Title: Parent participation in the school system
CITATION PDF VIEWER THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00098079/00001
 Material Information
Title: Parent participation in the school system its relationship to parent self-concepts and internal-external locus of control
Physical Description: vii, 96 leaves : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Fuller, Paul Hamilton, 1947-
Publication Date: 1978
Copyright Date: 1978
 Subjects
Subject: Home and school   ( 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 88-95.
Statement of Responsibility: by Paul Hamilton Fuller, IV.
General Note: Typescript.
General Note: Vita.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00098079
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: alephbibnum - 000085693
oclc - 05341566
notis - AAK1046

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:

PDF ( 4 MBs ) ( PDF )


Full Text











PARENT PARTICIPATION IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM:
ITS RELATIONSHIP TO PARENT SELF-CONCEPTS
AND INTERNAL-EXTERNAL LOCUS OF CONTROL









By

PAUL HAMILTON FULLER, IV


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

1978














ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


It is with sincere appreciation and thanks that I

recognize the following people for their significant con-

tribution to my personal and professional growth during my

doctoral program and their vital assistance toward the com-

pletion of this study:

Dr. Phillip A. Clark, Associate Professor of
Educational Administration, Director of
the Center for Community Education

Dr. James I. Wattenbarger, Professor of
Educational Administration, Director of
the Institute of Higher Education

Dr. Robert 0. Stripling, Professor of Counselor
Education

Dr. Michael L. Hanes, Associate Professor of
General Teacher Education

Dr. William Ware, Professor of Foundations in
Education

Dr. Skip Little, Associate Director of the
Center for Community Education

Jo Ann Salter, Linda Moore, and Mary Harrington,
my typists and friends

Many Friends, Fellow Students and Colleagues of
the University of Florida

My Family

I would also like to give grateful thanks to God for

inspiration, strength, love, joy, and faithfulness.















TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

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

ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . v

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . .. 1
The Prob] m . . . . . . . .
Delimitations and Limitations . . . ... 5
Definition of Terms . . .... . . 7

II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . . .. 9
Child cSel -Concepts, Locus
of Control, and Achievement . . . . 9
Parent Self-Concepts/Locus of Control,
and Child Self-Concepts/Locus of Control . .13
Parent Education and Parent Participation . .17
Conclusions . . . ... . . . 30

III. METHODOLOGY . . . ... . . . . . 32
The Sampl e .. . . . . . . . . 32
Data Collection . . . . . . . . 33
Instrumentation . . . . . . . . 34
Data Treatment . . . . . . . . 36

IV. RESULTS .. . . . . . . . 43

V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . .. 64
Summary of the Study . . . . . . . 64
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . 66
Recommendat ions .... . . . . . . . 67

APPENDIX

A. DEPAKTIIEiT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION,
AND WELFARE, OFFICE OF EDUCATION MEMORANDUM 71

B. HOW I SIE MYSELF SCALE . . . . . . 74









Page

C. REPORT ON THE REFACTORING OF THE HISH ... .77

D. SOCIAL REACTION INVENTORY . . . . . 80

E. S.R.I. SCORING INSTRUCTIONS . . . . 84

F. PAC ME.FETTNC/ACTIVITY SIGN-IN SHEET . . .. .85

G. PARENT EDUCATOR WEEKLY REPORT . . . .. .86

H. CLASSROOM VOLUNTEER REPORT FORM . . . .. .87

REFERENCES . . . .... . . . . ... 88

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .. .......... . . 96









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


PARENT PARTICIPATION IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM: ITS RELATIONSHIP
TO PARENT SELF-CONCEPTS AND INTERNAL-EXTERNAL
LOCUS OF CONTROL


By

Paul Hamilton Fuller, IV

June 1978


Chairman: Phillip A. Clark
Major Department: Educational Administration


Literature of educational research supports the existence

of significant relationships among parent self-concepts/

locus of control, child self-concepts/locus of control, and

child achievement. If parent participation in the school

system could be related to parent self-concepts and locus

of control, it would be of interest and significance in the

development and enhancement of the overall educational

and achievement process of that system. It was the purpose

of this study to determine the nature of the relationship

between selected parent participation activities in the

Florida model of Project Follow-Through and parent self-con-

cepts and locus of control.

Persons chosen to participate in this study were those

selected by Project Follow-Through staff and classified as

lower socio-economic members according to Office of Economic

Opportunity Income Poverty Guidelines. Conclusions and









generalizations were therefore restricted to this socio-

economic group.

Parents exhibited positive measures concerning inter-

personal adequacy, teacher-school relationships, and personal

appearance, and negatives attitudes concerning personal com-

petence on the How I See Myself (HISM) self-concept scale

prior to project participation. These same parents exhibited

an internal measure, or a positively perceived degree of con-

trol over one's destiny, on the locus of control instrument.

Social Reaction Inventory (SRI).

Of the four selected parent involvement activities,

project participation was most frequent in the basic project

element of the home visitation and successively less frequent

in the other project activities of classroom volunteering,

Parent Advisory Committee meetings, and Parent Advisory

Committee activities. Measurements of project participation

were limited to measurements of frequency.

The multi-variate analysis of canonical correlation

failed to provide predictors of project participation from

pretest attitudinal factors.

Posttest attitudinal change indicated less positive

responses in the HISM factors of interpersonal adequacy,

personal appearance, and teacher-school, and a more positive

response to the HISM factor of personal competence. Also,

post-SRI scores indicated that participants increased in their

degree of internality. This pre-post change was significant

vi










only for the competence factor of the HISM scale and the

SRI measure of locus of control.

Canonical correlation analyses were again used to

investigate the relationships between the independent variable

set of pretest attitudinal and project participation measures

with a dependent variable set of posttest attitudinal scores.

A strong variability associated with the pretest experience

was indicated, and additional correlations supported the

premise that the participation variables accounted for some

of the posttest attudinal variance. The home visitation

activity was consistently associated with this variance,

and it is the conclusion of this study that parent partici-

pation in the home visitation process, and in this project,

was directly related to positive change in parent self-

concepts and locus of control.














CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION


The growing concern and mandate of state and local

school districts for the increased participation of citizens

in advisory, decision-making, and programmatic activities

is, in part, the outgrowth of a national concern and desire

to make the overall educational endeavor more relevant and

effective. Professional educators and laypersons at all

levels of the educational system are striving to meet the

changing needs and desires of its student clientele.

Colleges and universities are encouraged to have citizen

input and involvement in program development and administra-

tion. Technical, vocational, and secondary schools utilize

to an increasing degree resources within their service

communities to train, advise, and regulate programs and

activities. Elementary schools have become aware of the

necessity, and potential, of increased parent participation

in regular and compensatory instructional activities.

Federal and state governments have also encouraged increased

parent participation through such legislation and programs

as the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 (Title II), the

Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1966 (Title I),

the federally funded project Follow-Through vocational/

technical programs, and state regulations such as the Florida









mandate of 1973 for the establishment of advisory committees

for school boards (Breivogel and Greenwood, 1973). It is

the specific intention of this study to identify and

examine selected elements of parent participation within

the early childhood educational milieu.

Three historical trends are largely responsible
for the recent urgent reactivation of interest
and realization of the importance of involving
parents in early child care programs. Accumu-
lative research data have given impetus to a
growing awareness of the basic and critical
nature of parent involvement for producing healthy
happy, and active child-learners, regardless of
whether those learners are yet in some sort of
more formal child care or schooling system, or in
the primary care of parent and parent surrogates.
1) The first historical stream feeding the
present rushing tide to involve parents stems
from the undisputed failure of almost all inter-
vention programs without such involvement to
sustain the often considerable cognitive gains
demonstrated during the child's participation in
such a program.
2) A second source of data consists in ob-
served cultural and familial differences in
parent-child interactions.
3) The third factor is accumulating positive
evidence of the effectiveness of parent involve-
ment in young children's education in influencing
academic motivation. (Ilonig, 1975, pp. 9-14)

There is little doubt in contemporary thought that

parent and family involvement is, and should become, more

pervasive in child development programs and early education

(Lillie, 1975). Research efforts, such as the work of Gray,

Klaus, Miller, and Forrester (1970), Karnes (1972), and

Levenstein (1970) point out that educational efforts in

day care centers, nurseries, Head Start Centers, and public

schools should be augmented with training programs for the








parents of those children involved. Deutsch (1964) feels

that appropriately organized cognitive stimulation during

the early years can be highly effective in accelerating

the development of intellectual functions. A summary of

the 1976 Gordon and Guinagh longitudinal study indicates

that there are clear, lasting school achievement and per-

formance effects for children who were in the parent education

program with their parents. Several investigations (Casler,

1965; Rheingold, 1961; Sayegh and Dennis, 1965; White,

Castle and Held, 1964) have demonstrated the feasibility of

positively altering early development through introducing

stimulation programs for infants.

Working with the child is therefore not enough. What

is needed is a coordinated effort to identify the ecological

variables of the family and community which need to be

changed for the child's good,as well as for that of the

family and community, and to try to change them. "The

devastating effects of the environment cannot be changed

until the environment itself is changed" (Palmer, 1976, p. 3).

Studies such as Brookover, Thomas, and Fatterson (1964);

Combs (1964); Fink (1962); Shaw and Alves (1963); Shaw,

Edson, and Bell (1960); Wattenburg and Clifford (1966) and

others (to be further discussed later in this study) clearly

indicate that child achievement is significantly related

to child self-concept and locus of control. Additionally,

research by Combs and Spoer (1963), Rogers (1958), Battle

and Rotter (1963), Crandall, Katkovsky, and Crandall (1965)









and many more indicatesthat child self-concepts and locus

of control are significantly related to those same measures

in parents and "significant others."

It would, therefore, be extremely important to identify

specific activities and experiences which could be signif-

icantly related to positive changes in parent self-concept

and locus of control, and thereby, related to child self-

concept, locus of control, and ultimately, child achieve-

ment.


The Problem


The purpose of this study is to determine the nature

of the relationship between selected types of lower socio-

economic parent participation in school activities and

parent self-concepts and internal-external locus of control.

This study will specifically address the following questions:

1. What is the nature of the measured self-

concept and locus of control of lower socio-

economic parents prior to their participation

in this study?

2. Do lower socio-economic parents exhibit nega-

tive measures on each of four factors of a

self-concept scale?

3. Do lower socio-economic parents exhibit an

external measure on a locus of control scale?

What is the nature of parent participation in

the following four selected activities:









1) Policy Advisory Committee Meetings,

2) Policy Advisory Committee Activities,

3) Classroom Volunteering, and 4) Home

Visitations?

5. Will parent participation be most frequent

in the basic program element of Home Visits

and become successively less frequent in

Parent Advisory Committee Activities, Parent

Advisory Committee Meetings, and least frequent

in Classroom Volunteering?

6. What factors of parent self-concept and

measure of internal-external locus of con-

trol can individually and in combination pre-

dict the type and/or frequency of parent

participation in the four selected participa-

tion activities?

7. What is the nature of the pre/post change in

measures of self-concept and locus of control

after participation in this study?

8. What is the nature of the relationship between

the four selected parent participation activities

and pre/post change in measures of self-

concept and locus of control?


Delimitations and Limitations


The following delimitations are basic to this investi-

gation:









1. The primary source of data for this study

will be the recorded participation of an

estimated sample (n) of 180 parents in

Richmond, Virginia, newly enrolled in the

Florida Model of Project Follow-Through.

2. Parent participation measures will be selected

from programmed activities of the Florida

Model of Project Follow-Through.

3. Self-concept and internal-external locus of

control measures are self-reported and

administered by local (Richmond) project

personal..

4. The How I See Myself (HISM) Scale is assumed

to measure parent self-concepts, and the Social

Reaction Inventory (SRI) is assumed to measure

parent internal-external locus of control.

5. Persons chosen to participate in this study

are those selected by Project Follow-Through

staff and classified as lower socio-economic

members according to Office of Economic

Opportunity (OE0) Income Poverty Guidelines

(See Appendix A).

The following limitations are recognized:

1. The self report nature of the HISM and SRI

may not accurately reflect the real behavior

and beliefs of the participating parents.

Reactive and testing threats to validity may

occur.









2. Data collection is the responsibility of

the Richmond project personnel with the

Florida Model Sponsor providing consultative

and evaluative services.

3. Data will be collected from persons in the

state of Virginia. Therefore, generalizations

may be restricted to similar socio-economic

members in the Richmond school district and

in other school districts with a comparable

socio-economic mix.


Definition of Terms


Policy Advisory Committee (FAC). An organization of Follow-

Through parents authorized to take a cooperative role in

program decision-making. Representatives of other groups

and the Follow-Through staff may, with PAC approval,

participate. The PAC elects its own officers, makes its

own meeting plans, has its own funds, plans how to use

these funds, organizes its own activities, and makes its own

rules.

Policy Advisory Committee Meetings and Activities. PAC

meetings will be defined as those planning, budgeting, and

decision-making sessions authorized and conducted by the

PAC. All other sponsored activities will be distinguished

as PAC Activities.

Home Visitation. Two adults, usually mothers from low-

income backgrounds, are trained to work in the classroom









with the teacher is a team. These adults, called "parent

educators," also visit the homes of the children in the

classroom weekly in order to teach an enrichment type

learning activity called a "task" to the child's mother,

who later teaches it to the child.

Classroom Volunteering. Parents are encouraged to partici-

pate in the classroom as parent volunteers by the parent

educator during home visits, as well as by the PAC, the

classroom teacher, and other program personnel. Whenever

possible, parent volunteers are involved in the actual

classroom instructional process. Teachers, parent educators,

and parent volunteers each take their turn at the clerical,

housekeeping, and other non-instructional activities which

must occur within the classroom.

Self-concept. "Those perceptions, beliefs, feelings, at-

titudes, and values which the individual views as describing

himself" (Perkins, 1958, p. 221). A more detailed descrip-

tion of this measure will be given in the Instrumentation

section oF this study.

Internal-External Locus of Control. Locus of control

refers to the disposition to perceive one's reinforcements

as consequences of one's own behavior or as due to extrinsic

factors; those who believe that they exercise some control

over their destinies are considered to be internally con-

trolled. Externals believe that their reinforcements are

controlled by luck, chance, fate, or powerful others

(Rotter, 1966).














CHAPTER II

rI:VTiH OF THE LITERATURE


The major Iopic under investigation in this study is

parent participation in the school system and its relation-

ship to parent self-concepts and locus of control measures.

This relationship becomes a significant link in the educa-

tional process when associated with two previously researched

relationships in this process: 1) child self concepts/

locus of control, and child achievement, and 2) parent

self-concepts/locus of control, child self-concepts/locus

of control.

This review will cite related research which documents

these two significant relationships and then describe parent

participation/parent education programs, characteristics,

goals and activities.


Child Sclf-Concepts, Locus of Control, and Achievement


Academic achievement in the educational process is the

subject of much research and in the opinion of most is the

complex product of many variables. Sex, race, and socio-

economic status among other characteristics of the student

clientele as well as parental-environmental influence,

teachers, school, and the curriculum are integrally involved

in determining the rate and extent of academic achievement.









One of the subsets of this very complex system of deter-

mining factors is that of the self-concept and locus of

control. Research has suggested the importance of the role

of the self-concept, and the closely related concept of

locus of control, with achievement in all areas of life.

Piaget and Inhelder (1965) called the earliest self an

"undifferentiated absolute" where there are no boundaries;

neither between one's body and other objects nor between

reality and fantasy. "The self is more than a possession,

it is the center of the individual's universe of experience

and is the criteria against which the world is measured"

(Purkey, 1967, p. 4). The self-concept, then, moves with

experience to bring greater definition to this earliest

"undifferentiated absolute." It becomes a "hypothetical

construct devised to explain the continuing effect of past

experience on present behavior" (Llabre, 1977, p. 1) and

includes "those perceptions, beliefs, feelings, attitudes,

and values which the individual views as describing himself"

(Perkins, 1958, p. 221). As an attitude, the self-concept

involves three components: cognitive, affective, and

behavioral (Gocdman, 1972) and is considered an important

factor both in guiding a person's immediate behavior and

in the later development of his personality (Combs and

Snygg, 1959).

As postulated by Arthur Combs and Spoer (1963), Carl

Rogers (1958), Purkey (1967), and others, the self has

numerous properties, some of which are these:










The self develops out of the ijvididual's
interaction and communication with his
environment; it is a social product.
The individual's perceptions of himself and
his environment will determine his behavior.
SThe individual's continuous struggle to
maintain and enhance the perceived self is
the basic motive for all behavior; thus,
people are always motivated.
The self strives for consistency and
behaves in ways which are consistent
with itself; self-concepts are followed in
a compulsive manner.
SLearnini, is more rapid if it is perceived
by the learner as related to positive
aspects of self.
The self determines what is perceived and the
closer the experience to self, the greater
its eflf ct.
The self can be changed through school
experiences.

Understanding these properties of the self it becomes

clear, then, why the self-concept is so significantly

related to academic achievement and is confirmed in research

studies by Allport (1936), Davidson and Lang (1960), Gough

(1955), and Hartshore and May (1930). Research by

Wattenburg and Clifford in 1966 clearly indicates that

measures of self-concept and ratings of ego-strength made

at the beginningp of kindergarten are more predictive of

reading achievement two-and-one-half years later than are

measures of intelligence. This study indicates that

self attitucdes stand in a causal relationship to later

achievement and this effect is long-lasting. Shaw, Edson,

and Bell (1960) found that male achievers feel relatively

more positive about themselves than do male underachievers.

Fink (1962) concluded that there is a significant relation-

ship between self-concept and academic underachievement, and









that this relationship appears stronger in boys than in

girls. Shaw and Alves (1963) confirmed Shaw's 1960 study

and added that male underachievers were less accepting of

self and attributed a similar lack of self-acceptance to

their peers. There also appeared a difference in the

general perceptual mode between males and females. Combs

in 1964 contrasted underachievers and achievers and found

that they "saw themselves as: less adequate and less ac-

ceptable to others; saw peers and adults as less acceptable;

showed less effective approach to problems, and less freedom

and adequacy of emotional expression" (p. 48). Brookover,

Thomas, and Patterson (1964) found a significant and positive

correlation between self-concept and performance in the

academic role, specific self-concepts of ability related

to specific academic areas, and, finally, that the self-concept

was significantly and positively correlated with perceived

evaluation of Lhe student by other significant people.

Additionally, Bilker (1970), Lefcourt and Ladwig (1965),

and Battle (1962) found that Negroes were significantly

more external in their control expectancies than Caucasians,

and that this degree of externality was related to academic

underachievement.

Research clearly indicates that self-concept is a

major factor in the academic achievement of the child.

Further, it is theoretically clear that the self-concept of

the child is related to those of his mother and father,










teacher, and significant others. Research confirms this

theoretical assumption.


Parent Self-Concepts/Locus of Control, and Child
Scl -Concepts/Locus of Control


During the early developmental years a child is com-

pletely dependent upon the love and care of those responsible

for him. The nature of this love and care has an over-

whelming influence on the way the infant sees himself and

the world (Purkey, 1967). If the experiences with important

people in his life are good, then the child can begin to

grow and develop to his fullest potential. Love is facilitated,

and intelligence is increased by exposure to an enriched

and varied perceptual environment. Loretan (1966) felt

that any of the early years spent in a poor environment

are almost irretrievable. For good or bad, the child is

molded by the behavior of the significant people in his

life.

Sigel (1964) stated that one of the reasons why child-

ren from disadvantaged homes have difficulty in kindergarten

and first grade is that they have not had appropriate stimu-

lation during the early years. Lewis (1963) stresses the

significance of the first three years of life in the future

cognitive development of the child, and states that the

process of the growth of meaning during the second year of

life is a complex interaction of cognitive and affective

factors. "Any behavior of significant people that causes









a young child to think ill of himself, to feel inadequate,

incapable, unworthy, unwanted, unloved, unable is crippling

to the self" (Purkey, 1967, p. 7). Significantly, Grant

(1967) found that the transmission of self-concept is largely

a one-way process from adults to children.

Moss arid Kagan (1964) reporting on the Fels Research

Institute Longitudinal Study which followed 36 males and 35

females from birth to adulthood found that maternal treatment

from birth to three years of age was generally a better pre-

dictor of child and adult intellectual status than was maternal

treatment of the child during subsequent periods of life.

This was based upon Stanford Binet testing, observations,

and interviews. Less, Shipman, Brophy, arid Baer (1968) found

that parent conveyance of positive attitudes toward educa-

tion and school and realistic expectations for the child's

behavior were significant predictors of the child's performance.

Bradshaw (1968) looked at several factors of maternal behavior

and infant performance in environmentally disadvantaged homes.

Such factors as maternal verbalizations, maternal punish-

ment and discipline, infant performances on speech and

hearing, family density, intelligence, housing, paternal/

maternal relationships, and nutrition were analyzed. Results

indicated a cause/effect relationship but were not precise

or specific. Other investigations in the area of intel-

lectual stimulation of infants from environmentally deprived

situations have demonstrated gains for the experimental

groups on measures of intellectual functioning associated










with increased levels of stimulation (Klaus and Gray, 1965;

Kittrell, 1968; Gordon, 1969). Deutsch (1964), Rheingold

(1961), Sayegh and Dennis (1965), Casler (1965), and White,

Castle and Held (1964) have each studied the possibility of

positively changing early development through stimulation

programs. However, the nature of the experiences which

initiate adaptation and stimulation is not fully understood.

Weschler (1971) hypothesized that one way to improve

the self-acceptance of an underachieving child might be to

improve the mother's attitude toward the child. Mothers of

underachievers underwent group counseling, and later testing

indicated that boys achieved an increased self-acceptance

and a sustained academic improvement. Achievement was

measured by the C'ilifornia Test of Mental Maturity, while

self-concept was measured by five sorts of the Catherall-

Reece, Ipsative, True-Ideal, Q-sort Upper Elementary Test.

Underachieving bovs whose mothers did not undergo counseling

did not improve on either measure.

Another important variable demonstrated by Bayley

and Schaeffer (1960) and Samuels (1969) indicate that many

personality and behavioral traits of the mother tend to be

functions of the mother's socio-economic class. Those

studies indicate that socio-economic status is a factor in

the transmission of self-concept from mother to child.

Battle and Rotter (1963) found that low socio-economic class









(determined by lather's or mother's occupation) was

related to a feeling of powerlessness externalityy). Dean

(1961) reports similar findings. Franklin (1963), Crandall

et al. (1965) and Strodtbeck (1958) found that the lower

the socio-economic class of an individual, the more likely

he will be external. The importance of this relationship

to the transmission of self-concept variables is presented

in a study by Phares (1965). Phares indicates that internally

oriented people are able to induce significantly greater

changes in the expressed attitudes of others than externally

controlled ones. This may indicate that internals have more

influence in changing the child's self-concept than externals.

Exterrals would then tend to breed externals and be less

effective in bringing about any positive change in the

child's locus of control.

Goff (1919), Ausubel (1953), and Kvaraceus (1965)

state that the position of the American Negro leads to nega-

tive self-perceptions, and Coleman (1966) emphasized the

importance of the Negro's perceptions of inability to control

his own environment. Additional studies by Rotter and as-

sociates show a hi gh correlation between internal control

and r ffil ia tin ,ind initiative in improving the conditions

of school performance (Gore and Rotter, 1963; Rotter, 1966).

Friejo, Gordon, and Bilker (1968) investigated control

expectancy in the Early Child Stimulation Through Parent

Education project and found a significant difference










between Negro and white mothers. White mothers had

significantly lower (more internal) scores on the Social

Reaction Inventory, and the same group of mothers in-

vestigated by Friejo et al. were found to be low on the

Autonomy factor of the How I See Myself Scale (HISM).

There was also a low but significant correlation between

the Interpersonal Adequacy factor of the HISM and the Social

Reaction Inventory (SRI).

Finally, a study at the University of Florida took

self-concept measures from 323 Florida Model Follow Through

kindergarten and first grade children and their mothers at

the beginning and end of the 1968-69 school year. The

mothers and children were compared with a variety of

statistical teclhniques, and the author concluded: 1) mother's

self-concept measures (HISM and SRI) are related to children's

self-concept measures (Child's Self-Social Constructs Test),

and 2) mother's self-concept measures are related to change

in children's solf-concept measures over the course of the

year (Tocco, 1970).


Parent education and Parent Participation


The integration of parent education and parent partici-

pation programs into the mainstream of the American educa-

tional system has been a long, slowly developing process.

European educator-philosophers such as Pestalozzi (1965)

and Froebel (1907) emerged as leaders in the parent involve-

ment process and were commonly associated with such American









educators as Dewey and the Progressive Education movement

in the early 1900's. The child-study movement, the PTA,

parent cooperative nursery schools and the community school

movement each chlaracteristicaliy contained elements designed

to generate increased parent participation in the educational

process. In addition, the country's social system increas-

ingly demanded the active participation of schools in the

democratization of the society for all of its members. This

national desire has continued to the present and often

centers its energy in the form of compensatory programs.

Compensatory programs were initially designed to "remedy"

"deficient" child groups of lower socio-economic members.

But educators who began to work with the children of the

socially disadvantaged soon realized that there were problems

associated with the value systems of the parents, the at-

titudes of parents associated with these values, and the

value systems of schools and the success of the children

within these value systems (Karnes and Zehrback, 1975).

Deutsch (1963) suggests a number of characteristics normally

found in the milieu of the environmentally disadvantaged.

These include overcrowding, sub-standard housing, lack of

sanitary facilities, restriction to the immediate environ-

ment, few toys and creative materials, and reduced verbal

communication. In addition to these demographic or struc-

turai variables as Gordon (1976) would call them, there are

the attitudinal and process home variables which also play

an important role in the child-development process. These










would include areas such as educational aspirations for

the child, parental self-concepts and locus of control,

academic guidance, intellectuality, dominance patterns,

stimulation, and reinforcement practices.

An educational system which attempts to remedy inef-

fective development in the child-learning triad of parents,

child, and the program without parental involvement is

destined to only marginal success (Lillie, 1975). Schein-

field (1969) proposes that

parents cannot construe a child's relationship
to the world in ways that are fundamentally
different from the way they construe their own
relationship to the world. Therefore, to change
child-rearing practices effectively, one must
change the parent's own experience in the world.
The required changes in child-rearing would
necessitate significant shifts in family cultures,
particularly a shift from a family environment in
which the chief concerns of child-rearing center
on external control or avoidance of trouble, to
one in which the internal experience of the
child and the development of competence become
pivotal family concerns. If parents are to foster
competence in their children, then it would seem
imperative that the parents experience "competence-
gaining-activity" in their own lives. (pp. 2-3)

IF the parent does not perceive these "competence-gaining-

activities" as having been gained through valid experience,

then Scheinfield suggests that there is relatively little

chance for substantial change.

Involvement of parents with the process of their

children's learning in ways consistent with a given compen-

satory program is advantageous in several ways. First,

such involvement often bridges a continuity gap which may

exist between home and school. The use of parental-applied









techniques can encourage the practice of important cog-

nitive skills lacking in many disadvantaged children.

Third, the indirect effects of parental self-worth and

respect engendered by a meaningful contribution to their

children's develoDment may go a long way toward improving

affectional relationships in the home (Evans, 1975). As

Weikart and Lambie (1968) suggest, the most fruitful out-

comes of compensatory programs could be in terms of changes

in parental behavior and the total home environment of dis-

advantaged children.


Head Start

In an effort to rectify the cultural disadvantages of

an increasingly large number of children, the federal

government began a series of compensatory programs in the

early 1960's. Chief among these programs was Operation

Head Start, initiated on a national scale in the summer of

]965. This "concrete deployment of resources to wage the

war on poverty" was mainly concerned with early childhood

education but included many other facets (Evans, 1975, p.

64). Project Head Start was conceived as a seven-component,

multidisciplinary enterprise including education, medical-

dental care, nutrition, social services, psychological

service, parent education, and the involvement of community

volunteers (Evans, 1975). Head Start goals included among

others:

helping the emotional and social development
of the child by encouraging self-confidence,
spontaneity, curiosity, and self-discipline.








-increasing the child's capacity to relate
positively to family members and others while
at the same time strengthening the family's
ability to relate positively to the child and
his problems.
-developing in the child and his family a re-
sponsible attitude toward society, and fostering
constructive opportunities for society to work
together with the poor' in solving their problems.
-increasing the sense of dignity and self worth
within the child and his family. (p. 12)

In addition, Head Start served to illuminate the general

question of how to achieve changes in local institutions

utilizing a nationwide educational innovation as the inter-

vention strategy (National Survey of the Impacts of [lead

Start Centers on Community Institutions, 1970).

Some well known figures in the social and behavioral

sciences contend that there is no evidence that the goals

of early compensatory education have been accomplished

(Palmer, 1976). Bronfenbrenner, in his U.S. Department of

Health, Education, and Welfare report of 1974, states that

early results indicate that the effects were short-lived,

modest achievement gains, with substantial overlap in the

distributions for experimental and control groups. Experi-

mental groups did not continue to make gains when the inter-

vention was discontinued for one year. But, this evidence

of failure is with respect to cognitive change (IQ).

Bronfenbrenner stated that "there is evidence that such

programs are contributing in important ways to the develop-

ment and welfare of the child and his family, community

and society" (p. 52). Bronfenbrenner also felt that the

evidence for social change as well as cognitive performance

was inconclusive, but the review finds that "the magnitude









of 10 gain was inversely related to the age at which the

child entered the program, the greatest gains being made

by children enrolled as one and two year olds" (p. 53).

Bronfenbrenner's Head Start Survey also found that, in

terms of parent participation, the greater the frequency of

participation in Head Start programs, the greater the change

process. In the communities surveyed there was a notable

increase in the participation of parents in the activities

of, and decisions concerning, local institutions. One

manifestation of change was the increase in the numbers of

volunteers helping with school-sponsored activities.

Another is the greater use of school facilities after class

hours for all types of community meetings, adult-education

classes, and service programs. In many communities it

was noted that the schools had begun to encourage greater

involvement by low-income parents, changing policies and

regulations to permit this. A majority of the school sys-

tems surveyed had been influenced by the activities of

neighborhood or parent organizations seeking involvement in

or control over school affairs. In many communities parent

advisory committees had been formed by grass-roots organi-

zations. These were both permanently established organiza-

tions and groups established for a special purpose.

The results of this 1974 survey cannot be construed

as solely derivative of operation Head Start. They reflect

to a great extent the influence of subsequent Federal pro-

jects developed throughout the late 1960's and early 1970's.









Day Care, Parent-Child Centers, and the Florida
Parent Education Program

Federal Interagency Day Care Guidelines of 1968

reflect the growing mandate for parental involvement. They

required specifically that:

ParenLs must have the opportunity to become
involved themselves in the making of
decisions concerning the nature and operation
of the div care facility.
P parents must be provided with opportunities
at times convenient to them to work with the
program and whenever possible to observe their
children in the day care facility.
SWhenever an agency provides day care for 40 or
more children, there must be a Policy Advisory
Committee with a set percentage of parents
selected by the parents themselves. (pp. 10-11)

In the fall of 1966 a White House Task Force on Early

Childhood Education was convened at the request of

President Lyndon B. Johnson (Costello, 1970). This group

was made up of acknowledged experts in the field of early

childhood education drawn from across the country and had

the assignment of reviewing the field and making recommenda-

tions. In February 1967, as a direct result of recommenda-

tions made by the White House Task Force, the President

delivered a special message to Congress on Children and Youth.

He requested the development of 25 comprehensive services

programs for families with children under three years of

age to be called the Parent and Child Centers (PCC's).

The Parent-Child Centers Program was established within

Head Start in the Office of Economic Opportunity and

directed by three members of the Washington Head Start Staff.









The budget provided a $10,000 planning grant and a grant

of $175,000 for first year operations for each center,

to serve a maximum of 100 children under three years, and

their families. The following criteria, as listed by

Costello in her 1970 national survey,were required of all

grantees:

1. Outreach recruitment and admissions procedures
which would guarantee that selected families
were economically disadvantaged.

7. Comprehensive health care for children, health
care and health education for parents and
siblings, family planning services, and pre-
natal care.

3. Children's programs designed to facilitate
physical, intellectual, and emotional develop-
ment.

4. Parent activities designed to strengthen:
(a) Understanding of child development,
(b) Competence as family managers,
(c) Skills essential to making a living,
including maximum opportunities for
FCC employment,
(d) Self-confidence and self-image as parents,
(e) Family relationships, i.e. husband-wife,
parent-child,
(f) Role of the father within the family.

5. Social services for the entire family.

Programs designed to increase family participation
in the neighborhood and the community in terms of:
(a) Becoming knowledgeable about its resources and
taking advantage of available opportunities,
(b) Stimulating the family to become participating,
responsible, and active members of the community.

7. Training program for both professionals and para-
professionals, which must include the recruitment
and training of neighborhood recruits and volunteers
of many age groups to work alongside the profes-
sional staff.

8. A Frogram of research and evaluation developed in
cooperation with an appropriate institution such









as a University or a Clinic and designed to
describe and measure the progress of the
programs for children, parents and other
family members; as well as program contents
and costs. It was also to produce packaged
instructional materials and handbooks on how
to operate the program. (It was expected that
each center's research and evaluation program
would be related to a comprehensive research
and evaluation subcommittee organized by OEO,
the Children's Bureau, Public Health Service,
and the O[fice of Education of the Department
of Health, Education and Welfare. (pp. 53-54)

As this clearly indicates,the Federal government was

getting more and more in the business of parent education

and the Washington commitment did not stop with the Head

Start and Parent-Child Centers. Many research grants were

awarded to private and state systems to investigate more

effective means of parent education. Among these grants

was the Florida Parent Education Program under the direction

of Ira Gordon at the University of Florida.

This 1967 project specifically focused on the family

so that the support system for the child's intellectual

growth might endure. Results at age six showed that children

in the experimental group for all three years or for two

consecutive years were superior to the control group on

the Stanford-Binet. These differences were evident at

least three years after the termination of the project

(Gordon and Guinagh, 1976).

Other results at age six indicated that the families

had been affected by the Florida Parent Education Program.

Interviews were conducted with mothers at the time of

testing in the child's sixth year. A significantly higher









percentage cf experimental mothers reported involvement in

an educational program after project termination, higher

educational expectations for the child, and more purchasing

of tovs and use of the toys in direct instruction of the

child. There was also more personal activity by the mother

in her use of community resources such as the library

(Gordon and Guinagh, 1976).

Research continued to support these conclusions. Mayeske

(1973, p. iv) showed that about 85 percent of the variation

in average achievement between schools is associated with

measures of the family background. Program success was

enhanced in all respects when intervention strategies

included efforts to actively involve and educate the parents

(Gordon, 19G8; Klaus and Gray, 1969; McCarthy, 1969; Weikert

and Lambie, 1968; Willmon, 1969). Research also demonstrated

that the influence of the home seems more critical than the

quality of education the child receives at school in af-

fecting school achievement (Coleman, 1966; Jencks, 1972;

Mosteller and loynihan, 1972). Strodtbeck (1958), Hertzig,

Birch, Thomas, and Mendez (1968) suggest that one of the

more promising methods of early intervention involves as-

sisting parents to become better teachers in day-to-day

transactions with their children. Carew (1976) concep-

tualized the interactive intellectual experiences of the

child and stated that the parent plays a critical role in

the child's development as a teacher, entertainer, playmate,

converser, and blender of roles. The interactor is









responsible either solely or jointly with the child for

the "manifest intellectual content of the experience"

(Carew, 1976, p. 12). A prototype for the coordination of

parent education with compensatory education is the Florida

Model of Project Follow-Through (Gordon, 1968).


Project Follow-Through and the Florida Model

Formulated primarily to service Head Start graduates,

Project Follow-Through is available to children who come

from other preschool programs for the disadvantaged (Evans,

1975). Eligibility is limited to children from low-income

homes as defined by the poverty line index of the OEO (see

Appendix A).

Follow-Through was initiated on a pilot basis in 1967

with a fiscal aJlocation totalling $15 million dollars, and

authorized to full-scale in 1968 under the Economic Oppor-

tunity AcL of 1964. Programs were established throughout

the nation with a fiscal budget of $30 million dollars which

serviced over 16,000 children (Evans, 1975). According to

Ms. Rose Koury of the National Follow-Through Office,

Washington, D.C., the 1977-78 budget will reach approximately

$54 million dollars and involve over 76,000 children and

their families.

A fundamental assumption of Project Follow-Through is

that further environmental planning can provide a more sus-

tained pattern of early gains by Head Start, or at least

further increase the probability of long-term benefits









(Evans, 1975). In addition, a philosophy supporting the

development of educational alternatives is reflected in

the subsidization of nineteen "program models," each of

which emphasizes somewhat different intervention strategies.

These planned variations range along continue with elements

such as structure, parental involvement and cognitive

activities; they include major evaluation components and

move within the context of broad community social and health

service involvement (Evans, 1975).

Project Follow-Through operates under the theoretical

assumption that parent education may take many forms but

basically involves parents in four, or five, types or levels

of participation (Gordon, 1970). These include:

1) Audience; bystander-observer Here the parent
visits or observes the school, or day-care
center to see what the wise, professional
teacher accomplishes. This has been called
"educational imperialism."
2) Teacher of the child At this level the school
normally suggests areas of change or
development and recommended activities to
produce this change. Here a bias of the school
changing the family to meet its standards may
occur.
3) Volunteer The parent takes an active role in
the school as an aide or volunteer with the goal
of changing or helping the child and the parent to change
skills and attitudes.
4) Trained workers This involves varying degrees of
training to develop the skills of parents to
assist in teaching, counseling, and assisting
in roles in and out of the school.
5) A fifth approach to parental participation and
involvement is to honor the right of the
parents to control the school board and the
school system. Offered by Campbell in Community
Control (1968), local control means that
parents become decision-makers rather than
recipients of a pre-determined system. (p. 53)










Grounded in this philosophy and intent upon including

parents at the highest levels of participation, the 1975-76

Florida Model of Project Follow-Through operates eleven

school systems in ten states (Jacksonville, Florida; Tampa,

Florida; Winnsboro, South Carolina; Houston, Texas; Jonesboro,

Arkansas; Chattanooga, Tennessee; Lawrenceburg, Indiana;

Richmond, Virginia; Lac du Flambeau, Wisconsin; Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania; Yakima, Washington). The Florida Model attempts

to involve parents in three ways: (1) through home visita-

tions, (2) involvement in program decision making and

activities; and (3) through classroom volunteering.

As established by the Florida Sponsor, home visita-

tions are conducted by two adults, usually from low-income

backgrounds who are trained to work in the classroom with

the teacher as a team. These adults, called "parent

educators," also visit the homes of the children in the

classroom weekly in order to teach an enrichment type

learning activity to the child's mother, who later teaches

it to the child.

Before the parent edcuator makes a home visit, she

plans for the visit with the teacher and relays evaluative

information after each visit to the teacher. Each parent

educator will normally spend one half of each day in the

classroom assisting the teacher and the other half in making

home visits.









Parents of children involved in Follow Through par-

ticipate in program decision-making through the Policy

Advisory Committee (PAC). The PAC serves as the governing

body for each program and often includes mini-PAC's for

each school involved and a city-wide PAC for the larger

communities. PAC members make decisions concerning program

personnel selection, budgets, proposal content, evaluation

and development of home learning activities, and also plan

and conduct numerous educational and recreational activities.

Parents are encouraged to participate in both PAC meetings

and activities and are often assisted with transportation

by parent educators and other interested parents.

Parents are also encouraged to participate in the

classroom as parent volunteers and whenever possible are

involved in instructional activities. Parent volunteers

also serve, as do teachers and parent educators, in planning,

clerical and general housekeeping activities.

Through the three processes the Florida Model attempts

to develop a flow of communication and a system of inter-

actions between the home and the school. The beneficiary

of these interactions is not only the child, but also the

parent, family, school, and community.


Conclusions


Research consistently provides evidence that parents

influence the intellectual, affective and interaction pat-

terns of their children by the nature of the parent-child









relationship (Grotberg, 1969). "The beliefs of parents

and the effects of these beliefs on their children are

inextricably woven into the learning potential" (Adkins,

1975, p. 2). Alice Honig, a leader in contemporary parent

education, states that parent involvement has been an "anti-

dote to professional arrogance" by dramatically spotlighting

the parents' role in the development process (1975, p. ix).

Parent involvement has played a crucial role in linking

the child's home-community world with his formal learning

environment and has challenged educators to think critically

about parents' rights to participate in decisions affecting

their children (i rnig, 1975). An educational system which

fails to maximize the parent involvement potential can never

be more than partially effective, and as Adkins (1975)

says, "the boundaries which restrict the utilization of

parents in the educational program are limitless. They are

dependent only upon educational creativity and enthusiasm"

(p. 5).














CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY


In order to answer the questions developed in Chapter I,

this study has identified and selected a group of parents

whose participation in a parent education program was moni-

tored and analyzed over the period of one school year.

Existing instrumentation developed by the University of

Florida Project Follow-Through staff was utilized as well as

existing evaluative processes. Additionally, Richmond

Follow-Through staff were responsible for pre and post self-

concept and locus of control test administration as well as

all other data collection.


The Sample


One hundred eighty-nine parents of kindergarten and

first grade children participating in Project Follow-Through,

Richmond, Virginia, were administered a pre-test measure

of self-concept and locus of control. Of this group,one

hundred forty-six parents were newly enrolled in Project

Follow-Through; forty-three parents were repeating parti-

cipation in the project. For purposes of this study, only

those newly enrolled parents were selected as participants.

Complete data sets were obtained from sixty-one partici-

pants and were the basis for all statistical information.









Each parent was classified as a lower socio-economic member

according to the 1976-77 Office of Economic Opportunity

(OEO) Guidelines (Appendix A) and was, therefore, represen-

tative of other Follow-Through project participants. In

addition, the Richmond project has been cited as one of the

most representative programs of the Florida Model of Project

Follow-Through. This sample and the results of this study

were, therefore, also representative of the Florida Model.

Specific measures were utilized to reduce the influence

of factors jeopardizing internal and external validity.

Selection biases were minimized through the use of a large

sample of the total population. Instrumentation and reac-

tive effects were reduced through the use of the same

observer for both pre and post test administration. Each

participant also had the knowledge that all similar project

participants were tested as an integral element of the

project and not as a special exercise or event. Testing

threats to validity were treated in the statistical analysis

package and recorded along with the final results of the

study.


Data Collection


The collection of data was supervised by the Richmond

project staff and monitored by this investigator, serving

as the Florida Model Sponsor Assistant Evaluation Coordinator.

Data werecollected throughout the 1976-77 school year and

occurred as follows:









1. Within the first six weeks of the 1976-77

school year parent educators administered

the HISM and SRI instruments to all partici-

pants of this study.

2. Home Visitations were recorded by parent

educators on a weekly basis and forwarded to

Model Sponsor for tabulation.

3. Classroom Volunteering was recorded by

teachers on a weekly basis and forwarded to

the Model Sponsor for tabulation.

4. PAC Meetings and Activities were recorded by

PAC secretaries and forwarded as they occurred

to the Model Sponsor for tabulation.

5. Within the last six weeks of the 1976-77 school

year, parent educators administered the HISM

and SRI instruments to all participants of this

study.


Instrumentation


Data collection for this study was accomplished through

the use of the following five instruments:

How I See Myself (HISN): The HISM (see Appendix B) is a modi-

fication for mothers of Gordon's HISM (1968), which has been

developed and norms established on children grades three

through 12. The scale is a 40-item, five-point, self-report

scale with the direction of the most positive responses vary-

ing for each question. The modification of the scale for use with









mothers consisted of changing those items which said

girls or boys to women or men and those having to do with

a teacher to the past tense.

A refactoring of the revised HISM Scale for parents

was performed on the data from 2,053 parents from the 1969-70

pretest administration. All items were correlated with each

other, and various statistical operations were performed to

group those items which related highest with each other.

Four such groups, or factors, emerged: 1) Interpersonal

Adequacy, 2) Teacher-School, 3) Personal Appearance, and

4) Competence.

An item analysis and table of comparisons of old and

new factors is included in Appendix C.

Social Reaction Inventory (SRI): This scale (see Appendix

D) is a self-report inventory designed to assess attitudes

toward mastery of the environment (Herman, 1970). The SRI

was developed by Bilker (1970) as a modification of the

Rotter (1966) Internal-External Scale. A population mean

and standard deviation for the Rotter I-E Scale were

approximately 8.34 and 3.87, respectively. The first step

in the modification of this scale was changing the language

to a fourth-grade vocabulary level. A test re-test reli-

ability for this modified self-report measure was .78,

about the same level as the original Rotter version (Bilker,

1970).


Scoring instructions are included in Appendix E.









PAC Meeting/Activity Sign-In Sheet (PAC M/A): This

report form (see Appendix F), a Project Follow-Through

Instrument, indicates the date and type of meeting or

activity conducted within each community. Parent name,

child name, type of relationship and teacher name are

also indicated. Type and frequency of parent participation

in this program element will be determined from this

record.

Parent Education Weekly Report (PEWR): This instrument

(see Appendix G), developed by the Florida Model Sponsor

of Project Follow-Through, reports the home visit of each

parent educator on a weekly basis. For purposes of this

study only the first two measures will be utilized. These

indicate the number of visits scheduled (by appointment

with the parent) and the number of visits completed. This

index should reflect the level of parent involvement with

this project element.

Classroom Volunteer Report Form (CR Vol): This instrument

(see Appendix I1), developed by the Florida Model Sponsor of

Project Follow-Through, reports the date, length of time,

and type of classroom volunteering of each parent partici-

pant. The frequency of parent participation should provide

an index of parent involvement in this project element.


Data Treatment


Descriptive statistics were utilized to initially

analyze pre and post HISM and SRI measures. The participation









variables were also analyzed in this manner. These opera-

tions provided base data (means, standard deviations, and

range) for subsequent inferential statistical analysis.

The standard error of correlations, SE,: 1//N-i, and

the standard error of the difference of means, SEd
dm
/m + c 2 "2 m m2 (m = standard error of a mean;

r12 = correlation between the two sets of means), were

derived for each variable to determine the significance of

pre-post change in self-concept and locus of control scores

(Guilford, 1956).

A multi-variate analysis procedure developed by

Hiotelling (1935, 1936) and referred to as "canonical corre-

lation" was used in this study. Canonical correlation

uses the coefficients of linear compounds to describe the

dependencies between two sets of variables (Morrison, 1976).

This correlation,as suggested by Kerlinger and Pedhazur

(1973) is a multiple regression analysis with k independent

variables and m dependent variables. Through least squares

analysis, two linear composites are formed, one for indepen-

dent variables, Xj, and one for the dependent variables, Yn.

The correlation between these two composites is the canoni-

cal correlation, Re. The square of the canonical correla-
2
tion, Rc is an estimate of the variance shared by the two

composites.

In canonical correlation analysis, two or more vari-

ables, the dependent variables, are partitioned from the









rest of the matrix as seen in Table 3.1, the basic data

matrix for canonical correlation analysis. The first

subscript of each X stands for rows (subjects, cases) and

the second subscript for columns (variables, tests, items).

The broken vertical line partitions the matrix into the K

independent and the n-k dependent variables. The variables

are intercorrelated and a correlation or R matrix is formed.


Table 3.1. Basic Raw Data Matrix for
Analysisa




Independent
Cases Variables



1 X 1t X12 . Xlk

2 X21 X22 X2k


XN1 N2


Canonical Correlation





Dependent
Variables




2(k+l) . 2n
X2(k+1) -* *2n


XN(k+l) ."XNn


"N = number of cases; k = number of independent variables;
n = total number of variables.

Source. Kerlinger, F. N. and Pedhaeur, E. J. Multiple
regression in behavioral research. Atlanta: Holt,
Kinehart and Winston, Inc., 1973, p. 343.




The four partitions of the correlation matrix are indicated

in this way:












R- -
R11 R12

R = -------- -------

R21 R22






where R = the whole correlation matrix of the K+(n-k)

variables; R11 = the correlation of the k independent vari-

ables; R22 = the correlations of the n-k dependent vari-

ables; R12 = the correlations between the independent and

dependent variables; R21 = the transpose of R12 (Kerlinger

and Pedhazur, 1973).

The inlercorrelated variables are similarly partitioned

as shown in Table 3.2 and indicated by the broken lines.

The correlation between composites of independent and depen-

dent variables is the canonical correlation. Its square
2
Rc represents the variance shared by the two composites.

According to Darlington, Weinberg, and Walberg (1973),

canonical variate analysis answers these questions:

1. What is the minimum number of traits that

would have to be controlled or partialled

out in order to eliminate all important

linear relations between sets X and Y?

2. What is the nature of those traits?

More than one source of common variance can be iden-

tified and analyzed. The method systematically extracts

the first and largest source of variance, and the canonical









Partitioned Correlation Matrix for Canonical
Correlation Analysisa


Independent
Variables


Dependent
Variables


Independent
Variables


Dependen t
Variables


1 2

rll r 22

r21 r22







'kl rk2


rlk rl(k+l)

r2k r2(k+l)


r(k+)l r(k+Dklr(k+l(k+l) r(k+l)n

I.
I.


rnl rn2 ' rnk


rn(k+l) nn


k = number
variables.


of independent variables; n = total number of


Source. Kerlinger, F. N. and Pedhazur, E. J. Multiple
regression in behavioral research Atlanta: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston, Inc., 1973, p. 3414.


Table 3.2.


I
I rk(k+l) r kn









correlation coefficient is an index of the relation between

the two sets of variables based on this source of variance.

The next largest source of variance, independent of the

first source of variance, is extracted and analyzed. The

second canonical correlation coefficient, which is smaller

than the first, is an index of the relation between the two

sets of variables due to this second source of variance

(Kerlinger and Pedhazur, 1973). The number of nonzero

canonical correlations is termed the number of canonical

relations between sets X and Y. This number cannot exceed

the number of variables in the smaller set (Darlington et

al., 1973). The most widely used significance test on the

number of canonical relations is Bartlett's (1938) chi-square

approximation to the distribution of Wilk's lambda. This

test, though conservative, can be regarded as highly accurate

for sample sizes of N above 50 (Darlington et al., 1973).

Canonical correlation does yield weights which can be

interpreted as regression weights. These weights, however,

are the weakest link in the analysis process and must there-

fore be interpreted with great caution (Morrison, 1976).

This study used the four factor scores of the pre-HISM

and a fifth measure from the pre-SRI locus of control instru-

ment as independent variables. These five independent

variables were correlated to the four participation measures

which served as dependent variables. Existing significant






42



relationships were established and recorded. Next, the

pre-HISM and pre-SRI variables and the four participation

variables were held constant as independent variables.

Change scores ii the HISM and SRI served as dependent vari-

ables. The canonical correlation analysis was then utilized

again to detect any unique variance attributable to the

participation variables. This was supported through the

use of an additional canonical correlation between pre-HISM

and pre-SRI measures with change scores in the same measures.

The results provided inferential statistical data between

the testing and participation variables of this study.














CHAPTER IV

RESULTS


The purpose of Lhis study was to examine the nature

of the relationship between selected parent participation

activities in the school system and parent self-concepts

and measures of internal-external locus of control. The

results presented in this chapter are addressed to the

questions presented in Chapter I. Descriptive statistics

were generated to answer questions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7.

Multivariate analyses were used to examine the relationships

among sets of variables and were required by questions 6

and 8.

Question 1: What is the nature of the measured
self-concept and locus of control of
lower socio-economic parents prior to
their participation in this study?

Descriptive statistics were generated for each of the

four HISM Factor's as well as the SRI score. Means and

standard deviations for each of these variables are provided

in Table 1I.1 and 4.3,with variance distributions provided

in Figure 4.1.

Factor 1 of the pre-HISM self-concept scale, Inter-

personal Adequacy, contained 14 questions scaled 1-5 with

the most positive response being a 5. A maximum score

would be 70, a minimum score, 14, and a neutral response

would be 42. The mean score for Factor 1 was 56.92 with









TABLE 4.1

MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR PRE AND POST
HISM AND SRI VARIABLE SCORES


Variable Mean Standard Deviation Cases

PRE-HISM Factor 1 (Interpersonal Adequacy) 56.92 9.22 61
PRE-HISM Factor 2 (Teacher-School) 21.54 8.46 61
PRE-HISM Factor 3 (Personal Appearance) 22.51 4.90 61
PRE-HISM Factor 4 (Competence) 20.43 3.39 61
PRE-SRI (Locus of Control) 8.85 3.92 61


POST-HISM Factor 1 (Interpersonal Adequacy) 55.79 8.75 61
POST-HISM Factor 2 (Teacher-School) 21.87 6.57 61
POST-HISM Factor 3 (Personal Appearance) 22.11 4.75 61
POST-HISM Factor 4 (Competence) 19.72 2.92 61
PRE-SRI (Locus of Control) 7.93 4.04 61

















HISM Positive
Response or
External Locus
of Control


+10


+5


NEUTRAL
RESPONSE


-5
HISH Negative
Response or -10
Internal Locus
of Control


--- + or 1 Standard
Deviation Unit
Mean Values


Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3


Factor 4


Figure 4.1 Composite Profile for HISM and SRI variable Prescores









an individual item mean score of 4.06, indicating a sample

response in the upper, or most positive, quartile of pos-

sible responses. The standard deviation for Factor 1 was

9.22. Sample items for this factor included such questions

as "1 like to work with others and "I feel at ease,

comfortable inside myself."

Factor 2 with items such as "I liked school and

"I get along well with teachers," was labeled Teacher-School

and was measured through responses to 10 questions. The

score was reversed and, therefore, one became the most

positive response. Since the factor consisted of the sum

on ten items, a maximum score would be 10, a minimum score

50, and the neutral response score would be 30. The sample

mean was 21.514 with an individual item mean of 2.15. This

was a positive response in the upper-middle quartile of

possible responses. The standard deviation for the 61 com-

plete data sets was 8.46.

Fre-HISM Factor 3 contained six questions with items

such as "I like the way I look." This factor labeled

Personal Appearance had a maximum score of 30, a minimum

score of 6, and a neutral response score of 18. The sample

and individual item means were 22.51 and 3.75, respectively,

and indicated a positive participant response in the upper-

middle quartile of possible responses. The standard devia-

tion for this factor was 4.90.

Factor 4 of the HISM scale, labeled Competence,

reflected the parent's feelings of academic or intellectual









ability as well as general language and academic adequacy.

This factor contained such items as "I'm very good at

speaking before a group and "I write well," and consisted

of 6 questions on the reversed scale. The maximum score

was, therefore, G, the minimum score, 30, and the neutral

response score, 18. The mean prescores for sample and

individual item, were 20.43 and 3.40. This lower-middle

quartile response was the only negative response of pre-

measures on the HISM Scale. The standard deviation for

this factor was 3.39.

The prc-SRI (Iocus of Control) mean for 61 responses

was 8.46, and the standard deviation was 3.92. Of 29

questions, 23 specific responses were tabulated with 0

indicaLing internal locus of control and 1 indicating

external locus of control, with a possible range of 0 to 23.

The neutral response score or midpoint lay between scores

of 11 and 12. Participants chose between alternative

statements such as "What happens to me is my own doing,"

or "Sometimes I feel that I don't have enough control over

the directions my life is taking."

Project participants responded in the upper quartile

of possible responses for Factor 1, Interpersonal Adequacy,

of the HISM self-concept scale, and upper-middle quartile

for Factor 2, Teacher-School, and Factor 3, Personal

Appearance. A negative response in the lower-middle quartile

was exhibited on HISM Factor 4, Competence. The pre-SRI









response for these lower socio-economic parents was below

the neutral response score, an internal measure of locus

of control.

Question 2: Do lower socio-economic parents exhibit
negative measures on each of four
factors of a self-concept scale?

Responses indicated that the sample exhibited a

positive attitude in the self-concept factor of Interpersonal

Adequacy. The mean score of 56.92 and standard deviation

of 9.22, with a possible maximum score of 70, indicated a

strong positive response. A comparative pre-intervention

sample of Farent Education Project mothers (Gordon, 1968)

responded with a mean of 60.75 and a standard deviation of

12.8 (Table 4.2).

Project participants also responded with positive

measures on Factor 2, Teacher-School. The sample mean of

21.54 lay in the upper-middle quartile of responses. The

standard deviation for this factor was 8.4G. Parent

Education Project mothers were not scored for this factor,

but a test-relest reliability group of working mothers

with a sample size of 34 scored a mean of 14.94 and a

standard deviation of 4.2. Follow Through parents were much

less positive about their relationship with teachers and

school.

Factor 3, or the Personal Appearance Factor, of the

HISM scale produced a positive premeasure for the lower









TABLE 4.2


MEAiS3 AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF PRE-IITERVENTIO,: HISH AND SRI VARIABLE SCORES
FOR THE PARENT EDUCATION PROJECT, UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA



Peliability Sample (T=34) Parent Education Samnle (N=61)
Mean Standard Deviarton Mean Standar- Deviation

HISM Factor 1
(Interpersonal Adequacy) 67.31 12.9 60.75 12.8

HISM Factor 2
(Teacher-School) 14.94 4.2

HISM Factor 3
(Physical Appearance) 28.09 6.6 25.51 7.1

HISM Factor 4
(Competence) 26.54 4.1 23.57 4.4

SRI
(Locus of Control) 10.26 3.8


Source: Gordon, I. J. A Test Manual for the How I See Myself Scale, Gainesville,
Florida Educational Research and Development Council, 1969, pp. 40-L2.









socio-economic parents of this study. The sample mean

of 22.51 out of a maximum score of 30 was also in the

upper-middle quartile of possible responses. This compared

to a 25.52 sample mean for Parent Education Project matters

and again indicated a less positive response for participants

of this study. The reliability sample had a mean of 28.09,

a very high response. The standard deviations for each

group were as follows: 1) Reliability sample, 6.6; 2)

Parent Education Project Sample, 7.1; and 3) Follow Through

parents of this study, 4.90.

Factor 4, Competence, revealed the only negative

response mean on the pre-HISM measure. The mean of 20.43

was in the lower-middle quartile of possible responses.

This compared with the Parent Education sample mean of 23.57.

The standard deviation of this study, 3.39, indicated less

variance than the Parent Education standard deviation of

4 I .

In summary, parent participants of this study exhibited

positive responses on three measures of a self-concept

scale, Factor 1, Interpersonal Adequacy, Factor 2, Teacher-

School, and Factor 3, Personal Appearance. The only

negative response for these parents was on pre-HISM Factor

4, Competence.

Question 3: Do lower socio-economic parents
exhibit an external measure on a
locus of control scale?










TABLE 4.3

KEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR PARENT
PARTICIPATION VARIABLE SCORES


Variable Xean Standard Deviation Cases

Hone Visits Scheduled 26.98 3.30 61

Home Visits Completed 24.61 3.96 61

Percent of Home Visits Completed 91.18 9.05 61

Classroom Volunteering 3.93 8.26 61

PAC Meetings 1.64 2.45 61

?AC Activities 0.80 2.47 61









With the neutral response score of 11.5 on the SRI

scale, the pre-SRI mean of 8.46 for this sample indicated

that project participants were internal on a measure of

locus of control. This compared very favorably with

the population mean of 8.34 established by Rotter (1966)

in a series of nine studies with over 3000 participants.

In contrast, Parent Education Project Mothers (Table 4.3)

exhibited mean scores of 10.26, a more external measure.

Question 4: What is the nature of parent partici-
pation in the following four selected
activities: 1) Policy Advisory
Committee Meetings; 2) Policy Advisory
Committee Activities; 3) Classroom
Volunteering; and 4) Home Visitations?

As Table 4.3 indicates, monthly PAC meetings were

attended an average of 1.64 times during the project period

of nine months. The dispersion of scores indicated by the

standard deviation of 2.45 was relatively small. PAC

activities, though more numerous than FAC meetings,were

attended at an even poorer rate of 0.80 times with a

standard deviation of 2.47. Parent participation in PAC

meeLiiin s and activities was not mandatory for project par-

ticipation.

Classroom volunteering occurred an average of

3.93 times during the project year reflecting greater

participation in this activity. The increased standard

deviation of 8.26 for this variable also indicated a greater

variance in the amount of parent participation in this

project activity.









The mean number of visits scheduled for home visita-

tions was 26.98 of a possible 30 visits with the number of

visits completed averaging 24.61. This high percentage of

completion, 91.7, was to be expected since participation in

this basic program element was mandatory. The standard

deviations of 3.44 and 3.96 for both visits scheduled and

visits completed were relatively small.

Project participation varied greatly with the highest

participation measured in the home visitation and lower

participation in classroom volunteering, PAC meetings and

FAC activities.

Question 5: Will parent participation be most
frequent in the basic program element
of lome Visits and become successively
less frequent in Parent Advisory
Committee Meetings, PAC activities
and least frequent in Classroom
Volunteering?

In this simple frequency comparison, results indicated

that parent participation in the Home Visits was by far

the most frequently attended activity. Classroom Volunteering,

though relatively infrequent,was the second most attended

activity. Parent Advisory Committee Meetings were in-

frequently atticnd'd with the mean participation at the

very low rate ot only 1.64 times. This, however, was

greater than parent participation in PAC Activities which

averaged less than once per person during the project period.

Question 6: What Factors of parent self-concept
and measure of internal-external locus
of control can individually and in
combination predict the type and/or
frequency of parent participation in the
four selected participation activities?









In order to determine significant relationships

between the measures of self-concept and locus of control

with four participation variables, the multivariate analysis

of canonical correlation developed by Kerlinger and Pedhazur

(1973) was used. The five self-concept and locus of

control variables were partitioned as independent from

the four dependent variables of participation. Table 4.4

lists the results of this analysis which indicated that

there were no canonical correlations that reached the .05

level of significance. This process systematically extracted

the first and largest source of variance,in this case,

Classroom Volunteering. The canonical correlation coef-

ficient, 0.93, was an index of the relation between the

two sets of variables based on this source of variance.

The largest source of variance among the dependent variables

was pre-HISM Factor 3, with a coefficient of -1.20. The

significance of this relationship wis only 0.29; therefore,

no canonical correlation reached the .05 level of signi-

ficance. The relationship described above was, however,

the first non-significant canonical correlation. The

results of this analysis indicated an absence of a suitable

attitudinal predictor for project participation from among

the selected variables.

Question 7: What is the nature of the pre/post
change in measures of self-concept
and locus of control after partici-
pation in this study?









TABLE 4.4


CAIHOHIICAL CORRELATION I FOR PARENT PARTICIPATION,
PRE-HISM, AND PRE-SRI VARIABLE SCORES


Canonical Wilk's
Number Eigen Value Correlation Lambda Chi-Square Significance


0.14
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01


0.38
0.19
0.13
0.16
0.08


0.78
0.92
0.95
0.98
0.99


33.88
12.20
7.04
3.36
0.87


0.29
0.91
0.86
0.76
0.65


No Canonical Correlation Found at the 0.050 Level of Significance
The First (Non-Significant) Canonical Correlation is Printed Below.


COEFFICIENTS FOR CANONICAL VARIABLES OF THE FIRST SET
Canvar I
Visits Scheduled 0.37


Visits Completed
Percent Completed
Classroom Volunteer
PAC Meetings
PAC Activities


0.27
-0.58
0.93
-0.69
0.45










Table 4.4 (continued)


COEFFICIENTS FOR CANONICAL VARIABLES OF THE SECOND SET

Canvar I
PRE-HISM Factor 1 -. G6
PRE-HISM Factor 2 0.15
PRE-HISM Factor 3 -1.20
PRE-HISM Factor 4 0.96
SRI -0.09










TABLE 4.5


CANOI:IAL CORRELATION II FOR PARENT PARTICIPATION, PRE HISM
AND SRI, AND POST HISM AND SRI VARIABLE SCORES


Canonical Wilk's
Number Eigen Value Correlation Lambda Chi-Square Significance

1 0.72 0.85 0.04 168.72 0.00


0.58
0.46
0.31
0.15


0.76
0.68
0.56
0.39


0.13
0.32
0.58
0.85


103.24
59.13
27.76
8.39


0.00
0.00
0.03
0.30


COEFFICIENTS FOR CANONICAL VARIABLES OF THE FIRST SET


Visits Scheduled
Visits Completed
Percent Completed
Classroom Volunteer
PAC Meetings
PAC Activities
PRE-HISM Factor 1
PRE-HISM Factor 2
FRE-HISM Factor 3
PRE-HISM Factor 4
PRE-SRI


Canvar I
0.42
-0.60
0.59
-0.04
-0.13
-0.35
-0.22
-0.31
-0.44
0.88
0.25


Canvar 2
2.53
-3.34
1.94
0.06
-0.20
0.28
0.39
-0.07
0.15
-0.05
0.85


Canvar 3
0.66
-1.07
0.44
0.23
-0.41
0.42
0. 74
0.08
-1.03
-0.47
-0.06


Canvar 4
3.63
-4.75
2.63
-6.65
0.85
0.27
-0.20
0.38
-0.22
-0.01
0.03










Table 4.5 (continued)



COEFFICIENTS FOR CANONICAL VARIABLES CF THE SECOND SET


Canvar 1 Canvar 2 Canvar 3 Canvar 4
POST-HISH Factor 1 0.38 0.11 0.78 0.19
POST-HISM Factor 2 -0.15 0.19 0.10 1.16
POST-HISM Factor 3 -0.55 0.18 -1.16 0.24
POST-HISM Factor 4 0.79 -0.27 -0.67 -0.24
POST-SRI 0.25 0.94 0.02 -0.25










Using the number of complete data sets for project

participants (N:61), the standard error of correlations

(SEr = i// N- of 1.28)was derived to determine the signi-

ficance of the relationship between pre and post scores.

Correlations for each change were determined and used in

this discussion. Additionally, the standard error of the

difference of correlated means (SE =o +o2 -2x120 o
dm m1 m, mi m2
was determined for each factor to investigate the significance

of any pre-post change. Z scores were also determined for

each factor (Z = Ml-M2/SEdm), and any score greater than

1.96 was estimated to be significant at the .05 level

(Guilford, 1956).

Project participants responded less positively on

HISM Factor 1 post scores than on previous pretesL scores

(Table 4.1). The means changed from 56.92 to 55.79 or a

difference of -1.13. The correlation of these scores,

r = .21, was within two standard error units from the mean

and was, therefore, not significant at the .05 level. Using

the formula SE = /o2+ o2 to determine the standard
dm m1 m2
error of these uncorrelated means, SEdm was equal to 1.31

which yielded a Z score of .86. This indicated that the

pre-post change for Factor 1 was not significant.

The pre-HISM Factor 2 mean was 21.54 as compared to

the post score of 21.87. This less positive response on

the reversed scale amounted to a difference of .33. The

correlation between these two scores was .39,which indicated









that the pre-post factor relationship was significant at

the .05 level. The standard error of the difference of

these correlated means was 1.14 and the Z ratio was -.29.

This was within 1.96 standard error units, therefore, the

pre-post change of Factor 2 was not significant.

Responses on post-HISM Factor 3 were also less positive

than responses on the pretest. The post score mean of

22.11 compared to 22.51, or a difference of .40. The cor-

relation between pre-post scores was .59 which placed the

relationship well within the .05 significance level. The

standard error of the difference between means was .57

and the der ive]d 2 score equal to .70. This pre-post change

was also not significant at the .05 level.

HISM Factor 4 was the only self-concept score to

increase during the project period. The postscore mean

of 19.72 increased .71 from the pretest score of 20.43.

This factor also had the highest correlation of means

r = .63 which meant that the pre-post factor relationship

was significant at the .05 level. The pre-post change of

Factor 4 was also significant. The standard error of the

difference between means (SE dm) was .35 and the Z ratio
dm
equal to 2.03. This Z score was greater than the 1.96

units required lor significance.

Post-SRI responses also increased in internality,

moving from a mean prescore of 8.85 to a postscore mean

of 7.93. The difference of .92 was almost an entire point










on the scale. The pre-post factor relationship was

significant with the high correlation of means of .67. The

standard error of the difference between means was .41

which yielded aZ score of 2.211. The pre-post change for

the SRI locus of control measure was, therefore, significant

at the .05 level.

In summary, there were no significant pre-post changes

in HISM Factor 1, Interpersonal Adequacy, HISM Factor 2,

Teacher-School, and HISM Factor 3, Personal Appearance.

There were, however, significant, positive pre-post changes

for HISM Factor Ji, Competence, and the SRI locus of control

scale.

Question 8: What is the nature of the relationship
between the four selected parent partic-
ilpation activities and pre-post change
in the measures of self-concept and locus
of control?

Four of the five preattitudinal measures were

significantly related to postscore change. In order to

determine whether or not any of the participation activities

of the project were related to this change, the canonical

correlation analysis was again utilized. The participation

variables were added to the preattitudinal scores and

partitioned as independent from the postattitudinal or

dependent variables. Table 4.5 lists the results of this

analysis and indicated that four canonical correlations

existed between the independent and dependent variables

at the .05 level of significance. Significance was









determined through the use of Bartlett's (1938) Chi-

square approximation to the distribution of the Wilk's

lambda Figures.

The canonical variable coefficients were listed for

each of the significant correlations and indicated the

largest source of variance for both independent and dependent

variable sets. The first canonical correlation (Rc) deter-

mined was 0.85. As indexed in the first canonical variate

list, the strongest relationship existed between pre-IISM

Factor 4, 0.88 and post-HISM Factor 4, 0.79. It was im-

portant to note that the next largest independent variable

source of variance was the inverse relationship indicated

for Visits Completed (-0.60). The strong influence of

the home visitation process was a pattern throughout the

analysis.

Canonical Variable List 2 confirmed this strong source

of variance with a coefficient of -3.34 for the number of

Visits Completed. This was most highly related to the post-

SRI variable with a coefficient of 0.94. More simply

stated, the more visits completed,the lower more internal

the score on an SRI scale. Also very highly related to

this variance was the number of visits scheduled with a

coefficient of 2.53.

The canonical correlation analysis having removed

the variance attributable to these first two relationships

produced a third significant correlation (Re = 0.68).









This third greatest variance was associated with the

relationship between the number of visits completed, coef-

ficient = -1.07, and post-HISM Factor 3 (-1.16). This

indicated that a direct relationship existed between the

number of home visits completed and the parent attitude

toward personal appearance.

A fourth and final canonical correlation, Re = 0.56,

was extracted and the coefficients of canonical variables

were an index of Lhis variance. The number of home visits

completed was again significantly related, -4.75, to two

dependent variables, post-HISM Factor 4 (-0.24) and post-

SRI (-0.25).

Through the use of the canonical correlation analysis,

significant relationships were indicated between the

number of home visitations and three attitudinal variables,

HISM Factor 3, Personal Appearance, HISM Factor 4, Competence,

and SRI, locus of control. The pre-post change, as deter-

miniled for Question 8 of thio; study, was significant only

for HISM Factor 4I and the SRI measure. Therefore, the

number of home visitations was directly and significantly

related to positive change in HISM Factor 4, Competence,

and the SRI locus of control measure.














CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS


Summary of the Study


One hundred forty-six lower socio-economic parents

of kindergarten and first grade children, newly enrolled

in Project Follow-Through, Richmond, Virginia, were

selected to participate in this study. Parents were

measured with pre and post self-concept and locus of con-

trol instruments, and their participation in four project

activities was monitored throughout the 1976-77 school year.

Sixty-one complete data sets were available for data analyses.

The relationships between the measured attitudinal and

behavioral variables were analyzed, and the results

reported in Crhapier LV.

When interpreting the results of this study, certain

cautions should be noted. Conclusions and generalizations

should be restricted to similar socio-economic groups.

The self-report nature of the self-concept and locus of

control scales may not have accurately reflected the real

behavior and beliefs of the project participants. Reactive

and testing threats to validity may have existed due to the

fact that such testing was mandatory for project participation.










Parent participation was also measured only by the

programmed activities of the Florida model of Follow-

Through and recorded only by the frequency of participa-

tion. More positive participation may have been exhibited

in other areas significantly related to the results of

this study. No attempt was made to isolate the many

variables effective in the lives of these participants,

conditions which would not only be relevant to any study

of this nature, but would possibly be significantly

related to its results. Additionally, the number of com-

plete data sets suffered an undesirable attrition. This

number, however, reached the very acceptable ratio of 4

to 1, data sets to variables.

The statistical procedures utilized in this study,

in particular, the multivariate analyses of canonical

correlation, were the most appropriate and effective means

for analysis and interpretation of the results. Appropriate

levels of significance were reached, and therefore, the

conclusions drawn from this study are offered as valid

interpretations.


Conclusions


Based on the results of this investigation, the fol-

lowing conclusions were established:

1. Project participants exhibited positive

preattitudinal self-concept scores on three










factors: 1) Interpersonal Adequacy,

2) Teacher-School, and 3) Personal Ap-

pearance.

2. Project participants exhibited negative

preattitudinal self-concept scores on the

Factor labeled Competence.

3. Project participation varied greatly

wiLh the individual and the activity with

highest participation measured in the home

visitation and lower participation in class-

room volunteering, PAC meetings, and PAC

activities.

4. Project participation cannot be predicted

by present IHISM and SRI instrumentation.

5. Pretest measures of self-concept and locus

of control were significantly related to

posttest scores on the same measures with

the exception of HISM Factor 1, Interpersonal

Adequacy.

6. Significant pre-post change of self-concept

and locus of control measures occurred only

for HISM Factor 4, Competence, and the SRI

scale.

7. The number of home visits completed was

consistently and significantly related to

positive change in the posLtest self-concept









Factor of Competence and in the post

locus of control score.

8. Project participation was significantly

related to positive change in the posttest

self-concept and locus of control scores.



Recommendations


The following recommendations were developed to

improve and further direct research in the study and evalua-

tion of parent education and parent involvement in the

school system:

1. The home visitation process, a parent

participation variable determined to be

significantly related to positive change

in self-concept and locus of control

measures, should be further developed

in orler to maximize its effective rela-

tionship with parent attitudinal variables.

2. Parent education programs should include

additional parent participation activities

which are significantly related to positive

self-concept and locus of control develop-

ment.

3. Parent participation variables such as

classroom volunteering and parent advisory










council meetings or activities, which

have been determined in this study not

to be related to positive self-concept

development, should be restructured or

investigated to determine their relation-

ship with other variables.

4. Further research should determine the

nature of the relationship between environ-

mental variables (i.e., age, state of

employment, family membership profile,

etc.) and parent self-concept development.

5. Further research should investigate the

relationship between parent participation

in the school system and child achievement.

6. Longitudinal studies should be developed

to determine the relationship between

selected parent participation activities

and parent self-concept and locus of

control measures.

7. Staffing and program administration of

parent education projects should at all

times reflect positive self-concepts

and locus of control in their interaction

with project participants.

8. Further research should determine the relative

merit of specific components of national parent





69



education models and synthesize these components

in order to provide the most effective model

for parent involvement in the school system.




































APPENDICES









APPENDIX A


DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
OFFICE OF EDUCATION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20202


June 17, 1976

Our Reference: CEP/Division of Follow Through
Administrative Memorandum #61

MEMORANDUM TO PROJECT DIRECTORS AND PAC CHAIRMEN

SUBJECT: IEW INCOME POVERTY GUIDELINES



In selecting children eligible to be included in the new
group of entering children funded by Follow Through for the
1976-77 school year, you should be aware of the new income
poverty guidelines, which are enclosed.

The following definitions, derived mainly from Current Popu-
lation Reports, P-60 No. 91, Bureau of the Census, December
1973, have been adopted for your use with these guidelines.

For the purpose of applying the guidelines to determine
eligibility:
A. INCOME Refers to total cash receipts before
taxes, from all sources. These include money
wages and salaries before any deductions, but
not including food or rent in lieu of wages.
They include receipts from self-employment or
from own farm or business after deductions
for business or farm expenses. They include
regular payments from public assistance, social
security, unemployment, and workmen's compen-
sation, strike benefits from union funds,
veterans' benefits, training stipends, alimony,
child support and military family allotments
or other regular support from an absent family
member of someone not living in the household;
government employee pensions, private pensions
and regular insurance or annuity payments;
and income from dividends, interest, rents,
royalties, or income from estates and trusts.









Page 2 MEMORANDUM TO PROJECT DIRECTORS AND PAC CHAIRMEN



For eligibility purposes, income does not refer
to the following money receipts: Any assets
drawn down as withdrawals from a bank, sale of
property, house or car, tax refunds, gifts,
one-time insurance payments or compensation for
injury; also to be disregarded is non-cash income,
such as the bonus value of food and fuel produced
and consumed on farms and the imputed value of
rent from owner-occupied or non-farm housing.

B. A FARM RESIDENCE Is defined as any dwelling on
a place of 10 acres or more with $50 or more
annual sales of farm products raised there; or
any place of less than 10 acres having product
sales of $250 or more.



Rosemary C. Wilson
Director, Division of
Follow Through


Enclosure









INCOME POVERTY GUIDELINES FOR CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES
FAMILY SIZE NON-FARM FAMILY FARM FAMILY


$ 2,800


3,700

4,600

5,500

6,400


$ 2,400


3,160

3,920

4,680

5,440


6 7,300
For family units with more than six members
each additional member in a non-farm family
each additional member in a farm family.


6,200
add $900 for
and $760 for


INCOME POVERTY GUIDELINES FOR ALASKA
FAMILY SIZE NON-FARM FAMILY FARM FAMILY


$ 3,520


4,640

5,760

6,880

8,000


$ 3,000


3,950

4,900

5,850

6,800


6 9,120 7,750
For family units with more than six members add $1,120 for
each additional member in a non-farm family and $950 for
each additional member in a farm family.

INCOME POVERTY GUIDELINES FOR HAWAII
FAMILY SIZE NON-FARM FAMILY FARM FAMILY


$ 3,240


4,270

5,300

6,330

7,360


$ 2,780

3,650


4,520

5,390

6,260


6 8,390 7,130
For family units with more than six members add $1,030 for
each additional member in a non-farm family and $870 for
each additional member in a farm family.














APPENDIX B

HOW I SEE MYSELF SCALE


P.E./Parent Name-


Child's Name


Child's Teacher__


1. Nothing gets me too mad


2. I don't stay with things
and finish them

3. I'm very good at drawing


4. I don't like to work
with others

5. I wish I were smaller
(taller)

6. I worry a lot

7. 1 wish T could dlo Oomne-
thing with my hair

8. Teachers like me


9. I've lots of energy

LO. I am ignored at parties

Ll. I'm just the right
weight

12. Women don't like me

13. I'm very good at
speaking before a group


City

Date

Collected by


1 2 3 4 5 I get mad easily
and explode

1 2 3 4 5 I stay with some-
thing til I finish

1 2 3 4 5 I'm not much good
in drawing

1 2 3 4 5 T like to work with
others

1 2 3 4 5 I'm just the right
height

1 2 3 4 5 I don't worry much

1 2 3 4 5 My hair is nice-
looking

1 2 3 4 5 Teachers don't like
me

1 2 3 4 5 I haven't much energy

1 2 3 4 5 I am a hit at parties

1 2 3 4 5 I wish I were heavier
(lighter)

1 2 3 4 5 Women like me a lot

1 2 3 4 5 I'm not much good
at speaking before
a group








Follow Through Project IHOW i SEE MYSELF SCALE


14. My face Is pretty
(good looking)


15. I'm very good in music


16. I get along well with
teachers

17. I don't like teachers


18. I don't feel at ease,
comfortable inside
myself

19. 1 don't like to try new
things

20. I have trouble control-
ling my feelings

21. I did well in school
work

22. I want men to like me


23. I don't like the way I
look

24. I don't want other
women to like me

25. I'm very healthy

26. I don't dance well


27. I write well

28. I like to work alone


29. I use my time well


30. I'm not much good at
making things with my
hands


1 2 3 4 5 I wish I were
prettier (good)
looking

1 2 3 5 I'm not much good
in music

1 2 3 4 5 I don't get along
with teachers

1 2 3 4 5 I like teachers very
much

1 2 3 4 5 I feel very at ease,
comfortable inside
myself

1 2 3 4 5 I like to try new
things

1 2 3 4 5 I can handle my
feelings

1 2 3 4 5 I didn't do well in
school work

1 2 3 1 5 I don't want men
to like me

1 2 3 4 5 I like the way I look


1 2 3 4 5 I want other women
to like me

1 2 3 4 5 I get sick a lot

1 2 3 4 5 I'm a very good
dancer

1 2 3 4 5 1 don't write well

1 2 3 4 5 I don't like to
work alone

1 2 3 4 5 1 don't know how
to plan my time

1 2 3 4 5 I'm very good at
making things with
my hands


Page 2








Follow Through Project H1OW I SEE MYSELF SCALE


31. I wish I could do some- I
thing about my skin

32. School was never in- 1
terestinpg to me


33. 1 don't do my housework 1
well

34. I'm not as smart as the 1
others

35. Men like me a lot 1

36. My clothes are not as 1
I'd like

37. I liked school 1

38. I wish 1 were built 1
like others

39. I don't read well 1

40. I don't learn noew
things easily


2 3 4 5 My skin is nice-
looking

2 3 4 5 When I was in
school it was
interesting to me

2 3 4 5 1 do a good job at
housework

2 3 4 5 I'm smarter than
most of the others

2 3 4 5 Men don't like me

2 3 4 5 My clothes are nice


2 3 4 5 1 didn't like school

2 3 4 5 I'm happy with the
way I am

2 3 4 5 1 read very well

2 3 4 5 I learn new things
easily


Developed by Ira J. Gordon, Director Institute for
Development o Human Resources, College of Education, University
of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32601


Page 3














APPENDIX C
REPORT ON THE REFACTORING OF THE HISM1


The original factor scores had been based on the high

school version of the How I See Myself Scale, and we felt

that with some of the items changed, and with adults as

respondents, these scores might not be the most accurate and

useful. Therefore, a refactoring of the revised HISM Scale

for parents was performed on -he data from 2,053 parents

from the 1969-70 pretest administration.

All 40 items were correlated with each other, and various

statistical operations were performed to group those items

which related highest with each other. Four such groups,

or factors, emerged.

Factor one was the most stable. It was named Inter-

personal Adequacy and consisted of the following test items:

2 I stay with things until I finish them.

4 I like to work with others.

12 Women like me a lot.

17 I like teachers very much.

18 I feel at ease, comfortable inside myself.

19 I like to try new things.

20 I can handle my feelings.

23 I like the way I look

24 I want other women to like me.

32 Housework is very interesting.









33 I do a good job at housework.

38 I am happy with the way I am

39 I read very well

40 1 learn now things easily.

With a few changes this factor is very similar to

that extracted with children' scores.

The second factor appears to be a combination of the

Teacher-School, the Physical Adequacy, and the factor which

appeared for males only, Boys-Social, on the high school

norms. It consists of the following:

8 People like me.

9 I've lots of energy.

16 1 get along well with teachers.

21 I did well in school work.

22 I want men to like me.

25 I'm very healthy.

27 I write well.

29 I use my time well.

35 Men like me a lot.

37 I liked school.

This cluster of scores is not easily named. After

inspection, it has been tentatively labeled Social-Male

because of items 22 and 35. In this respect, it differs

from the first Factor.

Factor three is clear and stable. It is the Personal

Appearance factor consisting of items:









7 My hair is nice looking.

1il My face is pretty (good looking).

23 1 like the way I look.

31 My skin is nice looking.

36 My clothes are nice.

38 I'm happy with the way I am (built).

Factor four is labeled Competence. The items which load

on this factor are:

13 I'm very good at speaking before a group.

15 I'm very gcod in music.

21 I did well in school work.

27 T write well.

34 I'm smarter than most of the others.

39 I read very well.

This factor seems to reflect the parent's feelings of

academic or intellectual ability, and combines items from

the previously all-male high school factor, Language Adequacy,

and the general Academic Adequacy factor (items 21, 34, 39).

This factor structure seems to be sound on the face of

it, and we are new going to score the 1969-70 HISM using

these four factors. We will also score the 1970-71 data on

these.




An interim report from Ira J. Gordon and Harris Jaffee to
Florida Parent Education Follow Through and Head Start
Planned Variation personnel.














APPENDIX D

SOCIAL REACTION INVENTORY


P.E./Parent Name ___ City

Child's Name Date

Child's Teacher ____ _Collected by


I More Strongly Believe That:

1. a. Children get into trouble because their parents punish
them too much.

b. The trouble with most children today is that their
parents are too easy with them.

2. a. Many of the unhappy things in people's lives are
partly due to bad luck.

b. People's troubles result from the mistakes they make.

3. a. One of the biggest reasons why we have wars is
because people don't take enough interest in govern-
ment.

b. There will always be wars, no matter how hard people
try to prevent them.

4. a. In the long run people get the respect they deserve
in this world.

b. It is the sad truth that an individual's worth often
passes without being recognized no matter how hard
he tries.

5. a. The idea that teachers are unfair to students
is "hot air."

b. Most students don't realize how much their grades are
influenced by accident or chance.










Follow Through Project SOCIAL REACTION INVENTORY Page 2

6. a. Without the right breaks one cannot be a good and
able leader.

b. Able people who fail to become leaders have not
taken advantage of their opportunities.

7. a. No matter how hard you try, some people just don't
like you.

b. People who can't get others to like them, don't
understand how to get along with others.

8. a. What a person is born with plays the biggest part in
determining what they are like.

b. It is one's experiences in life which determine what
they are like.

9. a. I have often found that what is going to happen will
happen.

b. Putting trust in fate has never turned out as well
for me as making a plan to take a certain course of
action.

10. a. In the case of the well prepared student there is
hardly ever such a thing as an unfair test.

b. Many times test questions tend to be so different
from class work, that studying is really a waste of
time.

11. a. Becoming a success is a matter of hard work, luck
has little or nothing to do with it.

b. Getting a good job depends mainly on being in the
right place at the right time.

12. a. The average citizen can have an influence in govern-
ment plans.

b. This world is run by a few people in power, and there
is not much the little guy can do about it.

13. a. When I make plans, I am almost certain that I can
make them work.

b. It is not always wise to plan too far ahead because
many things turn out to be a matter of good or bad
luck anyhow.









Follow Through Project SOCIAL REACTION INVENTORY Page 3


14. a. There are certain people who are just no good.

b. There is some good in everybody.

15. a. In my case. getting what I want has little or nothing
to do with luck.

b. Many times we might just as well decide what to do
by tossing a coin.

16. a. Who gets to be the boss often depends on who was
lucky enough to be in the right place first.

b. Getting people to do the right thing depends upon
being able, luck has little or nothing to do with it.

17. a. As far as world affairs are concerned, most of us
are pushed around by forces we can neither under-
stand, nor control.

b. By taking an active part in government and social
affairs the people can control world events.

18. a. Most people don't realize the point to which their
lives are controlled by accident and chance.

b. There is really no such thing as "luck."

19. a. One should always be willing to admit his mistakes.

b. It is usually best to cover up one's mistakes.

20. a. It is hard to know whether or not a person really
likes you.

b. How many friends you have depends upon how nice a
person you are.

21. a. In the long run the bad things that happen to us are
made up for by the good ones.

b. Most troubles are the result of lack of know-how,
lack of knowledge, being lazy, or all three.

22. a. With enough effort we can clean up dirty government.

b. It is difficult for people to have much control
over the things government leaders do in office.










Follow Through Project SOCIAL REACTION INVENTORY Page 4


23. a. Sometimes I can't understand how teachers arrive
at the grades they give.

b. The harder, I study, the better grades I get.

24. a. A good leader expects people to decide for them-
selves what they should do.

b. A good leader makes it clear to everybody what
their jobs are.

25. a. Many times I feel that I have little influence over
the things that happen to me.

b. It is impossible for me to believe that chance or
luck plays an important part in my life.

26. a. People are lonely because they don't try to be friendly.

b. There is not much use in trying too hard to please
people--if they like you, they like you.

27. a. There is too much emphasis on athletics in high
school.

b. Team snorts are an excellent way to build character.

28. a. What happens to me is my own doing.

b. Sometimes I feel that I don't have enough control
over the direction my life is taking.

29. a. Most of the time I cannot understand why politicians
behave the way they do.

b. In the long run, the people are responsible for bad
government on a national as well as on a local level.







Adapted by larry M. Bilker, Institute for Development
of Human Resource2,, College of Education, University of
Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32601, from Rotter I-E Scale.














APPENDIX E

S.R.I. SCORING INSTRUCTIONS


SoverL'n itmins in the instrument are dummy items and

are not used in scoring.

For each of the below listed items, the indicated

responses (either a or b) are to be considered as ones (l's)

and summed to arrive at a single score for the instrument:

2 a 16 a

3 b 17 a

I b 18 a

5 b 20 a

6 a 21 a

7 a 22 b

9 a 23 a

10 b 25 a

11 b 26 b

12 b 28 b

13 b 29 a

15 a


Total score ran i-e is from 0 to 23.



















APPENDIX F

PAC MrLET[NG/ACTIVITY SICi'-IN SHEET


rO 1l 16, June, 1976


Connunity

Check' u. roprlnte category and fill in appropriate blank

1. C:ty- l Je P\C necrtirg

2. BiilJng PAC meeting
School

3. PAC subccri:ttee meeting
Subco., ttee


(I[i i i .a n [r t
ELx ple. iarr ct .nith Exapl Carul Sithn
:,v Jne --


Date


ame o: Activity

5. Other





APPENDIX G
PARENT EDUCATOR WEEKLY REPORT









IT -
2i

-, -- I














til
_ _ _ _- I ,-7 1

I 7i
__,___ ..._ I lilliji 1111,
;_- I i i -: i -- i-'



__ __ __ __ __ LI j I I 1 i 1 I I i- : i [ i !
-_--_---_ --I--I-. -.r
.I I i
i k I I i , I iI ,
-. -I-.L



_ I iI 1-- 1;. ... I
S'I I Ii I i


I:, l i, __ r .. l- r n l - -
, L -_ .. . --- 1 -i i _, I


II IL-L-- --Ii i I-
I <4:I H 7 ~1T:i- C-i.-c

tI Ii 1 1 I















APPENDIX H

CLASSROOM VOLU ELR REPORT PFOrP

Teacher's NJam


For 'S, June, 1976

SCorou-nty


Y1o;r t














REFERENCES


Adkins, Parent involvement in the classroom. Journal of
Research and Development in Education, 1975, 8 (2),
2-6.

Allport, G. Pattern and growth in personality. New York:
Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1936.

Ausubel, D. Psychology of meaningful verbal learning.
New York: Grune and Stratton, 1963.

Bartlett, M. Further aspects of the theory of multiple
regression. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical
Society, 1938, 34, 33-40.

Battle, E. The relationship of social class and ethnic
group to the attitudes of internal vs. external
control of reinforcement for children. Master's
thesis, Ohio State University, 1962.

Battle, E., and Rotter, J. Children's feelings of
personal control as related to social class and ethnic
group. Journal of Personality, 1963, 31, 482-490.

Bayley, N., and Schaeffer, E. Correlation of maternal
and child behavior with development of mental ability
Monograph of the Society for Research in Child
Development, 1960, 29 (6).

Bilker, L. Locus of internal-external control expectancy
and expectancy changes among disadvantaged mothers.
Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida, 1970.

Bradshaw, C. Relationship between maternal behavior and
infant performance in environmentally disadvantaged
homes. Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida,
19G8.

Breivogel, ., and Greenwood, G. The school advisory
committee. Gainesville: Florida Educational
Research and Development Council, 1973.

Bronfenbrcnner, U. Is early intervention effective?
(Report on longitudinal evaluations of preschool
programs for the Office of Child Development, United
States Department of Health, Education and Welfare).
1974, IT.









Brookover, W., Thomas, S., and Patterson, A. Self-concept
of ability and school achievement. Sociology of
Education, 1964, 37, 271-278.

Campbell, R. Community control. Southern Education Report,
1968, 4, 10-13.

Carew, J. What are effective home learning environments
for the pre-school years? A speech given at an
Institute for Development of Human Resources Conference,
College of Education, University of Florida, March
29-31, 1976.

Casler, ,. The effects of extra tactile stimulation on
a group of institutionalized infants. Genetic
Psychology Monographs, 1965, 137-178.

Coleman, J. Equality of educational opportunity.
Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966.

Combs, A.,and Snygg, D. Individual behavior. (Rev. ed.)
New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1959.

Combs, A., and Spoer, D. The perceptual organization of
effective counselors. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 1963, X (3), 222-226.

Combs, C. Perception and self scholastic underachievement
in the academically capable. The Personnel and
Guidance Journal, 1964, XLIII (1), 47-51.

Costello, J. (Review and summary of a National Survey of
the Parent-Child Center Program prepared for the
Office of Child Development,United States Department
of Health, Education and Welfare). August, 1970.

Crandall, V., Katkovsky, W., and Crandall, V. Children's
beliefs in their control of reinforcements in intel-
lectual-academic situations. Child Development, 1965,
36, 91-109.

Darlington, R., Weinberg, S., and Walberg, H. Canonical
variate analysis and related techniques. Review of
Educational Research, 1973, '13 (4), 433-454.

Davidson, II., and Lang, G. Children's perception of
their teacher's feelings toward them related to self-
perception, school achievement and behavior. Journal
of Experimental Education, 1960, 29 (2), 107-118.









Dean, D. Alienation: Its meaning and measurement.
American Sociological Review, 1961, 42, 753.

Deutsch, M. The disadvantaged child and the learning
process, In A. H. Passow, (Ed.), Education in
Depressed Areas. New York: Columbia University
Press, 1963, 163-179.

Deutsch, M. Facilitating development of the preschool
child: Social psychological perspectives. Merrill
Palmer Quarterly, 1964, 10, 249-263.

Evans, E. Contemporary influences in early childhood
education. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,
Inc., 1975.

Federal Interagency Day Care Requirements. Washington,
D.C.: United States Department of Health, Education
and Welfare, September, 1968.

Fink, M. Self-concept as it relates to academic under-
achievement. California Journal of Education Research,
1962 (February), XIII, 57-62.

Franklin, R. Youth's expectancies about internal vs.
external control of reinforcement related to N
variables. Doctoral dissertation, Purdue University,
1963.

Friejo, H., Gordon, I., and Bilker, L. Internal-external
control of expectancy of reinforcement and family
characteristics in disadvantaged homes. Unpublished
report, Institute for Development of Human Resources,
University of Florida, 1968.

Froebel, F. Mother's songs, games and stories. Translated
by Frances and Emily Ford. London: William Rice, 1907.

Goff, R. Problems and emotional difficulties of Negro
children. New York: Bureau of Publications,
Teachers College, Columbia University, 1949.

Goodman, J. Institutional racism: the crucible of black
identity. In J. A. Banks and J. D. Grambs (Eds.),
Black self-concept: Implications for education and
social sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1972.

Gordon, I. A test manual for the How I See Myself Scale,
Gainesville: Florida Educational Research and
Development Council, 1968.









Gordon, I. Early child stimulation through parent educa-
tion (Final report to the Children's Bureau,
Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Grant
No. PHS-R-306). Gainesville, Florida, 1969.

Gordon, I. Parent involvement in compensatory education.
Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1970.

Gordon, I. What are effective home learning environments
for the school years? Paper presented at the Conference
of the Institute for Development of Human Resources,
Gainesville, Florida, March, 1976.

Gordon, I., and Guinagh, B. School performance as a function
of early stimulation (Final report to the Office of
Child Development, Grant #NIH-IHEW-OCD-09-C-638).
Gainesville: Institute for Development of Human
Resources, University of Florida, December, 1976.

Gore, P., and Rotter, J. A personality correlate of
social action. Journal of Personality, 1963, 31, 58-64.

Gough, H. Reference handbook for the Gough Adjectives
Check List. Mimeographed, BerKeley, California:
University of California Institute for Personality
Assessment and Research, 1955.

Grant, C. Age difference in self-concept from early
adulthood to old age. Doctoral dissertation, University
of Nebraska, 1967.

Gray, S., Klaus, R., Miller, J., and Forrester, B. Before
first grade. New York: Teachers College Press, 1970.

Grotberg, E. (Ed.). Critical issues in research related to
disadvantaged children (Research seminars held under
Office of economicc Opportunity Contract No. 4098).
Princeton, New Jersey: Education Testing Service,
September, 1969.

Guilford, J. Fundamental statistics in psychology and
education. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956.

Hartshore, H., and May, H. Studies in the nature of
character, III: Studies in the organization of
character. New York: MacMillan Co., 1930.

Herman, S. The relationship between maternal variable
scores and infant performance in a Negro experimental
stimulation training population. Doctoral dissertation,
University of Florida, 1970.










Hertzig, M., Birch, H., Thomas, A., and Mendez, 0. Class
and ethnic differences in the responsiveness of pre-
school children to cognitive demands. Monographs of
the Society for Research in Child Development, 1968,
33 (117), 69.

Hess, R., Shipman, V., Brophy, J., and Baer, R. Cognitive
environments of urban preschool children. Graduate
School of Education, University of Chicago, 1968.

Honig, A. Parent involvement in early childhood education.
Washington, D.C.: National Association for the
Education of Young Children, 1975.

IIotelling, H. The most predictable criterion. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 1935, 26, 139-142.

Hotelling, H. Relations between two sets of variates.
Biometrika, 1936, 28, 321-377.

Jencks, C. Inequality: A reassessment of the effect of
family and schooling in America. New York: Harper
and Row Publishers, 1972.

Karnes, M. Goal: Language development. Springfield,
Massachusetts: Milton Bradley, 1972.

Karnes, M., and Sehrbach, R. Parental attitudes and educa-
tion in the culture of poverty. Journal of Research
and Development in Education, 1975, 8 (2), 44-53.

Kerlinger, F., and Fedhazur, E. Multiple regression in
behavioral research. Atlanta: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston, Inc., 1973.

Kittrell, J. Enriching the preschool experiences of children
from age three: The program. Children, 1968, 15,
135-139.

Klaus, R., and Gray, S. The early training project for
disadvan aged children: A report five years after.
Nashville, Tennessee: George Peabody College, 1969.

Koury, R. Personal communication, May 18, 1977.

Kvaraceus, W. Negro self-concept. New York: McGraw-
Hill, Inc., 1965.

Lefcourt, H., and Ladwig, G. The American Negro: A
problem in expectancies. Journal of Personality,
1965, 1, 377-380.









Levenstein, P. Cognitive growth in preschoolers through
verbal interactions with mothers. American Journal
of Orthopsychiatry, 1970, a, 78-81.

Lewis, M. Language, thought, and personality in infancy
and childhood. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1963.

Lillie, D. The parent in early childhood education.
Journal of Research and Development in Education,
1975, 8 (2), 7-13.

Llabre, M. A factor analytic study of children's self-
concepts in three ethnic groups. Paper presented at
the National Council on Measurement in Education,
New York, April, 1977.

Loretan, J. Alternatives to intelligence Testing. In
R. C. Ebel (Chairman), Proceedings of the 1965 Conference
on Testing Problems. Princeton, New Jersey:
Educational Testing Service, 1966.

Mayeske, G. A study of the achievement of our nation's
students. Washington, D.C.: United States Department
of Health, Education and Welfare, 1973.

McCarthy, J. Changing parent attitudes and improving
language and intellectual abilities of culturally
disadvantaged four-year-old children through parent
involvement. Contemporary Education, 1969, 40,
166-168.

Morrison, D. Multivariate statistical methods. New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1976, 259-263.

Moss, 11., and Kagan, J. Report on personal constancy and
change from the Eels longitudinal study. Vita Humana,
1964.

Mosteller, F., and Moynihan, D. On equality of educational
opportunity. New York: Vintage Books, 1972.

National Survey of the impacts of Head Start centers on
community institutions (Final report to Froject Head
Start, Office of Child Development, United States
Department of Education, Contract No. B89-4638). May,
1970.

Palmer, F. Has compensatory education failed? A speech
given at an Institute for Development of Human
Resources Conference, College of Education, University
of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, March 29-31, 1976.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs