 63.3 36.7

Letters, Communications, and Library Sciences 60.9 39.1

Mathematics and Computer Science 50.0 50.0

Physical Science, Agriculture, and
Biological Science 22.0 78.0

Psychology, Public Affairs, and Social Science 56.8 43.2

Interdisciplinary 46.6 53.4

All Associate of Arts Programs 47.2 52.8

All Programs 47.0 53.0








enrollment or non-enrollment, by sex, in various study fields.

Within the Associate of Science program areas the distribution

of students by sex also reflects some rather wide variances, as shown

in Table 8.

It is noteworthy that in two of the Associate of Science program

areas the enrollment was primarily female, i. e., Health (70. 8%) and

Office (60%), while the enrollment tended to be primarily male in the

Agriculture (91. 3%), Technical (95. 5%), and Law Enforcement (75. 3%)

programs. Here again both employment opportunities and tradition

probably played significant roles in the decisions of the female and male

students, while the nature of the work in agriculture and law enforce-

ment also may have been a factor. On the other hand, although not all

technical occupations are closed to women, the college has experienced

little success in attracting female students to the programs covered by

this classification. It is interesting that about one-fourth of the law

enforcement students were females. Perhaps that career field is

gradually overcoming some of the traditional taboos which previously

had confined its enrollment almost entirely to male students.

With respect to the marital status of the students, Table 9

shows the status of those enrolled in the various Associate of Arts

programs.

Utilizing as a base point the fact that 75% of all Associate of Arts

students are single and 25% are married, the variances from program

to program are not so great as they are on several other factors. It does








Table 8

Distribution by Sex of Students Enrolled in Associate of Science
Programs at Central Florida Community College
August 1971 to May 1973





Sex


Program Female Male



Agriculture 8.7 91.3

Health 70.8 29.2

Office 60.0 40.0

Unclassified Occupational 49.7 50. 3

Technical 4.5 95.5

Law Enforcement 24.7 75. 7

-All Associate of Science Programs 46.9 53.1

All Programs 47.0 53.0









Table 9

Marital Status of Students Enrolled in Associate of Arts Programs
at Central Florida Community College, August 1971 to May 1973





Marital Status


Program Single Married



Business and Management 74. 1 25.9

Architecture and Engineering 74. 3 25. 7

Fine Arts and Foreign Languages 82. 3 17. 7

Health 83.5 16.5

Home Economics and Education 70.7 29.3

Letters, Communications, and Library Sciences 82.6 17.4

Mathematics and Computer Science 75.0 25.0

Physical Science, Agriculture, and
Biological Science 85.7 14. 3

Psychology, Public Affairs, and Social Science 81.0 19.0

Interdisciplinary 69.3 30.7

All Associate of Arts Programs 75.0 25.0

All Programs 65.0 35.0









appear that the concentration of married students tends toward such

areas as Home Economics and Education (29. 3%) and Interdisciplinary

(30. 7%), while single students tend rather strongly to have enrolled in

the Fine Arts (82.3%); Health (83.5%); Letters, Communications, and

Library Sciences (82. 6%); Physical Science, Agriculture, and Biological

Science (85. 7%); and Psychology, Public Affairs, and Social Science

(81%). Students in the Home Economics and Education as well as the

Interdisciplinary fields tend to be somewhat older than other students,

and it may be that in this case age is an explanation of the larger number

of married students.

The marital status of the students enrolled in the Associate of

Science programs is shown in Table 10.

As a group, the Associate of Science programs have attracted

more married students and students who were older than were the

Associate of Arts students. However, even among the Associate of

Science programs there were wide variances in marital status. Those

in Law Enforcement (71.4%) and the Unclassified Occupational group

(61%) showed a strong tendency toward being married, while those in

Agriculture (78. 3%), Office (72. 5%), Technical (70. 1%), and Health

(63%) tended to be single. Those in both the Law Enforcement and

Unclassified Occupational programs tended to be much older than other

students, and here again the students' marital status appears to be a

function of age.

Recently colleges and universities have become quite concerned









Table 10

Marital Status of Students Enrolled in Associate of Science Programs
at Central Florida Community College, August 1971 to May 1973





Marital Status


Program Single Married



Agriculture 78.3 21. 7

Health 63.0 37.0

Office 72.5 27.5

Unclassified Occupational 39.0 61.0

Technical 70.1 29.9

Law Enforcement 28.6 71.4

All Associate of Science Programs 50.5 49.5

All Programs 65.0 35.0








about their ability to attract minority groups, not only to the institution,

but also to specific programs. Inasmuch as blacks comprise about 25%

of the total population of the primary area served by the college, it is

interesting to note that only 16.6% of the student body is classified as

black. Table 11 shows the racial distribution of students within the

Associate of Arts program areas.

The percentage of black students enrolled in some programs was

comparatively high, such as 31. 8% in Psychology, Public Affairs, and

Social Sciences, 25% in Home Economics and Education, and 23.2% in

Letters, Communications, and Library Sciences. In other programs,

however, the percentage of black students was low, with only 6. 8%

enrolled in Health, 6. 9% in Architecture and Engineering, and 7. 7% in.

Physical Science, Agriculture, and Biological Science.

As indicated in Table 12, there are also large variances in

percentages of black students in Associate of Science programs, with

the percentage ranging from 20.4%0 in the Unclassified Occupational

program down to none in the Agriculture program. The tendency of

black students to prefer certain programs and to avoid other programs

may be due to such factors as the availability of employment for blacks

in certain fields and not in others; the training and education of blacks

prior to their college experiences; and the family backgrounds and

expectations of blacks insofar as certain occupational or professional

fields are concerned.

As noted by Sewell and Shah (32) in their 1968 study of Wisconsin









Table 11

Racial Distribution of Students Enrolled in Associate of Arts Programs
at Central Florida Community College, August 1971 to May 1973





Race


Program White Black Other



Business and Management 85. 1 11. 3 3.6

Architecture and Engineering 79.2 6.9 13.9

Fine Arts and Foreign Languages 85.5 11.3 3.2

Health 91.7 6.8 1.5

Home Economics and Education 74. 1 25. 0 0. 9

Letters, Communications,
and Library Sciences 75.4 23.2 1.4

Mathematics and Computer Science 83.3 14.3 2.4

Physical Science, Agriculture,
and Biological Science 87.9 7.7 4.4

Psychology, Public Affairs,
and Social Science 66.9 31.8 1.4

Interdisciplinary 86.8 12.2 1.0

All Associate of Arts Programs 81.4 16. 1 2. 5

All Programs 81.2 16.6 2.2








Table 12

Racial Distribution of Students Enrolled in Associate of Science
Programs at Central Florida Community College
August 1971 to May 1973





Race


Program White Black Other



Agriculture 100.0 0.0 0.0

Health 90.0 9.2 0.8

Office 82.4 16.4 1.3

Unclassified Occupational 78.0 20.4 1.6

Technical 87.5 10.2 2.3

Law Enforcement 88.3 11.7 0.0

'All Associate of Science Programs 82.4 16.2 1.3

All Programs 81.2 16.6 2.2








students, the child's actual college attendance seems to be influenced by

the educational attainment of his parents, with the attainment of one

parent being no more important than that of the other. As indicated by

the data shown in Table 13, nearly 40% of the fathers of Associate of

Arts students had not completed high school. Among the Associate of

Arts programs, however, there were some variances in this respect,

with 4 4% of the fathers of Home Economics and Education students not

having completed high school, and only 31% of the fathers of

Mathematics and Computer Science students not having completed high

school. On the other hand, having attended college were 33. 3% of the

fathers of the Mathematics and Computer Science students, but only

19.8% of the fathers of the Home Economics and Education students.

In contrast with these tendencies, there were 50. 6% of the

fathers of Associate of Science students who had not completed high

school, this percentage representing a full 11% differential as

compared with the figure for fathers of Associate of Arts students.

Table 14 reflects the educational levels of the fathers of Associate of

Science students, with variances in that field ranging from a low of

31.8%0 of Technical students' fathers to a high of 55.7%7 of Law Enforce-

ment students' fathers who did not complete high school.

Thus, insofar as the influence of the fathers' educational attain-

ment is concerned, it would appear that students having fathers with

higher educational attainments tended to enroll in Associate of Arts

programs, and students having fathers with lower educational attainments









Table 13

Education of Fathers of Students Enrolled in Associate of Arts Programs
at Central Florida Community College, August 1971 to May 1973





Father' s Education


Less
than
High High
Program School School College



Business and Management 34. 2 36.0 29.8

Architecture and Engineering 34.3 35.4 30.3

Fine Arts and Foreign Languages 37. 1 32.3 30. 6

Health 39.7 30.5 29.8

Home Economics and Education 45.4 34. 8 19.8

Letters, Communications,
and Library Sciences 34. 3 41.8 23.9

Mathematics and Computer Science 31.0 35.7 33. 3

Physical Science, Agriculture,
and Biological Science 37. 1 41.6 22. 3

Psychology, Public Affairs,
and Social Science 42. 1 30. 3 27.6

Interdisciplinary 40.9 29.8 29. 3

All Associate of Arts Programs 39.7 33.5 26.8

All Programs 45. 0 30.9 24. 1









Table 14

Education of Fathers of Students Enrolled in Associate of Science
Programs at Central Florida Community College
August 1971 to May 1973





Father's Education


Less
than
High High
Program School School College



Agriculture 43.5 34.8 21.7

Health 42.0 36.1 21.9

Office 55.1 25.6 19.3

Unclassified Occupational 54.3 23.1 22.6

Technical 31.8 46.6 21.6

Law Enforcement 55.7 30.0 14.3

All Associate of Science Programs 50.6 28.2 21.2

All Programs 45.0 30.9 24.1








tended to enroll in Associate of Science programs. Within those areas

it would be difficult to rank programs in the order of their difficulty,

academically speaking, though it should be noted that such programs as

Mathematics and Computer Science, Architecture and Engineering,

Health, and the Technical programs do have reputations for their

rigorousness of content. All of those programs seem to have attracted

students having fathers with relatively high educational attainments.

The data on the educational backgrounds of students' mothers

yield similar results. As shown in Tables 15 and 16, the mothers of

Associate of Arts students have attained a higher level of education than

have the mothers of Associate of Science students. In both areas the

same programs, i.e., Architecture and Engineering, Mathematics and

Computer Science, Health, and Technical can once again be cited as

having attracted students whose mothers have above-average educational

attainments.

With respect to the students' total scores on the Florida Twelfth

Grade Test (FTGT), an analysis of the Associate of Arts students, as

reflected in Table 17, shows some interesting comparisons. Having

scored particularly high (over 350) on that test were students in such

programs as Mathematics and Computer Science (38. 7%), Health (36.8%),

Architecture and Engineering (35%), and Physical Science, Agriculture,

and Biological Science (35%). On the other hand, having scored less

than 150 on that test were students in such programs as Psychology,

Public Affairs and Social Science (29. 1%), Home Economics and









Table 15

Educational Level of Mothers of Students Enrolled in Associate of Arts
Programs at Central Florida Community College
August 1971 to May 1973





Mother's Education


Less
than
High High
Program School School College



Business and Management 16.7 59.7 23.6

Architecture and Engineering 8.6 61.4 30.0

Fine Arts and Foreign Languages 19.6 55.4 25.0

Health 17.5 56.7 25.8

Home Economics and Education 19.5 55.7 24. 8

Letters, Communications,
and Library Sciences 17.2 56.9 25.9

Mathematics and Computer Science 8. 1 59. 5 32. 4

Physical Science, Agriculture,
and Biological Science 8.3 68. 1 23.6

Psychology, Public Affairs,
and Social Science 21.2 53.4 25.4

Interdisciplinary 20. 1 50.6 29.3

All Associate of Arts Programs 17.7 55.9 26.4

All Programs 21.4 53.4 25.2









Table 16

Educational Level of Mothers of Students Enrolled in Associate of Science
Programs at Central Florida Community College
August 1971 to May 1973





Mother's Education


Less
than
High High
Program School School College



Agriculture 30.0 55.0 15.0

Health 23.5 47.1 29.4

Office 32.1 48.1 19.8

Unclassified Occupational 22. 6 49.2 28.2

.Technical 22.9 57.1 20.0

Law Enforcement 24. 0 56.0 20. 0

All Associate of Science Programs 24.8 50.1 25.1

All Programs 21.4 53.4 25.2









Table 17

FTGT Total Scores of Students Enfolled in Associate of Arts Programs
at Central Florida Community College, August 1971 to May 1973





FTGT Total Scores


Program 0-150 151-350 351-495



Business and Management 20.8 53.1 26.1

Architecture and Engineering 18.3 46.7 35.0

Fine Arts and Foreign Languages 20.9 56.1 23.0

Health 10.2 53.0 36.8

Home Economics and Education 27.4 51.5 21.1

Letters, Communications,
and Library Sciences 25.1 41.5 33.4

Mathematics and Computer Science 9.7 51.6 38.7

Physical Science, Agriculture,
and Biological Science 20.0 45.0 35.0

Psychology, Public Affairs,
and Social Science 29. 1 42.9 28.0

Interdisciplinary 17.5 47.6 34.9

All Associate of Arts Programs 21.0 49.2 29.8

All Programs 22.7 50.6 26.7








Education (27. 4%), and Letters, Communications, and Library Sciences

(25. 1%).

These percentages may be compared with the 29. 8% of all

Associate of Arts students who scored higher than 350 and the 21% of

the Associate of Arts students who scored less than 150 on the test.

In the case of the Associate of Science programs, shown in

Table 18, there also appear to be some fairly wide variances. For

instance, having scored less than 150 on the FTGT were 34. 9% of the

students in the Office program, 41. 5% of those in the Law Enforcement

program, and 53.4% of those in the Agriculture program. Thus Law

Enforcement and Agriculture have attracted students who had tended to

score lower on that test than did the average Associate of Science

student.

Table 19 shows the rank of Associate of Arts program students

'in their high school graduating classes. The data indicate that having

attracted students who had ranked fairly high in their high school

graduating classes were such programs as Architecture and Engineering;

Letters, Communications, and Library Science; Health; Fine Arts; and

the Interdisciplinary group.

The Associate of Science programs, shown in Table 20, indicate

that a fairly high percentage of those students (53. 1%) ranked in the lower

40% of their high school graduating classes, with two programs,

Unclassified Occupational and Law Enforcement, showing about two-thirds

of their students in that category.








Table 18

FTGT Total Scores of Students- Enrolled in Associate of Science
Programs at Central Florida Community College
August 1971 to May 1973





FTGT Total Scores


Program 0-150 151-350 351-495



Agriculture 53.4 33.3 13. 3

Health 11.8 57.6 30.6

Office 34.9 48.7 13.8

Unclassified Occupational 11.0 45.2 43.8

Technical 20.4 59.2 20.4

Law Enforcement 41.5 46.3 12.2

All Associate of Science Programs 24.7 51.7 23.6

All Programs 22.7 50.6 26.7






86


Table 19

Rank in High School Graduating Class of Students Enrolled in Associate
of Arts Programs at Central Florida Community College
August 1971 to May 1973





Rank in High School Graduating Class


Program 0-40 41-60 61-80 81-100



Business and Management 41.9 21. 10.5 25.8

Architecture and
Engineering 32.5 10.0 10.0: 47.5

Fine Arts and Foreign
Languages 43.1 15.7 15.7 25.5

Health 43.3 20.7 14.4 21.6

Home Economics
and Education 41.6 15.5 16.0 26.9

Letters, Communi-
cations and Library
Sciences 36.4 12.7 7.3 43.6

Mathematics and
Computer Science 23.1 23.1 15.4 38.4

Physical Science, Agri-
culture, and
Biological Science 41.4 21.4 10.0 27.2

Psychology, Public
Affairs, and Social
Science 44.4 15.7 7.4 32.4

Interdisciplinary 47.4 16.6 10.0 26.0

All Associate of Arts
Programs 42.5 17.0 11.6 28.9

All Programs 46.2 16.7 13.3 23.8








Table 20

Rank in High School Graduating Class of Students Enrolled in Associate
of Science Programs at Central Florida Community College
August 1971 to May 1973





Rank in High School Graduating Class


Program 0-40 41-60 61-80 81-100



Agriculture 15.0 20.0 30.0 35.0

Health 43.6 15.8 13.9 26.7

Office 41.7 21.2 22.7 14.4

Unclassified Occupational 66.5 11.2 11.9 10.4

Technical 35.4 24.6 23.1 16.9

Law Enforcement 65.4 17.3 15.4 1.9

All Associate of Science
Programs 53.1 16.0 16.4 14.5

All Programs 46.2 16.7 13.3 23.8









Regarding the students' primary sources of financial support,

comparisons of the ten Associate of Arts programs are shown in

Table 21, and comparisons of the Associate of Science programs are

given in Table 22. Included in each table is a column showing the

percentage of students who were single. Slightly more than half of the

Associate of Arts students relied on their parents for financial support,

and generally there appeared to be a strong relationship between those

students' marital status and their sources of financial support.

In the case of the Associate of Science students, the relationship

was equally pronounced, although in the Technical program area, which

consisted almost entirely of males, there appeared to be more than a

normal tendency for them to be self-supporting. Relying on government

support of various kinds were fairly sizeable percentages of the students

in Law Enforcement, Mathematics and Computer Science, and the

various Business programs.

Insofar as the ages of the students were concerned, Table 23

shows those of the Associate of Arts program students, and Table 24

shows the ages of the Associate of Science program students. In the

Associate of Arts area the younger students seemed to be represented

more than proportionally in the Health and Fine Arts and Foreign

Languages fields. Older students seemed to be attracted to such

programs as Architecture and Engineering, and Mathematics and

Computer Science, although for most programs the deviation from the

norm was relatively small.




Table 21


Comparison of Marital Status and Primary Source of Financial
Support of Students Enrolled in Associate of Arts Programs
at Central Florida Community College, August 1971 to May 1973


Primary Source of Financial Support


1 Single Govern-
Program Students Parents Family ment



Business and Management 74.1 47.3 32.4 20.3

Architecture and Engineering 74.3 51.9 34.2 13.9

Fine Arts and Foreign Languages 82.3 58.0 26.0 16.0

Health 83.5 61.2 28.1 10.7

Home Economics and Education 70.7 46.5 39.4 14.2

Letters, Communications, and Library Sciences 82.6 53.8 34.6 11.5

Mathematics and Computer Science 75.0 48.6 29.7 21.6

Physical Science, Agriculture, and Biological Science 85.7 50.0 34.2 15.8

Psychology, Public Affairs, and Social Science 81.0 53.7 35.2 11.1

Interdisciplinary 69.3 51.1 34.0 14.9

Al Associate of Arts Programs 75.0 51.2 34.0 14.8

All Programs 65.0 46.8 38.1 15.1






Table 22

Comparison of Marital Status and Primary Source of Financial
Support of Students Enrolled in Associate of Science Programs
at Central Florida'Community College, August 1971 to May 1973


Primary Source of Financial Support


% Single Govern-
Program Students Parents Family ment



Agriculture 78.3 58.8 23.5 17.6

Health 63.0 47.3 41.9 10.8

Office 72.5 54.2 27.5 18.3

Unclassified Occupational 39.0 28.8 62.1 9.2

Technical 70.1 34.2 47.9 17.8

Law Enforcement 28.6 19.3 47.4 33.3

All Associate of Science Programs 50.5 37.6 47.5 14.9

All Programs 65.0 46.8 38.1 15.1









Table 23

Age of Students Enrolled in Associate of Arts Programs
at Central Florida Community College, August 1971 to May 1973





Age


Program Under 21 21-44 Over 44



Business and Management 52.7 45.6 1.8

Architecture and Engineering 45.6 50.5 4.0

Fine Arts and Foreign Languages 69.3 30.6 0.0

Health 67.7 30.1 2.3

Home Economics and Education 53.7 44.1 2.2

Letters, Communications,
and Library Sciences 57.9 40.6 1.4

"Mathematics and Computer Science 50.0 45.2 4.8

Physical Science, Agriculture,
and Biological Science 51.7 48.4 0.0

Psychology, Public Affairs,
and Social Science 57.5 40.5 2. 0

Interdisciplinary 53.1 43.6 3.2

All Associate of Arts Programs 55.0 42.6 2.3

All Programs 44.7 50.0 5.3




Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID EF867JR9D_0X6DG2 INGEST_TIME 2013-02-14T13:23:56Z PACKAGE AA00013523_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES