Title: Chin and Benne's change strategies in relationship to programs and policies in student affairs
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00102853/00001
 Material Information
Title: Chin and Benne's change strategies in relationship to programs and policies in student affairs
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Creator: Skorheim, Mary J., 1949-
Copyright Date: 1986
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00102853
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: ltuf - AEN9869
oclc - 16167690

Full Text







CHIN AND BENNE'S CHANGE STRATEGIES IN
RELATIONSHIP TO PROGRAMS AND POLICIES IN STUDENT AFFAIRS

















By

MARY J. SKORHEIM


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

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


1986










ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Special recognition is made as an appreciation to numerous special

people whose influences were instrumental in the completion of this

project.

Sincere appreciation goes to Dr. James Wattenbarger, chairman of

my committee, and Dr. James Pitts, committee member, for their

support, advice, and encouragement which served as valuable catalysts

for me.

A special thank you is extended to Dr. Art Sandeen, cochairman of

my committee, who provided patience, enthusiasm, and much appreciated

advice throughout the doctoral program. His guidance during the

completion of the dissertation provided me with direction and

confidence.

To my friends and colleagues in the Office for Student Services,

University of Florida, especially Dr. James Scott and Dr. Phyllis

Meek, a heartfelt thank you is given for their professional and

personal support. I also thank my wonderful friends for their

understanding and confidence in me. A special thank you is extended

to John Wahl for his assistance in the analysis of the data.

Lastly, a warm thank you goes to my family whose love has been a

constant source of strength. My parents, Ray and Vi Skorheim, have

always believed in me, encouraged me to pursue my goals, and provided

me with the faith that I could accomplish what was important to me.

My brother Randy not only provided support for me but kept me in touch

with a sense of humor and laughter. My sister and special friend,










Nancy, provided constant encouragement, a companion to laugh with, a

helping hand, and an ear to listen. A special recognition is made in

memory of my brother Danny, whose acceptance of life and its

challenges helped me to define my own beliefs.












TABLE OF CONTENTS


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...................................................... ii


LIST OF TABLES......................... .............................vi


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


CHAPTERS


I DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY.......................................1


Introduction........................................ ..
Statement of the Problem.........................
Recent Areas of Change in Student Affairs.........
Theoretical Framework............................
Overview of Research Methodology..................
Overview of the Study.............................


........... 1
........... 6
........... 8
............16
.......... 19
............22


II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE......................................23


Chin and Benne's Theory of Change.................
Change and Student Affairs........................
Recent Areas of Change in Student Affairs.........
Chapter Summary......................................


............23
............30
.......... 37
........... 52


III RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY...............................53


Research Objectives...............................
Research Population and Sample....................
Development of the Instrument.....................
Designing and Printing of the Instrument..........
Administration of the Instrument.................
Treatment of the Data.............. .............
Chapter Summary................................................


............53
........... 54
............55
............61
............62
............62
.......... 63


IV PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE DATA........................ 64


Research Sample.............. .......................
Analysis of the Data.............................
Chapter Summary...................................


............ 64
............ 65
............ 82


V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ....................................... 85


Development of the Study..........................
Summary of Major Findings........................
Conclusions.......... ........ .....................
Implications.......................................
Implications for Future Research..................


............85
.......... 90
...... ... 91
........... 92
............96










TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)


APPENDICES

A COVER LETTER FOR SURVEY REGARDING AREAS OF CHANGE.............98

B SURVEY FORM FOR IDENTIFYING AREAS OF CHANGE...................99

C COVER LETTER TO JUDGES...................................... 00

D SUMMARY OF CHIN AND BENNE'S TAXONOMY OF PLANNED CHANGE.......102

E INSTRUCTION TO JUDGES FOR VALIDATION OF RESPONSES............ 104

F RESPONSES OF CHANGE EXPERTS TO CHANGE STRATEGY VALIDATION.... 105

G SURVEY INSTRUMENT...................................... ....... 106

H COVER LETTER FOR RESEARCH INSTRUMENT FOR FIRST MAILING.......113

I COVER LETTER FOR RESEARCH INSTRUMENT FOR SECOND MAILING......114

J TABLES OF GENERAL DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION....................115

REFERENCES...........................................................117

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH................................................125










LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 4-1.....Analysis of Variance for Overall
Change..................................... ........... 68

TABLE 4-2.....Analysis of Variance for Empirical-
Rational Chance Strategy ..............................69

TABLE 4-3.....Bonferroni t Test for Empirical-
Rational Change Strategy...............................70

TABLE 4-4.....Analysis of Variance for Normative-
Re-Educative Change Strategy........................... 71

TABLE 4-5.....Analysis of Variance for Power-
Coercive Change Strategy...............................72

TABLE 4-6.....Analysis of Variance for Overall Change
as a Function of Administrative Type and
Change Strategies......................................74

TABLE 4-7.....Means and Frequencies for the Analysis
of Variance for Overall Change as a Function
of Administrative Type and Change Strategy............. 74

FIGURE 4-1....Mean Scores for Overall Change by Predominant
Change Strategies for Three Types of Administrators.... 75

TABLE 4-8.....Analysis of Variance for Overall
Dominance of Change Strategies......................... 77

TABLE 4-9.....Bonferroni t Test for Dominant Change
Strategy............................................... 78

TABLE 4-10....Numbers Used in the Analysis of Variance
for Ten Areas of Change................................ 79

TABLE 4-11.....Analysis of Variance for Ten
Areas of Change........................................ 80

TABLE 4-12....Bonferroni t Test for Drug Abuse........................81

TABLE 4-13....Bonferroni t Test for Technology......................82

TABLE F-1.....Summary of Validation of Change Strategy Responses....105

TABLE J-1.....Employment Profile of Respondents .....................115

TABLE J-2.....Type of Institution................................. 115

TABLE J-3.....Additional Demographic Information.................... 116

















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

CHIN AND BENNE'S CHANGE STRATEGIES IN
RELATIONSHIP TO PROGRAMS AND POLICIES IN STUDENT AFFAIRS

By

Mary J. Skorheim

December, 1986

Chairman: Dr. James Wattenbarger
Cochairman: Dr. Arthur Sandeen
Major Department: Educational Leadership

The purpose of this study was to determine if the change

strategies of Chin and Benne, as described in The Planning of Change,

were seen by three types of administrators at public four-year

colleges and universities as being equally important as processes

involved in causing change to occur in the area of student affairs.

The three strategies of change were (a) empirical-rational, (b)

normative-re-educative, and (c) power-coercive.

To obtain appropriate information to complete this study, the

researcher developed an instrument, based on the literature, that

contained 10 statements regarding change in student affairs within the

past 20 years. Following each statement were three responses that

reflected the change strategies. The survey was mailed to three

groups of administrators: chief academic, administrative, and student


vii










affairs officers. There were 162 administrators in each of the three

groups and 486 colleges and universities included in the study.

The one-way and two-way analyses of variance were used to analyze

the data. If significant differences existed, a follow-up procedure,

the Bonferroni procedure for identifying specific differences, was

used.

The results of the study provided support for the theory of Chin

and Benne. In change in student affairs, the three strategies are

perceived to cause change to occur. However, there were differences

among the strategies in terms of perceived importance and frequency of

usage.

In overall use of strategies, chief student affairs officers

perceived the empirical-rational category of change as more important

than did academic or administrative officers. There were also

differences among the respondents in their perceptions of a dominant

strategy. By importance, both the empirical-rational and the

normative-re-educative strategies were rated as more important than

the power-coercive strategies. The normative-re-educative strategy

was used most frequently.

There were also differences in the 10 areas of change. In the

area of drug abuse, the power-coercive strategy was perceived as

dominant by importance and the empirical-rational was used most

frequently. The empirical-rational was dominant by importance and

frequency in the area of increased use of technology.


viii

















CHAPTER I
DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY


Introduction

The profession of student affairs has experienced significant

change during the past 20 years. The profession has had to respond to

increasingly complex university environments and to more diverse

student needs. These changes occurred as a response to several

factors including legislation, court decisions, increased emphasis on

access, cultural pluralism, and current societal and political

issues. The consequences of these changes for student affairs

professionals have been new populations of students, and new programs

and services designed to meet their needs. As a result, there is more

diversification in the student affairs profession than ever before.

This expanded and diversified role for student affairs

professionals has been evolving since the beginning of higher

education in the United States. Early colleges, primarily religious

in nature, had the trustees, faculty, and presidents performing

student affairs functions (Fenske, 1980). Through legislation such as

the Morrill Land Grant Act in 1862, education became more pluralistic,

more secular in its role, and focused more on technology. Enrollments

expanded, knowledge became more specialized into academic disciplines,

and the role of the presidents, faculty, and trustees changed. There

was a need to assign traditional responsibility for student life to

others.










According to Rudolph (1962), in pre-Civil War days the college or

university typically had an administrative staff of a part-time

librarian, a treasurer, and a president. The development of the

administration usually progressed as follows:

first a secretary of the faculty, then a registrar, and then in
succession a vice-president, a dean, a dean of women, a chief
business officer, an assistant dean, a dean of men, a director of
admissions and in time a corps of administrative assistants to
the president. (Rudolph, 1962, pp. 434-435)

Not only did administrative staff increase but the number of

individuals working in student affairs increased as well. Harvard

University is credited with hiring in 1870 the first college dean

whose responsibilities were to include enrollment of students,

discipline, and teaching (Mueller, 1961). At Johns Hopkins, in 1889,

the first head of faculty advisors was assigned and by 1900 almost all

sizeable institutions had deans of men (Fenske, 1980).

The focus of many institutions broadened during the early 1900s as

well. In addition to the strong thrust of scholarship, attention was

beginning to be given to the personal development of the student.

Institutions responded to the belief that there was an obligation to

assist students to succeed once they had enrolled at their college or

university (Mueller, 1961).

In addition to the changing focus of colleges and universities,

students themselves were organizing and developing their own groups.

Between the Civil War and World War I, organizations such as literary

societies, intercollegiate sports clubs, drama groups, and Greek

letter organizations were developed. This was, in part, a reaction to

the increased scholarly emphasis of the institutions and the students'

need for both social and intellectual pursuits (Fenske, 1980).










After World War I the personnel movement, which was used heavily

in the United States army with mental testing and counseling, had an

impact on higher education. Tests were employed by colleges to

improve their selection process and to decrease the number of student

academic failures. The profession also expanded to include placement

services and student health services in response to the expectation of

employers, parents, and the students themselves. The focus of student

affairs maintained this basic structure during the Depression and

until after World War II.

After World War II, the student affairs profession began its most

dramatic expansion. The Servicemen's Readjustment Act resulted in a

huge need for an increase in academic, financial, and personal

advising on most campuses (Fenske, 1980). In 1947, the President's

Commission of Higher Education recommended the removal of ethnic,

racial, and financial barriers to higher education. By 1958, the

profession had 20 different functions as listed by the American

Council of Education's Committee of the Administration of Student

Personnel Work (Fenske, 1980), reflecting the increased diversity of

students and the rising expectations of the public for services.

Change in student affairs continued to accelerate during the years

1960-1980. Brodzinski (1980) reported the results of a study in which

chief student affairs officers identified the amount of responsibility

they had for 20 functional areas of responsibility. The results were

compared with a 1962-1963 study by Ayers, Tripp, and Russel (1966).

The study indicated a decrease in only one area. There was a 30%

increase in three areas; a 20% increase in an additional three areas;










and the chief student affairs officers identified 55 different

functional areas under the "other" category. The responsibility of

the student affairs officers have changed and increased greatly since

the early 1960s (Ayers et al., 1966; Brodzinski, 1980). The

phenomenon of change was predicted to continue and the forecast

included "continual change, constant ferment, and uneasy confusion"

(Brown, 1972, p. 13).

These changes occurred at a time when fiscal resources were quite

limited. Funding for student affairs was adequate between the Korean

War and the Vietnam War (Lawrence, 1980) and student affairs

professionals enjoyed a relatively healthy environment in which to

pursue the goal of assisting students. During the latter part of the

1960s and the early 1970s the situation changed. Student unrest

regarding the civil rights movement and the Vietnam War, high

unemployment, inflation, and a loss of public support resulted in more

conservative and stringent funding of higher education (Lawrence,

1980).

This financial conservatism demanded accountability and stimulated

creativity in the use of resources. Student affairs, when compared

with other institutional functions for support, was sometimes viewed

as an "extra." With limited resources, institutions were most likely

to support traditional teaching and research programs, and services

supporting the personal development of students often were assigned

lower priority.

The most important change affecting professionals in student

affairs recently has been the emphasis upon meeting the needs of










specially identified groups of students. There has been an increasing

recognition that institutions must adapt their services, staffing,

facilities, and policies to students with special needs. Some of

these groups include disabled, minority, adult, and women students.

Each of these groups has gained increased attention, and student

affairs staff have provided programs and services to them.

The administration of student affairs is a profession that has

been characterized by change. Professionals in the field have had to

adapt to a variety of changes in students, in the colleges themselves,

and in the expectations that society has for higher education.

Commenting on change in student affairs, Blaesser and Crookston

(1983) stated the following:

Changes in college student personnel programs are typically
brought about in diverse ways--through administrative fiat, staff
turnovers, financial ups and downs, recommendation from faculty
and student committees, marshalling of data from local, regional,
and national research, or pressure groups from students, faculty,
administration, alumni, and the surrounding community. (p. 193)

An understanding of how change occurs is critical at a time when

resources are limited and accountability is stressed. To continue to

meet the increasing demands of constant change and to maintain

institutional support student affairs professionals must become

familiar with how change occurs. Planned change is a systematic

methodology used to effect a difference in a specific setting.

Intentional change strategies need to be employed by student affairs

officers (Blaesser, 1978). "An intermittent and uncoordinated series

of planned change efforts .. and practice will not suffice"

(Blaesser, 1978, p. 112).











Statement of the Problem

The purpose of this study was to determine if the three change

strategies of Chin and Benne (1976) were seen by three types of

administrators at public four-year institutions of higher education as

being equally important as processes involved in causing change to

occur in the area of student affairs within the past 20 years. The

three types of administrators surveyed for the study were the chief

academic, administrative, and student affairs officers. This time

span of 20 years was selected because of documented significant change

during that time. Evidence of this was substantiated by the

comparisons of the 1962-1963 study by Ayers et al. (1966) and the

Brodzinski (1980) study.

The three change strategies of Chin and Benne (1976) served as the

theoretical base for the study. Their three categories of change

strategies are (a) empirical-rational, (b) normative-re-educative, and

(c) power-coercive. Their change strategies combine numerous

approaches to change into three main groups, each of which is found in

higher education.

The study examined the use of these change strategies in 10 areas

of responsibility of chief student affairs officers. These areas

included enrollment of minority students, opportunities for women

students, legal/liability concerns, use of technology, alcohol use

policies, drug abuse, enrollment of disabled students, living and

learning programs, opportunities for adult students, and counseling

services. These are 10 areas that have experienced change during the










past 20 years. These changes have been substantiated by activity on

the campuses, attention in the professional literature, and rankings

by leaders in the student affairs profession. A detailed description

of each area is presented in Chapter II.

Hypotheses

This study was designed to test the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1. There are no significant differences among

administrators in the three institutional positions in their

perceptions of the importance of change.

Hypothesis 2. There are no significant differences among

administrators in the three institutional positions regarding

their perceptions of the importance of the empirical-rational

change strategy in causing change to occur.

Hypothesis 3. There are no significant differences among

administrators in the three institutional positions regarding

their perceptions of the importance of the normative-re-educative

change strategy in causing change to occur.

Hypothesis 4. There are no significant differences among

administrators in the three institutional positions regarding

their perception of the importance of the power-coercive change

strategy in causing change to occur.

Hypothesis 5. There is no significant interaction between the

type of administrator and the importance of the three change

strategies in explaining the overall change perceived by

administrators.










Hypothesis 6. There are no significant differences among the

three change strategies regarding their perceived importance in

causing change to occur.

Hypothesis 7. There are no significant differences among the

three change strategies regarding their perceived importance in

causing change to occur in the 10 areas of change.

For all hypotheses tested, the level for statistical significance

was set at .05. If the probability value was less than .05 the null

hypothesis was rejected.

Justification of the Study

Student affairs literature indicates the need for practitioners to

be able to apply theory to current situations to work effectively with

students and institutions (Carpenter, Miller, & Winston, Jr., 1980;

Kuh, 1981). Included in this need to understand and apply theory is

the need to be knowledgeable about planned change strategies and their

relationship to institutions (Blaesser, 1978; Kuh, 1981; Smith, 1982;

Strange, 1981).

In addition, an understanding of the change strategies that have

been involved in student affairs programs is important to prepare for

the future. If student affairs professionals are to assume a

leadership role in their institutions, it is essential for them to

understand how change occurs regarding the important programs that

affect them.

Recent Areas of Change in Student Affairs

The recent areas of change were determined by two methods.

Through discussion with experts in student affairs and a review of the

literature, 22 areas of change were identified. A list of 20










nationally recognized professionals in student affairs was developed.

A mailing was sent that asked them to rank, by their significance or

importance, the 22 areas of change. A category of "other" was

included to allow for the addition of other areas of change. The 19

responses were compiled and the 10 areas of change with the highest

rankings were used for this study. The 10 areas, listed in priority

order, are enrollment of minority students, opportunities for women

students, legal/liability concerns, use of technology, alcohol use

policies, drug abuse, enrollment of disabled students, living and

learning programs, opportunities for adult students, and counseling

services.

Enrollment of minority students. The number of minority students

attending institutions of higher education has increased in the past

20 years. The number of entering freshmen who were minority students

nearly doubled between the mid-1960s and the 1970s. The increase

reflects mainly black, Hispanic, and American Indian students (Astin,

1984). Between 1968 and 1982 the percentage of minority students

increased from 9.5% to 17% of total college and university enrollment

(U.S. Bureau of Census, 1983).

During the 1960s there was a dramatic increase in black students

attending predominantly white institutions. In 1950, predominantly

black institutions enrolled 100,000 students, or approximately 90% of

all black students (Fleming, 1984). By 1960, 134,000 black students

between the ages of 18 and 24 years were enrolled in colleges. This

figure increased to 416,000 students in 1970 and by 1982 there were

767,000 black students enrolled in colleges and universities (U.S.

Bureau of Census, 1983).










Opportunities for women students. Women students began their

study of higher education in women's colleges in the early 1800s. By

1901 there were 119 women's colleges in the United States. The first

coeducational institution was Oberlin College in Ohio which admitted

the first woman student in 1833. By 1900, 71.6% of the colleges and

universities were coeducational (Brubacher & Rudy, 1958).

Mueller (1961) stated that in the early 1960s the male to female

ratio on large campuses was approximately three to two. By the late

1970s the shift changed to a slight majority of women at most campuses

(Astin, 1984). The total enrollment of women in higher education

increased from 1,326,000 in 1960 to 6,397,000 in 1981 (U.S. Bureau of

Census, 1983). The projections indicate a continued increase in the

enrollment of women students in higher education (Jacobs, 1979).

Legal/liability concerns. The impact of legal problems has been

evident in numerous areas of student affairs. These areas include use

of alcohol (Janosik, 1983; Zirkel & Bargerstock, 1980); withdrawal of

students for psychiatric reasons (Zirkel & Bargerstock, 1980);

counseling and health services, student discipline, student

publications, the supervision of student activities (Barr, 1983); and

hazing (Buchanan, 1983). These legal concerns warranted the Council

for the Advancement of Standards for Student Affairs/Services Programs

to include in their General Standards a statement that encouraged the

education of student affairs professionals in legal and liability

issues and adoption of risk management standards (Buchanan, 1983).










"Almost every decision or action of the student affairs

administration today has legal implications" (Barr, 1983, p. 3). The

attention to legal and liability issues increased in student affairs

in recent years.

Use of technology. In addition to new groups of students served

by institutions of higher education the use of technology has also had

an impact according to Johnson and Riesenberg (1979) and they cited

the following examples:

1. Computers--used in areas such as research on student trends,

learning skills centers, financial aid, housing, registration, career

planning, and instruction.

2. Multi-media productions--used in recruitment, career planning, and

orientation programs.

3. Videotape equipment--used in training programs (e.g., interviews,

assertiveness), providing admissions information, and orientation

programs.

4. Biofeedback--used in behavior modification counseling services.

Johnson and Riesenberg also projected an increased use of

technology in the future. Cited as possible uses of technology are

uses of home terminals for access to information such as financial

aid, registration, and academic programs; increased use of home

systems for students with disabilities; and the use in the residence

halls of video and closed circuit systems. Jacobs (1979) stated that

by the year 2000 a significant portion of the population will have

jobs that rely on technology.










Alcohol use policies. The abuse of alcohol has been a concern on

campuses since colonial days when most colleges and universities

considered drinking liquor unacceptable. Recent concerns have

resulted in more attention to the subject.

During 1974-1975 the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse

identified alcohol abuse problems on the 62 campuses that were visited

during their study (Snodgrass & Wright, 1983). Since that time the

College Alcohol Survey (Anderson & Gadaleto, 1985) showed an increased

concern regarding the abuse of alcohol on college campuses. The

survey indicated that between 1979 and 1985 institutions having an

individual work with educational programs on alcohol abuse rose from

14% to 48% of those responding.

Drug abuse. While the concern for the abuse of alcohol dates back

to colonial times, its use has become prevalent on college campuses.

A report by Boost Alcohol Consciousness Concerning the Health of

University Students (BACCHUS) (1985) indicated that most reports find

that about 90% of today's college students drink occasionally. More

than half of the males, age 18 to 24, are heavy drinkers, which means

that they consume more than 15 drinks a week, or on a daily basis

drink more than two drinks.

In addition to the focus on alcohol use, the use of other drugs

has been a concern on college campuses. These drugs included

substances such as marijuana, Lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), and

mescaline during the 1960s. In addition, other drugs such as

barbiturates, amphetamines, and heroin became present on campuses

(Arnstein, 1973). According to Snodgrass and Wright (1983) a study by










Fishburn, Abelson, and Cisin (1979) indicated that the percent of

college students who had used marijuana increased from 59% to 68%

between 1977 and 1979. In addition, between 1975 and 1981 the use of

cocaine by students increased from 6% to 12% and it was the fourth

preferred illegal drug used by students (Snodgrass & Wright, 1983).

The use of multiple drugs is also a concern on college campuses.

Polydrug use "refers to the simultaneous or sequential use of two or

more mood altering drugs from different pharmacological categories to

achieve different effects (Snodgrass & Wright, 1983, p. 26).

Snodgrass and Wright (1983) cited a study by Hochhauser (1976) which

indicated a combination of drugs was used by 42% of 365 undergraduate

students.

Enrollment of disabled students. Prior to the 1970s students with

disabilities seldom attended public institutions of higher education,

except institutions specifically designed for their need, such as

Gallaudet College in Washington, D.C.. While the number of disabled

students attending college is difficult to determine (Perry, 1981),

the enrollment of these students has increased. The Postsecondary

Education Planning Commission (1986) cites Astin, Green, Korn, and

Maier as indicating that the percentages of students with reported

disabilities in the freshman class increased from 2.7% in 1978 to 7.3%

in 1984. Previously, about 30% of the population of nondisabled

persons attended college compared with only about 9% of totally

disabled individuals (McBee, 1982). In 1986, a national poll by Lou

Harris & Associates estimated that 14% of the population of disabled

individuals had completed four years of college or more (Funk, 1986).










A 1976 survey by the United States Office of Education indicated

that only one-fifth of colleges and universities had programs and

services for the disabled student (Bailey, 1979). By the late 1970s

and early 1980s these programs expanded and most colleges and

universities offered some assistance to this population of students.

Perry (1981) indicated that factors such as the education of

handicapped children, improved medical services, awareness of the

public regarding disabilities, and progress in rehabilitative

engineering served as catalysts for this change in enrollment.

The needs of these students are unique because of the types and

severities of the disabilities. As a result, the profession of

student affairs has given increased attention to meeting the academic,

personal, and vocational needs of disabled students.

Living and learning programs. Prior to the 1960s residence halls

typically served as a place for students to live while on campus. The

environment was mainly custodial and provided a location for students

to eat, sleep, and study while learning occurred in the traditional

classroom.

During the 1960s attention was given to the intellectual as well

as the physical well-being of the student in the residence hall. The

concept of living and learning in the residence halls can be defined

as an opportunity for students in the residence halls to integrate

their academic programs with the environment in which they live

(Adams, 1974). Approaches to the concept have varied, depending on

facilities, faculty commitment, and fiscal resources. Examples of

elements of a living and learning program include such things as lab










units, traditional classes held in residence halls, and offering

alternative courses not offered in the regular curriculum (Adams,

1974). In addition they can include residential colleges where

faculty and college deans live with the students and special floors

offering different options for study (Adams, 1974; Schneider, 1977).

Riker (1965) predicted that this concept would be common within

the next 20 years. By 1974 Adams referred to the concept as "one of

the most profound changes currently taking place on college and

community campuses" (p. 87).

Opportunities for adult students. There has been an increase in

the number of adult students attending colleges and universities in

recent years (Astin, 1984; Chickering, 1973; Jacobs, 1979). In the

early 1960s there were nine million adult students who were furthering

their education in various programs. This figure increased to 25

million by 1970 (Chickering, 1973). According to Jacobs (1979),

"persons over twenty-five enrolled at three times the rate of those

under twenty-five, and the growth of enrollment of those over

twenty-five was twice that of overall growth" (p. 30). The U.S.

Bureau of Census (1983) reported that in 1972 students 25 years and

older comprised 23.8% of the college enrollment and by 1982 that

number increased to 35.6%.

The large number of adult students is projected to continue to

increase. By the year 2000, the largest age group of people in the

United States will be those in the 30-to 40-year-old range (Cross,

1979). As a result, additional services and programs are being

designed to meet the needs of these students.










Counseling services. The primary services of the university

counseling center prior to the 1970s focused on advising, personal,

and vocational concerns (Warman, 1961). The majority of services were

provided on a one-to-one basis. During the early 1970s both the

remedial and developmental functions of university counseling centers

were encouraged in the guidelines of the International Association of

Counseling Services (IACS) (Kirk, Free, Johnson, Michel, Redfield,

Roston, & Warman, 1971). In addition, the scope of responsibility of

the counseling centers expanded to include areas such as research,

training, consultation, serving on university committees, and program

development (Weissberg, 1984).

The role and scope of the university counseling centers expanded

during the 1970s. Weissberg (1984), citing Carni, Gelweik, Lamb,

McKinley, Schoenberg, Simono, Smith, Wireson, & Wrenn (1981), stated

that the guidelines published by the IACS

stressed the importance of enhancing the university environment
so as to maximize growth and development; becoming a valuable
component of the entire student affairs effort; and developing
extensive networks and linkages with various academic, student
service, institutional, and community agencies. (p. 41)

He also indicated that the guidelines included such things as

outreach programs, structured groups, workshops, and services for

nontraditional groups of students such as minority and older students.

These changes represent a more diversified, specialized, and

comprehensive university counseling center.

Theoretical Framework

Change Strategies

Chin and Benne (1976) described planned change as those activities

in which at least one of the individuals in the process uses obvious,










specific, and designed attempts to produce change. Chin and Benne

grouped into three categories the strategies commonly used for

change. While there are similarities among the strategies, the

differences are significant. The strategies are not mutually

exclusive and elements of one may be found in another. Independently

they each represent a major type of change strategy that can be found

in higher education. The three categories for change strategies are

(a) empirical-rational, (b) normative-re-educative, and (c)

power-coercive. The following provides a summary of these

strategies.

The empirical-rational strategy assumes that people are rational

and they will pursue their rational self-interest when it is known to

them. In this process, a person or organization proposes a change

that will be of benefit to and consistent with the self-interest of

the individual or group on which the change will have an impact. It

is assumed that change will be accepted if it is shown to be justified

and of benefit because the individual or organization is assumed to be

rational and able to be motivated by self-interest.

The normative-re-educative change strategies include rationality

and intelligence. However, the motivation for the change is the

support by individuals of the sociocultural norms which are the values

and attitudes that affect commitments. Change involves an alteration

of the orientation to current normative patterns and replaces them

with new orientations. The change in commitment involves change in

"attitudes, values, skills, and significant relationships, not just

changes in knowledge, information, or intellectual rationales for










action and practice" (Chin & Benne, 1976, p. 23). Processes such as

conflict management, problem solving groups, and management by

objectives are often used in student affairs.

Power-coercive change strategies are based on the use of power as

a source of change. The source of power can be legitimate,

authoritative and/or coercive. Sources of motivation for change

therefore can include such things as positional, economic, legal,

political, moral, and administrative power. In this process, those

with more power use it to obtain the desired outcome from those with

less power. In education, this process of change can be found in

sources such as legislative mandates, judicial decisions, and

administrative orders (Blaesser, 1978).

Assumptions

In this study the following assumptions were made:

1. Respondents responded accurately and honestly to the instrument.

2. Respondents were knowledgeable about changes that occurred at

their institutions.

3. The changes in student affairs, as identified from a review of the

literature and rankings from nationally recognized student affairs

personnel, occurred at most institutions.

Delimitations

1. The study was limited to the perceptions of chief student affairs,

academic affairs, and administrative affairs officers at public

four-year institutions.

2. The change strategies studied were limited to the categories

formulated by Chin and Benne.










3. Areas of recent change were limited to 10 identified areas of

student affairs. The responses cannot be generalized to other areas

of change.

Definition of Terms

The following terms are defined to assist the reader:

Planned change. Change in which at least one of the individuals

involved in the process uses obvious, specific, and designed attempts

to produce change (Chin & Benne, 1976).

Student affairs. An administrative subdivision in colleges and

universities whose responsibilities include programs and services that

are designed to assist the personal growth of students and to

complement their academic development.

Chief student affairs officer. The college or university

administrator whose primary responsibility is to oversee the operation

of programs, services, and staff in the division of student affairs.

Chief academic affairs officer. The college or university

administrator whose primary responsibility is to oversee the operation

of programs, services, and staff in the division of academic affairs.

Chief administrative affairs officer. The college or university

administrator whose primary responsibility is to oversee the operation

of programs, services, and staff in the division of administrative

affairs.

Overview of Research Methodology

The major purpose of this study, as stated earlier, was to

determine if the change strategies of Chin and Benne (1976) were seen

by three types of administrators at public four-year colleges and










universities as being equally important as processes involved in

causing change to occur in the area of student affairs. The three

types of administrators surveyed for the study were the chief

academic, administrative, and student affairs officers.

Selection of the Population and Sample

The population for this study consisted of the chief student

affairs, academic affairs, and administrative affairs officers at all

public four-year postsecondary institutions. Institutions that focus

on medical education were eliminated from the study because of their

uniqueness. The total number of appropriate public four-year

institutions was 486 according to the Education Directory, College and

Universities, (Broyles & Fernandez, 1984).

The 486 institutions were listed in alphabetical order. Three

groups were selected from the population using a regular interval

sample. By alphabetical order, institutions were assigned a number

one, two, or three. This determined which chief officer at each

institution received the survey. The three groups, in order, were the

chief academic officers, the chief administrative officers, and the

chief student affairs officers.

Instrumentation

Twenty-two programs or policies that have been affected by change

in student affairs within the past 20 years were identified through a

review of the literature. A letter explaining the study (Appendix A)

and a survey (Appendix B), listing these 22 areas of change and a

section to identify additional areas, was sent to a national










representative group of 20 recognized leaders in student affairs.

These individuals were asked to rank the 22 areas according to their

significance and importance and the 10 highest ranking areas of change

were included in the study.

An instrument, titled "A Study of Planned Change Strategies in

Higher Education" (Appendix G), was designed by the writer. Each area

of change was presented and described. Respondents were asked to

consider the change and how they perceived it to have taken place.

Following each description were three responses and there were three

different sets of these responses. These responses reflected the

change strategies of Chin and Benne and were validated as such by a

panel of experts in the field of planned change as indicated in

Appendix E. Respondents were asked to rate the responses in terms of

the importance they believed each process had in causing the change to

occur.

Data Collection

The survey was mailed to three groups of administrators. The

three groups, in order, were the chief academic affairs officers, the

chief administrative affairs officers, and the chief student affairs

officers. There were 162 institutions in each of the three groups and

486 public four-year colleges and universities included in the study.

A letter from Dr. James Wattenbarger, Director of the Institute of

Higher Education at the University of Florida, was included with the

survey (see Appendixes H and I). The letter described the purpose of

the study and the need to support the research. To facilitate the

return of the survey, it was stamped and self-addressed. The










respondents needed only to complete, staple, and return the

instrument. For the purpose of a second mailing, the survey was

numerically coded. A second mailing of the survey, which was also

stamped, and self-addressed for return, was sent approximately two

weeks later.

Analysis of the Data

To analyze the responses, one-way and two-way analyses of variance

(ANOVA) were used. The data were analyzed to determine difference in

the perceptions of the importance of change, the overall use of the

three strategies, the importance of a change strategy, and the

relationship between the type of administrator and the importance of

the three strategies in explaining overall change perceived by the

administrators.

Overview of the Study

The introduction, purpose, justification for the study,

theoretical framework, assumptions, limitations, and definitions have

been presented in Chapter I. Chapter II presents relevant research

and literature regarding recent changes in the field of student

affairs and further information on Chin and Benne's strategies for

change. Chapter III describes the methodology and design used in the

study. Chapter IV presents the results and analysis of the data.

Chapter V includes a discussion of the results, conclusions, and

recommendations.

















CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE


This chapter will provide an overview of the literature as it

relates to Chin and Benne's theory on change and student affairs. The

three areas reviewed will be Chin and Benne's theory of change, the

catalysts and management of change in student affairs, and recent

areas of change in the student affairs profession.

Chin and Benne's Theory of Change

Chin and Benne (1976) indicated that planned changes are those

changes "in which attempts to bring about change are conscious,

deliberate, and intended, at least on the part of one or more agents

related to the change attempt" (p. 22). According to them knowledge

is present when change occurs and the use of knowledge is intended.

There are two main types of knowledge that are included in Chin

and Benne's theory. The first is knowledge about nonhuman

environments where activity occurs. This includes "thing technology"

which is knowledge that is used to control some aspect of the

environment. They cited an example of the knowledge of electronics

which influences educational activities (Chin and Benne, 1976). As

thing technology is introduced people become involved as new practices

are introduced. An agent of change must then be concerned with the

reactions of people that are involved with and affected by the










change. Behavioral knowledge of people's reaction to change is a

basis for people technology.

Behavioral knowledge may be the initial reason for change. For

example, in education an awareness of different learning styles or

effects of diverse cultural backgrounds may suggest various methods of

instruction or changes in the composition of staff that deliver the

information. These changes, based on behavioral knowledge, must also

be done with an awareness of people technology. People technology

deals "with the resistances, anxieties, threats to morale, conflicts,

disrupted interpersonal communication, and so on which prospective

changes in patterns of practice evoke in the people affected by the

change" (Chin & Benne, 1976, p. 22). Chin and Benne stated that

whether the initial focus of change is on thing technology or people

technology the basis of the change must be on the "behavioral

knowledge of change and must utilize people technologies based on such

knowledge" (p. 23).

Strategies for Change

Chin and Benne grouped change strategies into three main

categories. Their categories of change have some similarities but the

differences are significant. The three groups of change strategies

are (a) empirical-rational, (b) normative-re-educative, and (c)

power-coercive.

Empirical-rational strategies. The category of empirical-rational

strategies is based on the premise that reason is a basis of action.

People, because they are rational, will change when it is evident that










it is in their self-interest to do so. The evidence is based on facts

or factual information.

The development of this grouping of strategies dates back to the

time of The Enlightenment and Classical Liberalism. During these

times it was believed that ignorance and superstition were hindrances

to the progress of society. Through the widespread knowledge of

factual information change and progress would occur. The main thrust

of education was scientific investigation and research.

The nineteenth century was the time when educational opportunities

were extended to many with the belief that through the dissemination

of knowledge and reason people would move from ignorance to

intellectualism. Chin and Benne cited Horace Mann and Thomas

Jefferson as change agents of this time. Jefferson was noted as an

"early advocate of research and of education as agencies of human

progress" (Chin & Benne, 1976, p. 24). The opportunities associated

with the common school concept of Horace Mann also encouraged progress.

The evolution of education moved to the belief that research and

knowledge should be linked with the practitioners. The concept of the

land-grant universities, along with the agricultural extention

systems, are examples of this movement. Chin and Benne (1976) stated

that this approach was focused on thing technology. Even with

activities of the Research and Development Centers that were federally

funded and based at many universities, sufficient attention was not

given to how to get the acceptance and adoption of the innovation by

the people who would be affected by it at the local setting.










Normative-re-educative strategies. In the normative-re-educative

strategy of change theory, the hypothesis about the motivation for

change is different. The main belief in these strategies for change

is that people are also motivated internally. Socially the activity

is collective. Individually, values, habits, and beliefs motivate

people. At the cultural level, this motivation, along with the

rational information, causes changes in the values and relationships

of the units involved.

Inherent in the normative-re-educative change strategies is a

change agent. The role of the agent is to intervene and incorporate

change into the workings of the system to be changed, whether an

institution or an individual. The approach used by the change agents

is based on a deliberate theory of change.

Chin and Benne (1976) cited five elements that exist in these

strategies.

1. The client is involved in seeking the improvements through

change. This client involvement is emphasized.

2. In addition to the use of technical empirical information as

possible assistance to the client, the values, attitudes, norms, and

internal and external relationships to the system are included as

possible areas of re-evaluation.

3. There is an interaction between the client and the change agent

during the change process. This relationship includes reciprocal

cooperation in the diagnosis and solutions of problems.

4. It is important that unintentional obtacles to change be evaluated

openly and revised accordingly.










5. Both the client and the change agent use their experiences and

knowlegde of the behavioral sciences in future changes and problem

areas.

According to Chin and Benne (1976), the organizing of the National

Training Laboratories in 1947 was an important stage in the

development of the normative-re-educative approach to planned change.

It was at these laboratories that participants would test their own

interpersonal theories in a group setting. The effects of the

laboratories were significant and resulted in two main methods of

working with social systems: problem-solving and personal growth.

Problem-solving approaches deal with the sociotechnical problems

and usually involve steps to identify problems, evaluate current

situations, obtain feedback, and employ internal agents to monitor the

organizational development. The personal growth approach focuses on

the individual as the key element in the organization. Through

individual or group work the people's needs are met and, as result,

the organization benefits. Through personal re-education of norms

change is believed to occur.

It is important to note that conflict management also evolved in

this category of change strategies. The basic premise of this

approach is the belief that through the resolution and management of

conflict changes in the individual and the organization will evolve.

Power-coercive strategies. Power-coercive strategies differ from

the empirical-rational and the normative-re-educative approaches to

change in the way power is obtained and used and the components of the










power. According to Chin and Benne the power-coercive processes

typically have as their basis political and economic sanctions of

power.

In these strategies the change agents, aware of a desired goal,

attempt to use political and economic power to create the change.

Those who have the legitimate power may or may not be aware of the

needs of those under their influence. Groups or individuals outside

the power may seek to influence change by creating a challenge to the

existing power structure.

According to Chin and Benne, there are three main approaches to

power-coercive strategies that are employed to maintain or create

power: (a) nonviolent strategies, (b) political power, and (c)

influence of those who hold the power. Nonviolent strategies include

such things as peaceful demonstration, sit-ins, and boycotts. The

power here can be moral and/or economic sanction.

Political power is evident in legislation, administrative

decisions, and judicial decisions. To be effective as a change

catalyst, Chin and Benne indicate that these actions must be

accomplished with education regarding the desired practice.

The third approach, influence of those in power, acknowledges the

power held by certain individuals, organizations, or groups. Through

the influence of these power holders change can occur.

Related Literature and Research

Blaesser (1978) cited the change strategies of Benne and Chin as a

taxonomy that influences and effects change in social systems such as

colleges and universities. The empirical-rational approach, through










the principles of research and the conveying of knowledge, is a

favored approach used by academic personnel. Educational policies are

affected by legislative and judicial decisions, therefore

power-coercive strategies are apparent. In addition, conflict

management, group problem-solving, and personal growth are all

employed to generate creativity necessary for managing change. This

is evidence of the presence of the normative-re-educative change

approach. According to Blaesser (1978) aspects of the three change

strategies are found in colleges and universities.

A study by Goldstein (1982) was designed to determine which

tactics were the most influential in introducing a new curriculum of

special education. The author used tactics for innovation and placed

them into a tactic factor based on Chin and Benne's three change

strategies. This framework allowed the author to identify the

innovator's use of tactics in each of these three categories.

It was found that users of empirical-rational tactics used

communication as a major way to move the innovation into the system.

Obtaining information was also important to power-coercive tactic

users but with high power-coercive users there was no evidence of how

the information was used once it was obtained. No evidence was found

that supported the use of normative-re-educative tactics and advocacy

activities. According to Goldstein (1982) the identification of the

tactics use factors adds empirical support for the theoretical

framework of Chin and Benne.










Change and Student Affairs

Institutions of higher education have been influenced by change

(Miller & Prince, 1977; Tilley, 1973) and the area of student affairs

has been part of the change (Borland, 1980; Brodzinski, 1977; Kinnick

& Bollheimer, 1984; Paul & Hoover, 1980; Shaffer, 1980).

Catalysts for Change in Student Affairs

Change in education and specifically in student affairs, in the

past, has been a reaction to various events (Blaesser & Crookston,

1983). As Miller and Prince (1977) observed, past changes were mainly

results of pressure placed on student affairs or when students

advocated a need for change. The main source of institutional change

was internal motivation (Kinnick & Bollheimer, 1984).

Recent history indicates that change has occurred as a result of

numerous catalysts, not all internal. Cited as some of the motivators

for change are changes in enrollment figures, fiscal maintenance,

changes in federal financial assistance available to students, and the

enrollment of non-traditional students (Kinnick & Bollheimer, 1984).

Tilley (1973) also included changes in student's expectation from

colleges and changes in values and life styles. A shift has occurred

from internal to external sources of influences for change in student

affairs (Foster, 1983; Kinnick & Bollheimer, 1984).

Stamatakos (1980) also described the change.

The external pressures of Civil Rights and free speech movements,
Vietnam war protests, and student demands for relevance, a role
in decision-making, and the termination of loco parents during
the sixties and early seventies, wrought some fundamental and
substantive changes in the profession's self-perceptions,
traditions, priorities, preparation emphasis, and modus
operandi. (p. 287)










Past approaches to change and the new catalysts for change

warranted attention by professionals in student affairs. Change must

be anticipated (American College Personnel Association, 1983;

Brodzinski, 1977; Miller & Prince, 1977). In addition to the

anticipation of change, an understanding of and planning for change is

necessary (Miller & Prince, 1977).

Management of Change in Student Affairs

Literature in the field of student affairs includes many

suggestions for dealing with change. Authors cite ingredients and

processes necessary for change.

Smith (1982) stated that the profession has moved from the early

priorities of discipline, counseling and health of students, which was

reactive and pragmatic, to a broader goal that includes the total

education and development and growth of students. The movement

includes the entire institution and models for change must include

both the institutional goals and missions and the academic and

intellectual development of the students. Also necessary is

involvement from many groups within the institution. Trust must be

present in addition to support, participation, and commitment if

change is to occur. In summary, Smith (1982) stressed the need to

understand what inhibits and what maintains change, the institutional

goals and missions, and the process of change initiated from

humanistic perspective.

Kuh (1981) challenged traditional thoughts regarding

organizational change and stressed the importance of knowledge

regarding environmental factors and their impact on relationships.










Three traditional views that Kuh challenged are that (a) mutually

agreed upon goals are the basis upon which units and institutions are

organized, (b) rational decision-making is the basis of action, and

(c) communication among all levels is clear and understood by all

levels or is tightly coupled. According to Kuh, specific and rational

goals are not directly related to what actually occurs and personal

goals, not unit or organizational goals, are the prime target for

action. With regard to decision-making, other elements such as

political and economic factors are involved along with rational,

systematic decisions. Communication and mutual understanding of

issues is not clear and student affairs are not highly interdependent

as a unit or as part of a large organization.

Kuh (1981) cited Berman's (1979) approaches to change

implementation. These two approaches are programmed and adaptive

implementation.

In the programmed approach there are clear goals and objectives.

The process is also rational and orderly. The four requirements for

the rational programmed implementation are "(1) a tightly coupled unit

or institution; (2) clear consensually validated goals; (3) relatively

well-known technologies (e.g., well accepted and understood student

development theories and programming strategies); (4) a supportive

environment (administrative support, commitment of adequate resources

etc.)" (Kuh, 1981, p. 33).

The adaptive approach is one in which the innovation is worked

into the existing structure. This approach to change implementation










is used to work a new policy or program into an existing institution.

This is best when "(1) 'major' changes in policy or procedures are

required; (2) when the goals are vague or contradictory; (3) when the

technology used is unclear; (4) and when 'loose coupling' best

describes the institutional setting in which the innovation is to be

implemented" (Kuh, 1981, p. 33).

Plato (1977) incorporated many similar constructs of common

elements found in literature regarding change. She listed four main

assumptions regarding change which include the following: (a) the

rational decision-making model is used; (b) the "collegial model" of

administration is used in higher education; (c) current and future

availability of fiscal resources for student affairs are not examined;

and (d) there is an unconscious shift from the individual to the

organization. Given these four common assumptions, Plato (1977)

recommended five strategies for the student personnel profession. She

included (a) awareness of fiscal resources; (b) viewing student

development as policy; (c) involvement of students in implementation;

(d) expressing the goals of the profession within the political model

of administration; and (e) including educational politics and

planning, decision-making theory, organizational theory, and policy

studies in the training of professionals in student development.

Strange (1981) indicated that the definition of the goals of the

profession of student affairs has been a significant recent

accomplishment. To actually implement the desired goals identified in

the definition of the profession it is important that there be an










understanding of the institutional dynamics that affect innovation.

Strange (1981) cited the work of Hage and Aiken (1974) who identified

four steps involved in program implementation and they also described

seven organizational variables that affect the rate and success of

program innovation.

Program innovation begins with evaluation, when the organization

is determined to be in need of change to become more effective or

efficient. The next step is initiation when it is decided that a

specific change is to be made, such as a new activity or program.

Next in the process is implementation, when the desired change occurs

and, fourth, routinization is the acceptance of the new activity or

program. The effect of the change depends on seven variables within

an organization. These are formalization, centralization, production,

efficiency, complexity, stratification, and job satisfaction. These

variables affect the rate and success of innovation.

Strange (1981) suggested that the theoretical framework of Hage

and Aiken is a viable one in which student affairs professionals can

systematically approach change within an organization. He also

indicated that external factors (e.g., governing boards, decreasing

fiscal resources, accreditation agencies), must be viewed for their

impact on change.

Terry and Miller (1978) cited four main change strategies: the

Havelock Linkage Model; Social Interaction Model; Research,

Development, and Diffusion Model; and the Problem-Solving Model that

they discussed as appropriate to change in higher education. The

Problem-Solving Model is useful to organizations where change occurs










usually as the result of the identification of a problem that needs

resolution. The Problem-Solving Model has three main steps:

planning, implementation, and evaluation.

Terry and Miller (1978) believed that the creativity for change is

limited in higher education because of the bureaucratic structure.

This structure fosters a condition of control and predictability and,

as a result, stifles the opportunities for change.

According to Priest, Alphenaar, and Boer (1980) change management

is obtained through long-range planning. This approach also provides

student personnel administrators with a method to address the future

and be better prepared to make decisions. There are five constructs

in the long-range planning framework that they suggested.

1. A description of the units' role or mission within the
institution.
2. Identification of goals, within the units' mission, to be
achieved during the planning period.
3. Description of current status of the unit and progress toward
the existing goals.
4. Delineation of points to be touched en route to goals and
objectives.
5. And attachment of resource requirements for all components
of the plan. (p. 4)

An understanding of current conditions by catalysts or innovators

is necessary before effective planned change can occur according to

Martin (1969). He suggested that student personnel can be an

important force in leading other components of higher education in

innovation. An understanding of current conditions and methods to

work with them prepare student personnel administrators for the role

of innovators. There are five propositions that Martin (1969) cited as

descriptions of current conditions.










1. Because of existing inadequacies, change, ongoing and extreme, is

needed. In addition, possibilities of the future require change.

2. As well as a need for change, an acceptance that change will occur

is warranted.

3. Faculty inhibit change.

4. Students are more often inhibitors for change than innovators.

5. Because change can result in real shifts in values, priorities,

and funding, administrators usually move from a supportive to a

reluctant stance with actual change.

To understand better how change occurs and how organizations

function, Kuh (1981) recommended three priorities for student affairs.

1. Support, financial and moral, must be made possible to individuals

who provide information regarding student affairs relationships to

existing organization development theories, possible use of these

theories in other components of the university, and interaction

between organizations and individual development.

2. New information regarding organizational development must be made

available to the profession.

3. Identification of institutional obstacles to the development,

positive and negative, of students, staff, and faculty is necessary.

Tilley (1973) cited several areas that need attention for coping

with change:

improving student service administration, developing staff,
multiplying helping resources among faculty and peers, and
recognizing the need for differentiated organizational systems to
serve institutional needs on the one hand and the human and
social needs of students, faculty, and staff on the other. (p.
116)










Change in student personnel during the next 25 years will likely

be significant (Harvey, 1983). As Blaesser and Crookston (1983)

stated "it is likely that most student personnel workers would agree

that more could be done about the nature and direction of 'change' in

the college student personnel program" (p. 193).

Recent Areas of Change in Student Affairs

The following areas of change were ranked as the most significant

10 areas of change within student affairs within the past 20 years.

The areas are listed in their order of importance according to the

rankings given by nationally recognized experts in the field of

student affairs.

Enrollment of Minority Students

During the past 20 years the enrollment of minority students

increased significantly. Brubacher and Rudy (1958) traced the history

of the enrollment of this population of students. According to them

it was Ralph Turner who, during the time of World War II, articulated

the equal access philosophy to education. He indicated that the basic

principle was "the free access of all individuals to the full content

of the advancing body of knowledge" (Brubacher & Rudy, 1958, p. 375).

In the late 1940s several states passed fair education practices acts

that mandated equal access. In addition, between 1936 and 1952 U.S.

Supreme Court decisions were made that prohibited the exclusion of

black students from public colleges and universities (Brubacher &

Rudy, 1958). By the 1950s most public institutions were open to

minority students.










According to Astin (1984) the minority representation in freshmen

enrollments nearly doubled between the mid-1960s and the 1970s. This

increase included Hispanics and American Indians while the largest

increase was among black students. In the 1950s approximately 90% of

all black college students were enrolled at predominantly black

institutions (Fleming, 1984). The enrollment of black students in

colleges increased from 134,000 in 1960 to 767,000 in 1982 (U.S.

Census Bureau, 1983). The total college enrollment percentages of

minority students increased from 9.5% to 17% between 1968 and 1982

according to the U.S. Census Bureau (1983). Astin (1984) indicated

that minorities are enrolled most frequently in the social sciences

and education at the undergraduate level and the least representation

is found in engineering and sciences.

This change in enrollment has affected the area of student

affairs. The role of promoting positive race relations, and the

support of the special needs of minority students have often been the

responsibility of the student affairs professional. Hayes (1985)

stressed the need for student affairs professionals to be acutely

aware of the campus environment provided for minority students.

Opportunities for Women Students

Access to higher education opportunities for women began with

colleges specifically for women. The Wesleyan Female College in

Macon, Georgia was the first institution to award degrees to women,

and by 1901 there were 119 women's colleges in the United States

(Brubacher & Rudy, 1958). The first coeducational institution,










Oberlin College, had its first female graduate in 1841. By 1900 the

number of coeducational institutions represented 71.6% of institutions

of higher education (Brubacher & Rudy, 1958).

The access to educational institutions, according to Astin (1976),

can be traced to the historic 1884 meeting in Seneca Falls, New York,

where women articulated the need for equal access to a number of areas

including education. The evolution of access included the women's

right to vote in 1920. In addition, developments in the 1960s and

1970s increased opportunities for women. Some of these events include

(a) the establishment of the Commission of Women in 1963 by President

John Kennedy; (b) the addition of sex to the Title VII of the Civil

Rights Act in the early 1960s; (c) the addition, in 1968, of sex to

the classes protected from illegal discrimination by federal

contractors; (d) the inclusion of institutions of higher education in

the Equal Pay Act in 1963; (e) the prohibition of discrimination in

admissions to medical and health professions by the Public Health Act

of 1971; (f) the prohibition of discrimination on the basis of sex in

federally assisted educational programs by the Title IX of the

Educational Amendments of 1972, and (g) the finding of the U. S.

Congress that educational institutions were frequently inequitable to

women as stated in Section 408 of the Educational Amendments of 1974

(Astin, 1976).

The change in enrollment of women in higher education is evidenced

by the figures. In 1960 women comprised almost 35% of the total

enrollment in higher education and by 1982 the percent increased to

52.1% (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1983). Several authors discussed










the enrollment of re-entry women as a significant impact on these

figures (Copas & Dwinell, 1983; Cross, 1973, Wheaton & Robinson,

1983). This group of women 25 years and older increased from 8.4% of

the total enrollment in 1970 to 19.7% in 1982 (U.S. Bureau of the

Census, 1983).

Legal/Liability Concerns

Student affairs professionals have become increasingly concerned

about legal rights and responsibilities (Barr, 1983; Hammond, 1977,

1979; Liethen, 1978; Parr & Buchanan, 1979; Zirkel & Bargerstock,

1980). The causes for these concerns are numerous and include federal

legislation and the legal age of adulthood change to 18 years of age

(Parr & Buchanan, 1979), and the removal of in loco parents (Barr,

1983; Parr & Buchanan, 1979). The Vietnam War and the civil rights

movement of the 1960s were also catalysts for increased litigation

according to Liethen (1978).

The areas of increased liability and litigation can be found in

areas such as "student discipline, the student press, administrative

standards, liability of administration in supervision of activities,

and the provision of health and counseling services" (Barr, 1983, p.

3). The use of alcohol can also be a legal concern on campuses based

on case law, local and state laws, and alcohol beverage control

requirements (Janosik, 1983). In addition to the concern regarding

the consumption of alcohol, a study of Lehigh University Graduate

School of Education, done by the Pennsylvania Association of Student

Personnel Administrators, found that the legal question of

institutional withdrawal of students for psychiatric reasons was also

a legal concern (Zirkel & Bargerstock, 1980).










Hazing has also received legal attention. According to Buchanan

(1983) hazing accounted for the deaths of 28 college students between

1971-1981. The majority of these resulted in legal cases and were

settled out of court and eight resulted in litigation against the

institution.

This increased litigation and awareness of legal responsibilities

in the area of student affairs resulted in the Council for the

Advancement of Standards for Student Affairs/Services Programs (CAS)

to develop guidelines. The Risk Management Standard of CAS included

the following recommendations:

Staff in all functional areas should be current and well-versed
in those obligations and limitations imposed on the operation of
the institution, and particularly their functional area, by
federal, state, and local statutory, regulatory, and common law,
and institutional policy, and should utilize appropriate risk
management practices and policies to limit exposure of the
institution, its officers, employees, and agents. (Buchanan,
1985, P. 13)

Use of Technology

The Carnegie Commission on Higher Education (1972) referred to the

use of technology as the fourth revolution and the indicated that

"Higher Education (and education in general) now faces the first great

technological revolution in five centuries in the potential impact of

the new electronics" (p. 1). The first three revolutions were (a) the

shift from the use of real objects to symbols, (b) the shift from

family educators to specialized teachers, and (c) the use of the

movable printing type (Mayhew, 1977).

The use of technology expanded in the late 1950s and by the end of

the 1960s it was used as a primary vehicle for the delivery on

services in education (Mayhew, 1977). By the late 1970s the










importance of an understanding of the application of technology in

student development was stressed as a necessary skill (Penn, 1976).

By 1983 the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators

and the American College Personnel Association included technology as

a main theme at their national conferences (Johnson, 1983).

Computer technology is now used in almost every area in student

affairs (Sampson, 1982). To provide direct services to students it

can be found in such things as study skills, career guidance and

personal counseling (Sampson, 1982) and 24-hour telephone access to

information such as health center information (Johnson, 1983).

As a management tool technology is also very evident in student

affairs. It is employed in areas such as student activities, housing,

financial aid, academic advising, admissions, registration, placement,

and new student orientation (Sampson, 1982). Because of the

prevalence of technology in student affairs, Sampson (1982)

recommended that the chief student affairs officer (a) ensure legal

and ethical use of computers, (b) provide for regular evaluation of

current systems, (c) provide staff development in the area of

technology, and (d) provide for long-range planning for future

technological applications.

This change in student affairs will continue and student affairs

professionals have a need to understand the fourth revolution (Penn,

1976; Sampson Jr., 1982).

Alcohol Use Policies

During the past 20 years increased attention has been focused on

the use of alcohol by college students. Historically, the use of










alcohol by students has been questioned by colleges. In colonial

times restrictions were placed on the consumption of liquor and some

schools banned the drinking of alcohol.

Recent studies about the drinking behavior of students caused

institutions of higher education, and specifically, student affairs

professionals to increase programs and initiate policies regarding the

use of alcohol by students. In 1979 a study by Anderson and Gadaleto

indicated that 69% of the institutions surveyed were sponsoring

programs in alcohol education and by 1985 the number increased to

88%. In addition to educational programs, alcohol use policies were

promulgated. Zirkel and Bargerstock (1980) recommended that a

realistic policy be established with the following guidelines

suggested when the use of alcohol is permitted and rules are

established:

(b) the clear and continued notice of such rules, for example by
tasteful place cards at the serving table of university
receptions; (c) the provision of proper supervision at such
events, including the monitoring of state liquor control board
identification cards; (d) the non-availability of alcoholic
beverages at as many events as possible; (e) the strict
disciplinary enforcement of violations of such rules; and (f) the
purchase of comprehensive insurance coverage. (p. 254)

Others also recommended policies regarding the use of alcohol

(Buchanan III, 1983; McBrien, 1980). In addition to institutional

policies, state laws affecting education have been adopted. Janosik

(1983) indicated that 20 states have recently changed the legal age

for using alcohol and 14 additional states were considering such

changes. The educational law of New York in 1981 was amended to

include language for the prohibition of certain alcohol related










activities. Activities prohibited included the forced consumption of

alcohol or other drugs and recommended that colleges developed clear

guidelines for events at which alcohol was available.

Drug Abuse

Concern for the abuse of drugs has been a relatively recent

development on college campuses. Prior to the 1960s the main concern

regarding substance abuse on campuses was the consumption of alcohol.

By the mid-1960s the attention was more toward the use of

hallucinogens (LSD, mescaline) and marijuana and drugs such as heroin,

amphetemines, and barbituates also were used by college students

(Arnstein, 1973). By 1981 cocaine was the fourth most preferred

illegal drug and was used by 12% of students (Snodgrass & Wright,

1983).

The abuse of alcohol is the most prominent drug problem on

campuses. The Boost Alcohol Consciousness Concerning the Health of

University Students (BACCHUS) (1985) indicated that most studies find

that approximately 90% of college students drink occasionally and more

than half of the male college students between the ages of 18-24 are

heavy drinkers. For that report, students who consumed more than two

drinks daily or more than 15 drinks a week were classified as heavy

drinkers.

According to Packwood (1977) marijuana was used by 23% of college

students with 4% of these students classified as heavy users. A 1979

report by Fishburn, Abelson, and Cisin (cited by Snodgrass & Wright,

1983) found that between 1977-1979 the percent of students using

marijuana increased from 59% to 68%. Findings by Snodgrass and Wright










(1983) indicated that both male and female students reported using

marijuana daily more often than they used alcohol on a daily basis.

The study found that the most popular drugs were, in order, alcohol,

marijuana, amphetamines, and cocaine. In the month preceding their

study, respondents indicated that 15% of the males and 12% of the

females used cocaine, 37% of the males and 21% of the females had used

amphetamines, and about 88% of the respondents had used alcohol.

Recent attention has also been given to the use of multiple drugs

by college students. Polydrug use "refers to the simultaneous or

sequential use of two or more mood altering drugs from different

pharmacological categories to achieve different effects (Snodgrass &

Wright. 1983, p. 26). Citing Hochhauser, (1976) Snodgrass and Wright

(1983) stated that responses from 365 undergraduates found that "42

percent of those surveyed used combinations of mood altering drugs.

Of those polydrug users, 84 percent said they combined alcohol and

marijuana while 30 percent indicated they used one of these drugs with

amphetamines, barbiturates, or hallucinogens" (p. 28).

As evidenced by the research, the abuse of drugs has been a recent

and significant change on college campuses. Programs and services to

provide for education and coping mechanisms for students abusing drugs

have often been assigned to the student affairs professionals.

Enrollment of Disabled Students

According to Kiell, (1968) a study by Tucker (1964) indicated that

of 951 colleges and universities with enrollments of 1,000 or more

students, counselors to assist disabled students were provided at 121

institutions. Visits from other agencies such as vocational










rehabilitation were made at an additional 340 institutions. Students

with disabilities were present on many of the campuses studied. The

same study indicated that the enrollment at more than half of the

colleges included one or more blind students and students using

wheelchairs were enrolled at approximately one-third of the

institutions.

By the mid-1970s a study sponsored by the U.S. Office of Education

reported that services for disabled students were available at

one-fifth of the colleges and universities (Bailey, 1979). This

increase in services reflected an increase also in the enrollment of

disabled students. Colleges and universities have experienced a

significant increase in this population of students (McBee, 1982; Penn

& Dudley, 1980; Perry, 1981; Warnath & Dunnington, 1981). The number

of disabled students is difficult to cite as the reporting of these

students is not often done (Perry, 1981). The Postsecondary Education

Planning Commission (1986) cited Astin, Green, Korn, and Maier as

indicating that the enrollment of students with disabilities in the

freshmen class increased from 2.7% in 1978 to 7.3% in 1984. In

addition, only about 9% of totally disabled individuals attended

colleges previously compared with about 30% of the population of

nondisabled individuals (McBee, 1982). In 1986 a national poll by Lou

Harris and Associates estimated that 14% of the population of disabled

individuals had completed four or more years of college (Funk, 1986).

Changes in the enrollment of disabled students is attributed to

legislation and changes in social attitudes (McBee, 1982; Penn &

Dudley, 1980; Perry, 1981). The first legislation that affected









disabled individuals was the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 (Penn

& Dudley, 1980). The act required accessibility in new facilities

built with the use of federal monies. In addition, the Rehabilitative

Act of 1973, as amended, required programmatic and architectural

accessibility to institutions receiving federal funds. Perry (1981)

indicated that factors such as the education of handicapped children,

improved medical services, awareness of the public regarding

disabilities, and progress in rehabilitative engineering were

catalysts for this change in enrollment.

Living and Learning Programs

Riker (1965) described the living and learning concept in student

housing as one in which the total learning process in involved. He

indicated that environment, both physical and social, influences the

individual behavior and if the environment is improved the

intellectual development of the individual is enhanced. These

integration of academics into the living environment "provide

students with an opportunity to take full advantage of the residence

environment without divorcing themselves from the academic programs

and departments of the university" (Adams, 1974, p. 89). While the

concept is considered a recent change in colleges and universities

(Adams, 1974), Harvard and Yale used the Cambridge and Oxford models

for their housing and they were the first institutions that embraced

this concept (Bess, 1973).

Components of a living-learning residential program can include

numerous elements. These include such things as team-teaching,

textbooks and technology, advising in both personal and academic










areas, and enrichment programs (Riker, 1965). In addition, Adams

(1974) identified components such as lab units, classes in the

residence halls including courses not offered in the regular

curriculum, different options by floor units, and a residential

college where all faculty live in the residence hall. Schneider

(1977) also suggested academically focused floors, residential

colleges, floors with no or limited staffing, areas of living where a

special theme is the focus, matching of students with environments by

information cards, and the presence of a library.

According to Riker (1965) there are three essential components to

a living-learning center:

Programs, developed as a framework for student action and
reaction in learning;
Staff, selected and organized to sustain the programs and guide
the day-to-day activities of the housing unit; and
Physical Facilities, designed to meet the requirements of
students, programs, and staffs. (p. 6)

Considerations for establishing a living and learning program are

early involvement of students in the planning, participation by

students in the actual teaching, planning for the education programs,

use of resource personnel as consultants, use of technology in

educational programs, use of a variety of teaching methods, and

involvement of the student organizations (Stark, 1964). Stark (1964)

made the following recommendations for personnel:

Make maximum and early usage and involvement of students through
the residence hall government; call upon faculty and community
experts for suggestions and involvement; make full use of a wide
variety of types of programs; involve students in the
implementation of the programs; make use of different kinds of
teaching methods; and overlap with the already existing residence
hall organizations and programs. (p. 20)










The impact of the living and learning concept has been significant

(Adams, 1974) and is attributed to the personalization of colleges and

universities (Brown, 1972). This concept will likely continue in

colleges and universities (Brown, 1972; Riker, 1965).

Opportunities for Adult Students

Older students, those over the age of 22, have increased in recent

years (Astin, 1984; Brodzinski, 1977; Chickering, 1973; Cross, 1973;

Fingerman & Dyar, 1983; Greenwood, 1980; Jacobs, 1979;).

Older students represented 22% of the college enrollment in 1970

(Brodzinski, 1977). In 1972, according to the U.S. Bureau of Census

(1983) 23.8% of the college enrollments were comprised of students

over the age of 25. By 1975 this age group of students represented

34% of the college enrollment (Brodzinski, 1977) and by 1982 that

figure increased to 35.6% of college and university enrollment (U.S.

Bureau of Census, 1983).

Within the group of older students is a large subgroup of

returning women students. According to Johnson, Wallace, and Sedlacek

(1979) the Women's Bureau of Statistics documented this increase.

Between 1960 and 1975 the number of returning women students over the

age of 25 increased from 171,000 to 1,561,000.

The enrollment of adult learners is projected to continue to

increase. The largest age group in the United States in the year 2000

will be those in the 30-40 year old range (Cross, 1979). In addition,

by the year 2000, approximately 75% of the workforce will be comprised

of adults in the current workforce and about 23 million American

adults are currently functionally illiterate (National Commission on










Excellence in Education, 1983). In addition to current programs, new

approaches will be taken to prepare adults for employment. "These

workers, and new entrants into the workforce, will need further

education and retraining if they--and we as a Nation--are to thrive

and prosper" (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983, p.

13).

Counseling Services

In 1910, at Princeton University, Stewart Paton was credited as

being the first college psychiatrist (Arnstein, 1973). Following this

appointment more attention was gradually given to the counseling needs

of students. It was Edmond G. Williamson who, in the late 1930s,

articulated the role of counseling in the profession of student

affairs (Betz, 1980).

In 1952 the membership roster for the Counseling Center

Administrators' Conference included 50-60 members and by 1968 the

numbers increased to over 175 (Oetting, Ivey, & Weigel, 1970). In

1964 approximately 60% of colleges and universities responding to a

survey had a guidance or counseling center (Oetting et al., 1970).

The primary focus of these centers was on personal and vocational

counseling, and advisement of students on a one-to-one basis prior to

the 1970s (Weissberg, 1984). As the numbers of counseling centers

increased the role also expanded. The emphasis included preventive and

developmental as well as remedial attention (Hurst, 1980). In 1971

the International Association of Counseling Services (IACS) included

not only the remedial but the developmental needs of students as

services of college counseling centers (Kirk, Johnson, Redfield, Free,

Michel, Rosten, & Warman, 1971).










According to Weissberg (1984) the IACS "suggested functions and

services included individual and group counseling and psychotherapy,

consultation, learning skills assistance, university program

development, committee involvement, training supervision, assessment of

student needs, and research" (p. 40). He indicated that in 1981 these

guidelines were revised to include services to special populations of

students, outreach, and special programs. Weissberg (1984) cited

Garni, Gelwick, Lamb, McKinley, Shoenberg, Simono, Smith, Wierson, and

Wrenn, (1981), as indicating that the guidelines also:

stressed the importance of enhancing the university environment
so as to maximize growth and development; becoming a valuable
component of the entire student affairs effort; and developing
extensive networks and linkages with various academic, student
service, institutional, and community agencies. (p. 41)

This expansion is evidenced by a study done by Aiken (1982).

Respondents identified the areas that they believed to be important in

the present and those that would be of concern in the 1980s. Changes

between the current and future needs were also noted:

an increased emphasis of computer and media approaches to career
search; licensure of counselors providing services; tightened
budgets causing a restricted range of services; increased student
consumerism; the need for centers to be more involved in research
and program evaluation; the need for counselors to learn skills
in consultation and program planning; and the need for closer
ties between centers and the academic faculty. (p. 20)

The development of the counseling centers at colleges and

universities has resulted in a dramatic expansion of services. Both

Aiken (1982) and Weissberg (1984) indicated that the recent past has

resulted in a more comprehensive and diversified role for counseling

centers.






52



Chapter Summary

This chapter presented an overview of the literature related to

Chin and Benne's theory of change, the catalysts and management of

change in student affairs, and the recent areas of change in the

student affairs profession.

The next chapter describes the methodology and design developed

and used to facilitate the study.

















CHAPTER III
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY


Research Objectives

The purpose of this study was to determine if the change

strategies of Chin and Benne (1976) were seen by three types of

administrators at public four-year institutions of higher education as

being equally important as processes involved in causing change to

occur in the area of student affairs within the past 20 years.

The following null hypotheses were developed and were tested in

this study:

Hypothesis 1. There are no significant differences among

administrators in the three institutional positions in their

perceptions of the importance of change.

Hypothesis 2. There are no significant differences among

administrators in the three institutional positions regarding

their perceptions of the importance of the empirical-rational

change strategy in causing change to occur.

Hypothesis 3. There are no significant differences among

administrators in the three institutional positions regarding

their perceptions of the importance of the normative-re-educative

change strategy in causing change to occur.











Hypothesis 4. There are no significant differences among

administrators in the three institutional positions regarding

their perceptions of the importance of the power-coercive change

strategy in causing change to occur.

Hypothesis 5. There is no significant interaction between the

type of administrator and the importance of the three change

strategies in explaining the overall change perceived by

administrators.

Hypothesis 6. There are no significant differences among the

three change strategies regarding their perceived importance in

causing change to occur.

Hypothesis 7. There are no significant differences among the

three change strategies regarding their perceived importance in

causing change to occur in the 10 areas of change.

For all hypotheses tested, the level for statistical significance

was set at .05. If the probability value was less than .05 the null

hypothesis was rejected.

Research Population and Sample

The research population for this study included the chief

academic, administrative, and student affairs officers at all public

four-year institutions of higher education. This population consisted

of 486 institutions according to the Educational Directory, Colleges

and Universities (Broyles & Fernandez, 1984).

The 486 institutions were listed in alphabetical order. Three

groups were selected from the population by using a regular interval

sample. By alphabetical order, institutions were assigned a number of










one, two, or three. This determined which chief officers at each

institution would receive the survey. The three groups, in order,

were the chief academic affairs officers, the chief administrative

affairs officers, and the chief student affairs officers. There were

a total of 162 institutions in each of the three groups.

The three groups of administrators were chosen for a variety of

reasons. As change occurs, the chief officers in these areas of

responsibility are the individuals most likely to be aware of the

change and/or be involved in actions that affect change. In addition,

the areas represented, student life, academic, and administrative

issues are often the three key components of the university that deal

with change. When major changes occurs, these three areas of

responsibility are often involved and the chief officers must interact

with one another.

Development of the Instrument

Change Statements

The change statements were developed by a review of the literature

which documented change within the past 20 years in the field of

student affairs. In addition, the selected 10 areas of change noted

were ranked as such by a total of 19 nationally recognized leaders in

student affairs. These individuals were sent a list of 22 areas of

change (Appendix B) and asked to rank them in terms of their

significance. The 10 areas of change are, in order of ranking,

enrollment of minority students, opportunities for women students,

legal/liability concerns, use of technology, alcohol use policies,

drug abuse, enrollment of disabled students, living and learning










programs, opportunities for adult students, and counseling services.

The 10 areas were used in the change statements.

The 10 change statements were as follows:

1. Between 1965 and 1985 the enrollment of students with disabilities

increased significantly at public colleges and universities. In

thinking about this change, please rate each of the following

responses in terms of their importance in causing this change to occur.

2. The percentage of minority students increased from 9.5% to 17% of

the total college and university enrollment between 1968 and 1982. In

thinking about this change, please rate each of the following

responses in terms of their importance in causing this change to occur.

3. In 1960 women represented almost 35% of the enrollment at colleges

and universities and, according to the U.S. Bureau of Census (1983),

the figure is now 52.1%. In thinking about this change, please rate

each of the following responses in terms of their importance in

causing this change to occur.

4. The living and learning concept in residence halls, which evolved

during the past 20 years, is a program which provides for the physical

as well as the social and academic development of students. The

impact of this concept has been significant (Adams, 1974). In

thinking about this change, please rate each of the following

responses in terms of their importance in causing this change to occur.

5. The use of technology has expanded significantly in the past 20

years. It is found in direct access services for students such as 24

hour telephone access to services and programs in career and personal

counseling and study skills. It is also prevalent as a management










tool and is used in areas such as admissions, financial aid, and

academic advisement. In thinking about this change, please rate each

of the following responses in terms of their importance in causing

this change to occur.

6. Institutions of higher education are confronted increasingly with

legal/liability issues. These concerns can be found in areas such as

alcohol use, hazing, campus security, student discipline, and student

publications. In thinking about this change, please rate each of the

following responses in terms of their importance in causing this

change to occur.

7. Prior to the 1960s the main concern regarding substance abuse on

campuses was the consumption of alcohol. During the 1960s the use of

hallucinogins, marijuana, and other drugs such as heroin,

amphetamines, and barbiturates occurred. The abuse of these drugs,

along with the use of cocaine and the use of multiple drugs by

students, has appeared on college and university campuses. In

thinking about this change, please rate each of the following

responses in terms of their importance in causing this change to occur.

8. Prior to the 1970s the primary focus of counseling centers was on

the personal, vocational, and advisement of students on a one-to-one

basis. The centers have expanded their role and now include such

things as educational consultation, university committee involvement,

training, services to special populations of students, and outreach.

In thinking about this change, please rate each of the following items

in terms of their importance in causing this change to occur.










9. In 1970, older students (those over 24 years of age) represented

22% of the college enrollment. By 1982 this figure increased to 35.6%

of college enrollments. In thinking about this change, please rate

each of the following responses in terms of their importance in

causing this change to occur.

10. Colleges and universities have increased the number of

educational programs and policies regarding the use of alcohol.

Studies by Anderson and Gadaleto (1985) indicate that the percentage

of responding institutions having programs in alcohol education

increased from 69% in 1978 to 88% in 1985. In thinking about this

change, please rate each of the following responses in terms of their

importance in causing this change to occur.

Responses to Change Statements

For the construction of the responses the researcher reviewed the

literature on each of the change strategies represented. The

following key words and phrases reflected the types of change

strategies:

1. Empirical-rational--communication of ideas, basic research,

scientific investigation and research, diffusion of knowledge,

scientific management, applied research.

2. Normative-re-educative--creating conditions for innovation,

creativity, personal growth, problem-solving, conflict management, use

of external consultants, taskforces, values, habits, involvement of

the client in the system, feelings.

3. Power-coercive--use of mandates, orders, legislative and judicial

decisions, civil disobedience, use of political institutions,

influence of those in power.










Three responses for each change strategy were then developed that

included the key words or phrases that reflected the three change

strategies: three response items reflecting the empirical-rational,

three the normative-re-educative, and three reflecting the

power-coercive change strategy. From the three sets of responses one

set was used for four change statements, and two sets were used for

three statements each.

The first response in each set reflected the empirical-rational

strategy, the second the normative-re-educative strategy, and the

third represented the power-coercive change strategy. While the three

sets were used, the number of the individual statements varied to

assist in assuring that the responses were read for each change

statement.

1. The change was based on research, increased knowledge and

information, and the dissemination of the information.

2. Changes in commitments and/or changes in values, habits, and

attitudes were the basis for change.

3. The use of political, economic or moral sanctions, civil

disobedience, and/or judicial or legislative decisions were the basis

for the change.

1. The use of research, an increase in information and knowledge,

and the communication of the information were the basis for this

change.

2. Changes in values, habits, attitudes, and/or commitments were

the basis for this change.











3. The change occurred as a result of activities such as

legislative or judicial decisions, civil disobedience, and/or

political, moral, or economic sanctions.

1. The communication of increased information and knowledge

and/or the use of research were the basis for this change.

2. The change occurred as a result of changes in the values,

attitudes, habits, and/or commitments.

3. The use of moral, political or economic sanctions, legislative

or judicial decisions, and/or civil disobedience were the basis for

this change.

Validation of the Response Items

To determine that the response items accurately reflected the

theory of Chin and Benne, the researcher submitted the responses to a

panel of five expert judges. These individuals were selected on the

basis of their expertise and knowledge regarding change theory.

Agreement among three of the five judges established a response as

being valid. As indicated in Appendix F, of the four responses

received, all concurred that the responses reflected the appropriate

change strategy.

Each judge was selected in advance and informed about the research

project and his/her role in the project. Each judge was sent a letter

(Appendix C) which included a brief description of the study

(Appendix D). The following directions (Appendix E) were included.

1. Read the summary of Chin and Benne's taxonomy of planned change.

2. Read the sample change strategy responses.










3. Indicate the change strategy that you believe is most accurately

described by the response. Use the following key for the responses:

E= empirical-rational, N= normative-re-educative, and P=

power-coercive.

4. Judge each response independently and do not use the process of

elimination to determine the change strategy represented.

5. Note comments and suggestions in the space provided.

6. The completed form should be returned in the enclosed,

self-addressed envelope.

Pilot Study Using the Survey Instrument

Following the validation of the response items a pilot study was

conducted. The instrument was completed by the three highest ranking

officials in the Division of Academic Affairs, Administrative Affairs,

and Student Affairs at the University of Florida. These individuals

were asked to determine the length of time required to complete the

instrument, to make general comments about the instrument, and to

suggest changes or improvements in the instrument. Their responses

were considered when the final design was developed. As a result of

the pilot study, clarifications were made in the wording of two change

statements and several of the responses.

Design and Printing of the Instrument

An instrument titled "A Study of Planned Change Strategies in

Higher Education" was printed (see Appendix G). The printing was done

with consideration for ease of reading and completion by the

participants. Considerations for mailing, such as number and size of

pages, were included when the format of the instrument was designed.










Administration of the Instrument

The instrument was mailed to the participants. Each of the

potential 486 respondents, representing 162 chief academic,

administrative, and student affairs officers at different four-year

public postsecondary institutions received a survey form that included

a letter indicating the purpose of the survey and endorsement, and a

questionnaire. The letter outlined the purpose of the study (see

Appendixes H and I). In addition, it requested that the recipient

return the completed questionnaire by stapling the instrument and

returning the self-addressed, stamped survey. Respondents were asked

to return the questionnaire within two weeks. A follow-up mailing was

sent two weeks following the initial mailout, urging participation and

support of the study and there was a two week response time for the

follow-up questionnaire. Confidentiality of the respondents was

ensured. A letter from Dr. James Wattenbarger, Director of the

Institute of Higher Education at the University of Florida, was

included with the survey.

Treatment of the Data

Responses obtained on the section on institutional and personal

data provided specific information regarding these areas. This

demographic information was collected to obtain data that may be

helpful in comparing future research and is summarized in Appendix J.

Responses to the change statements provided a measure of the

perceived overall importance of change, the perceived overall

importance of each strategy, differences among administrators in their

perceptions, and by specific differences in the 10 areas of change.










The Statistical Analysis System (SAS) computer program was used to

analyze the data. The various types of data analyzed with SAS

provided the necessary functions for this study.

Survey instruments were numbered for follow-up after the initial

mailing and to categorize responses appropriately. Returned, useable

responses were put on data coding sheets and then on to IBM cards.

One-way and two-way analyses of variance (ANOVA) were used to

analyze the data. The one-way ANOVA was used to test all hypotheses

except hypothesis number 5. For hypothesis 5 the dependent variable

overall change and the independent variable of the three types of

administrators and the three types of change strategies, was analyzed

using the two-way ANOVA. All hypotheses were tested and the level for

statistical significance was set at .05. If the probability value was

less than .05 the null hypothesis was rejected. If the null

hypothesis was rejected a follow-up procedure, the Bonferroni

procedure for identifying specific differences, was used. This

allowed the researcher to compare all pairs of means and determine

which means were significantly different.

Chapter Summary

This chapter has provided an overview of the design and

methodology of this study. The outline consists of (a) research

objective, (b) research population, (c) development of the instrument,

(d) design and printing of the instrument, (e) administration of the

instrument, and (f) treatment of the data. Chapter IV presents the

results and the analysis of the data.

















CHAPTER IV
PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE DATA


The purpose of this study was to determine if the change

strategies of Chin and Benne (1976) were seen by three types of

administrators at public four-year institutions of higher educations

as being equally important as processes involved in causing change to

occur in the area of student affairs within the past 20 years. The

three types of administrators surveyed for the study were the chief

academic, administrative, and student affairs officers. In addition,

the study researched the perceived importance of the overall change

strategies regarding their role in the 10 areas of change. An

instrument that included 10 areas of change and responses that

reflected the three change strategies was used for the research.

There were seven hypothesis tested in this study and each one is

identified in the section regarding the analysis of the data.

Research Sample

The chief academic, administrative, and student affairs officers

at public four-year institutions of higher education comprised the

sample population for this study. A list of 486 institutions was

compiled from the Educational Directory, Colleges and Universities

(Broyles & Fernandez, 1984). The 486 institutions were listed in

alphabetical order and three groups were selected from the population

by using a regular interval sample. The institutions, in alphabetical










order, were assigned a number one, two, or three. The administrators

included in the first group were the chief academic affairs officers,

the second group were the chief administrative officers, and the third

group were the chief student affairs officers at those institutions.

Each group included 162 administrators.

Of the 486 administrators surveyed there were a total of 304

(62.5%) returns. Of that total, seven instruments were not completed

and 10 surveys were duplicate responses, the result of the second

mailing. The useable return total was 287 (59%). This number was

used for analysis purposes. A breakdown of the total responses by the

three types of administrators indicated that the chief academic

affairs officers response number was 92 (32.1%), the chief

administrative affairs officers return rate was 93 (32.4%), and the

chief student affairs officers responded with 102 (35.4%) of the total

returns. There were 230 male and 35 female respondents with 22

unidentified responses.

Analysis of the Data

In this section the process that was used to test the hypotheses

that were stated earlier is discussed. An overview of the procedures

and a section specific to each hypothesis is presented.

The instrument used,"Study of Planned Change in Higher Education"

(Appendix G), included 10 statements regarding change that have

occurred in higher education within the past 20 years. Each change

statement was followed by three responses that reflected the three

different change strategies of Chin and Benne. Each respondent was

asked to rate each response in terms of its importance in causing the










identified change to occur. The respondents were asked to rate each

of the responses on a scale from one (not important) to five (very

important). With this scale, the closer the mean score for the

strategy was to five the more important the change strategy was

perceived to be, and the closer it was to one the less important it

was perceived to be in causing the change to occur.

A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test six of the

hypotheses. A two-way ANOVA was used to test hypothesis 5. These

analyses allowed the researcher to compare the means of three or more

groups. The procedure involved the computation of an F-value for each

ANOVA along with the probability of the its occurrence under the null

hypothesis. The level of statistical significance was set at .05. To

determine the acceptance or rejection of the null hypothesis, the

calculated probability was compared to the .05 level of significance.

If the probability value was less than .05, the null hypothesis was

rejected. If it was greater than the .05, the null hypothesis was

accepted.

Several different one-way ANOVAs were used. The analysis

consisted of the combined scores of all change strategies for the

dependent variable of change to test for an overall importance of the

change strategies. To test for differences among the three types of

administrators, each of the three change strategies was tested using

each of them as a dependent variable. In addition, change was the

dependent variable used to test for differences for the 10 areas of

change.










For all of the analyses, if the null hypothesis was rejected a

follow-up procedure, the Bonferroni procedure for identifying specific

differences, was used. This allowed the researcher to compare all

pairs of means and determine which means were significantly

different. The level of significance was set at .05. If the means,

when compared, were significantly different at the .05 level it was

determined that a difference existed. If more than one comparison was

significant, the order of the difference was determined by the order

of the group means.

Overall Importance of Change Strategies

The analysis for overall change was to determine how much of the

perceived importance of the change strategies was attributed to the

three different administrative positions. To test this, the dependent

variable was change, a category that combined scores of all three

change strategies. This procedure was used to test hypothesis 1.

Hypothesis 1. There are no significant differences among

administrators in the three institutional positions in their

perceptions of the importance of change.

As shown in Table 4-1, the F-value for the dependent variable of

change was 2.37. The probablilty of obtaining this F-value is .0951.

Since the probability is greater that .05, the null hypothesis was not

rejected. There is no statistical difference among the three types of

administrators regarding their perceived importance of change.










Table 4-1

Analysis of Variance for Overall Change


Group N Mean F-Value Probability Implications

Academic
Affairs 92 3.291

Administrative
Affairs 93 3.276

Student
Affairs 102 3.405

2.37 .0951 non-significant

Note: Alpha = .05.


Empirical-Rational Change Strategy

The next step in the analysis was to determine if differences

existed among administrators in their perceived importance of the use

of the empirical-rational change strategy. This was analyzed by a

one-way ANOVA using empirical-rational as the dependent variable and

position as the independent variable. The analysis was designed to

test hypothesis 2.

Hypothesis 2. There are no significant differences among

administrators in the three institutional positions regarding

their perceptions of the importance of the empirical-rational

change strategy in causing change to occur.

Table 4-2 provides a summary of this analysis. As shown in Table

4-2, the F-value for the independent variable of position was 4.60.

The probability of obtaining this F-value is .0108. Since the

probability is less that the .05 level of significance, the null

hypothesis was rejected. There is a statistically significant











difference among the administrators in their perceived importance of

the use of the empirical-rational change strategy. The analysis

indicates that the obtained R-square was .03. Therefore, about 3% of

the variation in overall change was explained by the different

perceptions of the empirical-rational strategy.


Table 4-2

Analysis of Variance for Empirical-Rational Change Strategy


Group N Mean F-Value Probability Implications

Academic
Affairs 92 3.060

Administrative
Affairs 93 3.079

Student
Affairs 102 3.313

4.60 .0108 Significant

Note: Alpha = .05.


A follow-up procedure was used to determine where the significant

differences existed. The results of the Bonferroni t test for the use

of the empirical-rational change strategy are shown in Table 4-3.

The results indicated that there are no differences between the

chief academic and administrative affairs officers. The chief student

affairs officers differ significantly from the other administrators in

their perception of the importance of the use of the

empirical-rational change strategy. The student affairs officers

consider it to be of more importance in causing change to occur than

do the other administrators.












Table 4-3

Bonferroni t Test for Empirical-Rational Change Strategy


Groups Compared N Means Implications

Academic Affairs 92 3.060
Administrative Affairs non-significant
Student Affairs significant

Administrative Affairs 93 3.079
Academic Affairs non-significant
Student Affairs significant

Student Affairs Affairs 102 3.313
Academic Affairs significant
Administrative Affairs significant

Note: Alpha = .05.


Normative-Re-Educative Change Strategy

The test to determine if there were significant differences among

the three types of administrators and their perceived importance of

the use of the normative-re-educative change strategy a one-way ANOVA

was used with normative-re-educative change strategy as the dependent

variable and position as the independent variable. This was done to

test hypothesis 3.

Hypothesis 3. There are no significant differences among

administrators in the three institutional positions regarding

their perceptions of the importance of the normative-re-educative

change strategy in causing change to occur.

The results of the analysis of the normative-re-educative change

strategy are noted in Table 4-4. An F-value of .10 was calculated and

the probability of obtaining this value was .9009. Because the










probability was greater than the alpha level of .05 the hypothesis was

not rejected. This indicates that there are no significant

differences among the administrators regarding their perceptions of

the importance of the use of the normative-re-educative change

strategy.


Table 4-4

Analysis of Variance for Normative-Re-Educative Change Strategy


Group N Mean F-Value Probability Implication

Academic
Affairs 92 3.913

Administrative
Affairs 93 3.906

Student
Affairs 102 3.941

.10 .9009 non-significant

Note: Alpha = .05.


Power-Coercive Change Strategy

To determine whether there were differences among the types of

administrators and their perceptions of the importance of the use of

the power-coercive change strategy an ANOVA was done using

power-coercive as the dependent variable and position as the

independent variable. This was done to test hypothesis 4.

Hypothesis 4. There are no significant differences among

administrators in their perceptions of the importance of the

power-coercive change strategy in causing change to occur.











A significant difference does not exist among the administrators

regarding their perceived importance of the use of the power-coercive

change strategies as shown in Table 4-5. The computed F-value is .91

with a probability of .4054. Because the probability is greater than

.05 the null hypothesis was not rejected.


Table 4-5

Analysis of Variance for Power-Coercive Change Strategy


Group N Mean F-value Probability Implication

Academic
Affairs 92 2.900

Administrative
Affairs 93 2.844

Student
Affairs 103 2.960

.91 .4054 non-significant

Note: Alpha = .05.


Dominant Change Strategies

A major aspect of this research was to determine if the

administrators in the sample perceived an overall dominant change

strategy. Also investigated was the possibility of a dominant

strategy in the 10 areas of recent change in student affairs. For the

purpose of this study, dominance refers to the level of importance

attributed to the strategy. The prevalent strategy refers to the

strategy which was viewed by the greatest number of administrators as

the one most often used in causing change to occur.










If a respondent rated each strategy as equally important the

response was not used in the analysis for a dominant change strategy.

These data, however, are included for information purposes and are

noted as responses where no dominant strategy was identified. The

useable total reflects the number of responses where differences

existed among the responses in the rating of the importance of the

three strategies.

Overall change by change strategy and administrative position. To

determine if there was significant interaction between administrative

type and change strategies in determining overall change perceived by

administrators, a two-way ANOVA was performed using overall change as

the dependent variable. The interaction tests to determine if

different administrative types with different dominant change

strategies view the level of importance of overall change the same

way. The three types of administrators and three change strategies

were the independent variables. This was done to test hypothesis 5.

Hypothesis 5. There is no significant interaction between the

type of administrator and the importance of the three change

strategies in explaining the overall change perceived by

administrators.

Table 4-6 is a summary of the analysis of hypothesis 5. An

F-value of 2.87 with a probability level of .0234 was identified. The

probability was greater than the .05 level of significance and the

null hypothesis was rejected. The means and the frequencies used in

this analysis are identified in table 4-7.










Table 4-6

Analysis of Variance for Overall Change as a


Function of Administrative


Type and Change Strategies


Source of Variance DF Type III SS F-Value Probability

Change Strategies 2 2.121 6.02 .0028

Position 2 0.518 1.47 .2318

Change Strategies X Position 4 2.024 2.87 .0234*

Note: R-square = .0949.
*significant at .05.



Table 4-7

Means and Frequencies for the Analysis of Variance for Overall Change
as a Function of Administrative Type and Change Strategy


Change Strategy
Group ER NR PC

Academic Affairs
Mean 3.122 3.350 2.933
Frequency 3 77 7

Administrative Affairs
Mean 3.525 3.246 3.314
Frequency 4 80 7

Student Affairs
Mean 3.529 3.420 2.793
Frequency 7 84 7

Note: ER = empirical-rational, NR = normative-re-educative, and PC =
power-coercive.


There is an interaction between the type of administrator and the

three change strategies in explaining overall perceptions of change.

A significant interaction here would indicate that the three types of

administrators perceived the three strategies with different

importance.










The analysis did indicate differences. The differences are

depicted in the graph in Figure 4-1. An analysis of the interaction

indicates that the obtained R-square was .0949; therefore only about

9% of the variation in the model is explained by the two factors

(strategies and position) and the interaction in perception of overall

importance between the two.



3.75


3.50


Overall 3.25
Change

3.00

Empirical-rational = 0
2.75 Normative-re-educative = U
Power-coercive =

Academic Administrative Student
Affairs Affairs Affairs

Mean Scores for Overall Change by Predominant Change Strategies for
Three Types of Administrators.


The analysis indicates that academic affairs officers who saw

normative-re-educative change as a dominant strategy perceived more

overall importance to change than did those who perceived the

empirical-rational and power-coercive strategies as dominant. The

normative-re-educative strategy was the prevalent strategy by

approximately 89% of the academic affairs officers.

In contrast, the chief administrative affairs officers who saw

empirical-rational strategies as the dominant change strategy also











noted more overall importance to change than did those who perceived

the dominant strategies to be the the other strategies. While the

normative-re-educative strategy had the lowest mean score for this

group of administrators, approximately 86% of the administrative

affairs officers perceived it to be a prevalent strategy.

The empirical-rational change strategy was also the one student

affairs officers perceived to be the most important in overall

change. While these administrators saw it as most important, the

normative-re-educative strategy means were close to the

empirical-rational means and it was indicated to be the prevalent

change strategy by approximately 86% of the chief student affairs

officers.

The analysis indicated an interaction between administrative

position and change strategy with regard to overall change. While the

differences in the means exists, it is important to note the numbers

of administrators indicating each strategy as a prevalent one. The

normative-re-educative strategy was seen as prevalent by 241

administrators, the power-coercive strategy by 21 administrators, and

the empirical-rational strategy was perceived by a total of 14

administrators as the dominant strategy. Therefore, the line for

normative-re-educative strategy is the most stable line in Figure 4-1.

Overall dominant change strategies. To determine if there were

differences regarding the importance of the three change strategies,

a one-way ANOVA was done using dominant change as the dependent

variable. This procedure was used to test hypothesis 6.










Hypothesis 6. There are no significant differences among the

three change strategies regarding their perceived importance in

causing change to occur.

The results of this analysis are shown in Table 4-8. The F-value

was 6.25 with the probablilty level of .0022. Since the probability

was less than the alpha level of .05 the null hypothesis was

rejected. There is a difference among the three change strategies

regarding their perceived importance in causing change to occur.


Table 4-8

Analysis of Variance for Overall Dominance of Change Strategies


Strategy N Mean F-value Probability Significance

No Dominant
Strategy 11 3.493

Empirical-
Rational 14 3.440

Nomative-Re-
Educative 241 3.340

Power-Coercive 21 3.013
6.25 .0022 significant

Note: Total N = 287, useable n = 276. Alpha = .05.


To determine where the significant differences existed, a

follow-up multiple comparison procedure, the Bonferroni t test, was

done. The results are shown in Table 4-9.

The analysis indicated that significant differences existed among

the three strategies in terms of their perceived importance. Both the

empirical-rational strategy and the normative-re-reducative strategies











differed from the power-coercive strategy. There were no significant

differences in the means of the empirical-rational and the

normative-re-educative strategies. The normative-re-educative change

strategy was identified by the great majority of respondents as the

strategy most often used as a catalyst for change. It was followed by

the power-coercive and the empirical-rational change strategies.


Table 4-9

Bonferroni t Test for Dominant Change Strategy


Strategies Compared N Means Implications

No Dominant Strategy 11 3.493

Empirical-Rational 14 3.440
Normative-Re-educative non-significant
Power-Coercive significant

Normative-Re-educative 241 3.340
Empirical-Rational non-significant
Power-Coercive significant

Power-Coercive 21 3.013
Empirical-Rational significant
Normative-Re-educative significant

Note. Total N = 287, useable n = 276. Alpha = .05.


Dominant change for ten areas of change. To determine if there

was a dominant change strategy used for the 10 different areas of

change the ANOVA procedure was also used. The independent variables

in this analysis were opportunities for adult students, alcohol use

policies, counseling services, enrollment of disabled students, drug

abuse, legal/liability concerns, living and learning programs,

enrollment of minority students, opportunities for women students and











technology. If the respondent rated each of the three responses

equally in importance for the specific area of change, that response

was not used in the analysis of dominant change strategies. The

responses of no dominant change strategies are noted for information.

This was done to test hypothesis 7.

Hypothesis 7. There are no significant differences among the

three change strategies regarding their perceived importance in

causing change to occur in the 10 areas of change.

Table 4-10 is a summary of the number of responses for each area

of change.


Table 4-10

Numbers Used in the Analysis of Variance


for Ten Areas of Change


Number of Responses
Area ND ER NR PC

Adult Students 80 19 184 4

Alcohol Use Policies 137 62 63 23

Counseling Services 122 64 92 4

Disabled Students 67 10 76 132

Drug Abuse 60 14 199 8

Legal/Liabilty Concerns 114 7 51 114

Living and Learning Programs 107 61 105 9

Minority Students 84 5 49 148

Women Students 69 7 163 47

Technology 74 169 41 2

Note: ND = no dominant strategy, ER = empirical-rational, NR =
normative-re-educative, PC = power-coercive change strategy.










Table 4-11 provides a summary of the 10 one-way ANOVAs. In 8 out

of the 10 areas of change there were no differences among the three

change strategies. In the areas of drug abuse and the use of

technology, differences existed. In the area of drug abuse an F-value

of 9.35 was obtained with a probability level of .0001. The analysis

of the use of technology indicated a F-value of 4.58 with a

probability level of .0113. Both of these levels are less than the

.05 level of significance and the null hypothesis was rejected.


Table 4-11

Analysis of Variance for Ten Areas of Change


Mean scores
Area ND ER NR PC F-value Probability

Adult Students 3.500 3.368 3.206 2.833 1.42 .2431

Alcohol Use
Policies 3.886 3.392 3.291 3.580 1.76 .1757

Counseling
Services 3.213 3.260 3.058 3.000 1.95 .1455

Disabled Students 3.632 3.566 3.500 3.377 1.47 .2330

Drug Abuse 3.400 3.393 2.782 3.500 9.25 .0001*

Legal/Liability
Concerns 3.871 3.286 3.454 3.545 .98 .3786

Living and Learning
Programs 3.137 3.022 2.975 3.222 .66 .5199

Minority Students 3.627 3.533 3.333 3.468 1.36 .2584

Women Students 3.754 3.190 3.373 3.390 .37 .6930

Technology 3.144 3.110 2.829 2.500 4.58 .0113*

Note: ND = no dominant strategy, ER = empirical-rational, NR =
normative-re-educative, PC = power-coercive strategy.
*significant at the .05 level.











A multiple-comparisons follow-up procedure was used to determine

where the significant differences existed in both drug abuse and the

use of technology. This was done to determine which of the three

change strategies was the dominant one for that area of change.

Table 4-12 is a summary of the follow-up analysis for drug abuse.

As indicated in table 4-12, both the power-coercive and the

empirical-rational strategies differ from the normative-re-educative

strategy. The power-coercive change strategy is the strategy perceived

to be the most important in causing change to occur in the area of

drug abuse. A greater number of individuals rated the

empirical-rational strategies as a prevalent one but its importance

was rated lower than the other two categories.


Table 4-12

Bonferroni t Test for Drug Abuse


Strategies Compared N Means Implications

No Dominant Strategy 60 3.400

Empirical-Rational 14 3.393
Normative-Re-educative significant
Power-Coercive non-significant

Normative-Re-educative 199 2.782
Empirical-Rational significant
Power-Coercive significant

Power-Coercive 8 3.500
Empirical-Rational non-significant
Normative-Re-educative significnat

Note: Alpha = .05.










Table 4-13 identifies a difference between the empirical-rational

and the normative-re-reducative change strategies in causing a change

in the use of technology. For change in the area of technology, the

empirical-rational strategy was rated as dominant in causing change to

occur, followed by the empirical-rational and power-coercive

strategies. In addition, the greatest number of administrators

perceived this to be the prevalent change strategy.


Table 4-13

Bonferroni t Test for Technology


Strategies Compared N Mean Implications

No Dominant Strategy 74 3.144

Empirical-Rational 169 3.110
Normative-Re-educative significant
Power-Coercive non-significant

Normative-Re-educative 41 2.829
Empirical-Rational significant
Power-Coercive non-significant

Power-Coercive 2 2.500
Empirical-Rational non-significant
Normative-Re-educative non-significant

Note: Alpha = .05.


Chapter Summary

This chapter has presented the results of the study. The sample

population, return responses, and the procedures used for the

statistical analysis have been provided. In addition, the results of

the analyses were described. A summary of the analyses is presented


in the following general statements.











1. The importance of the change strategies was not statistically

different. Chief academic, administrative, and student affairs

officers, did not differ statistically in their perceived importance

of change.

2. Regarding the use of the the empirical-rational change strategy,

the chief student affairs officers perceived it to be of significantly

more importance than did the other two types of administrators.

3. The chief student affairs officers did not differ from the chief

academic and administrative officers in the importance of the

normative-re-educative strategy.

4. There were no significant differences regarding the importance of

the power-coercive change strategy. The academic affairs,

administrative affairs, and the student affairs officers perceived it

as equally important.

5. There were significant differences among the administrative types

and the perceived importance of the change strategies in overall

change. The chief student affairs officers perceived

empirical-rational as the most important in overall change.

Approximately 86% of the student affairs officers perceived

normative-re-educative as the prevalent strategy but rated it lower in

importance than the empirical-rational strategy.

6. The dominant strategies by importance for the 10 areas of change

were empirical-rational and normative-re-educative. While the

empirical-rational strategy had the highest rating of importance it

also had the lowest number of administrators selecting it as a










dominant strategy. The normative-re-educative strategy had the

highest number of administrators selecting it as a dominant strategy.

7. There were two issues within the 10 areas of recent change where

significant differences were indicated regarding a dominant strategy.

The power-coercive and the empirical-rational strategies were rated

significantly higher than the normative-re-educative strategy in the

area of drug abuse. The normative-re-educative, while lower in

importance, had the highest number of administrators perceiving it as

a dominant strategy. In the area of technology, the

empirical-rational strategy was rated significantly higher than the

normative-re-educative strategy and also had the highest number of

administrators indicating it as a dominant strategy.

Chapter IV has presented specific information regarding the

analysis of the data. Chapter V presents a summary of the study,

findings, conclusions, and recommendations and implications for future

research.

















CHAPTER V
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS


This chapter consists of five sections. The first section is an

overview of the development and design of the study. In the second

section a summary of the major findings is presented. The third

section identifies some conclusions and the fourth provides a

discussion of the conclusions of the study. The fifth section

includes some possible implications for future research.

Development of the Study

Purpose

The main purpose of this study was to determine if the change

strategies of Chin and Benne (1976) were seen by three types of

administrators at four-year public institutions of higher education as

being equally important as processes involved in causing change to

occur. The three types of administrators surveyed for the study were

the chief academic, administrative, and student affairs officers. The

three change strategies used in the study theorized by Chin and Benne

(1976) are (a) empirical-rational, (b) normative-re-educative, and (c)

power-coercive categories of change. The types of strategies were

compared in terms of their perceived importance to determine if

differences existed in general and by type of administrator. In

addition, the perceived importance of the change strategies in the 10

areas of change were examined, as was the perceived dominance of a

strategy in the 10 areas of change.

85










Justification for the Study

Student affairs as a profession has experienced significant change

during the past 20 years. A study by Brodzinski (1980) reported the

amount of responsibility that chief student affairs officers

identified for 20 functional areas of responsibility. The results

were compared to a 1962-63 study (Ayers et al., 1966). In the

Brodzinski study there was an increase of 30% in three areas and a 20%

in three additional areas. Only one decrease was noted and a total of

55 different functional areas were included in the "other" category in

the Brodzinski study. These increased responsibilities and changes

occurred at a time when resources were limited and accountability was

stressed.

It is important that student affairs professionals are aware of

these changes. In addition, an understanding of planned change is

necessary (American College Personnel Association, 1983; Miller &

Prince, 1977). According to Blaesser and Crookston (1983)

Changes in college student personnel programs are typically
brought about in diverse ways--through administrative fiat, staff
turnovers, financial ups and downs, recommendation from faculty
and student committees, marshalling of data from local, regional,
and national research, or pressure groups from student, faculty,
administration, alumni, and the surrounding community. (p. 193)

Change is predicted to continue in the area of student affairs

(Harvey, 1983). To continue to meet the increasing demands of

constant change and to maintain institutional support, student affairs

professionals must become familiar with how change occurs.

This study examined how change is perceived to occur by chief

student affairs officers and by two other types of administrators that











are typically involved with institutional change, the chief academic

and administrative officers. The results of the study may provide

information for student affairs professionals about how change occurs

within the profession and within other parts of institutions of higher

education. This information may assist in planning for the future and

working with other key administrators within institutions.

Conceptual Framework

The change strategies of Chin and Benne (1976) formed the

theoretical basis for this study. Their change strategies combine

various approaches to change into three main groups, each of which can

be found in higher education. Their three categories of change are

(a) empirical-rational, (b) normative-re-educative, and (c)

power-coercive. The following provides a summary of these strategies.

The empirical-rational strategy assumes that people are rational

and they will pursue their rational self-interest when it is known to

them. In this process, a person or organization proposes a change

that will be of benefit to and consistent with the self-interest of

the individual or group on which the change will have an impact. It

is assumed that change will be accepted if it is shown to be justified

and of benefit because the individual or organization is assumed to be

rational and able to be motivated by self-interest.

The normative-re-educative change strategies include rationality

and intelligence. However, the motivation for the change is the

support by individuals of the sociocultural norms which are the values

and attitudes that affect commitment. Change involves an alteration

of the orientation to current normative patterns and replacing them











with new orientations. The change in commitment involves change in

"attitudes, values, skills, and significant relationships, not just in

knowledge, information, or intellectual rationales for action and

practice" (Chin & Benne, 1976, p. 23). Processes such as conflict

management, problem-solving groups, and management by objectives are

examples of this strategy.

Power-coercive change strategies are based on the use of power as

a source of change. The source of power can be legitimate,

authoritative, and/or coercive. Sources of motivation for change

therefore can include such things as positional, economic, legal,

political, moral, and administrative power. In this process, those

with more power use it to obtain the desired outcome from those with

less power. In education, this process of change can be found in

sources such as legislative mandates, judicial decisions, and

administrative orders (Blaesser, 1978).

Review of the Literature

The purpose of the review of the literature was to provide

background information on three areas. The three areas were Chin and

Bennes' theory of change, change in student affairs, and the 10 areas

of recent change in student affairs. Chin and Benne's theory was

described in terms of their general beliefs regarding planned change

and by a description of the three categories of change. Change in

student affairs was described through a summary of the literature that

discussed catalysts and the management of change in the profession. A

history of each of the 10 areas of recent change was also included.










Methodology

The research population for this study included the chief

academic, administrative, and student affairs officers at public

four-year colleges and universities. From an alphabetical list of 486

institutions, three groups were selected by assigning a number one,

two, or three to each institution. Each of the three groups contained

162 administrators from different institutions and the three groups

were the academic, administrative, and student affairs officers.

An instrument "A Study of Planned Change in Higher Education" was

constructed by the reseacher. The instrument contained two sections.

One section included demographic data and the second section contained

10 statements about recent change in student affairs. Following each

of the change statements there were three responses, each one

reflecting one of the change strategies of Chin and Benne. The

responses were validated by experts in planned change as reflecting

the three change strategies. The respondents were asked to rate each

of the responses in terms of its perceived importance in causing

change to occur. The instrument was sent to 486 administrators and

the useable return rate was 287 (59%) responses.

The statistical analysis was done using the Statistical Analysis

System. The procedures used were the General Linear Models Procedure

for one-way and two-way analysis of variance. The Bonferroni t test

for identifying specific differences was used to do post hoc

comparisons between all groups when a significant difference existed.










Summary of Major Findings

There were seven null hypotheses that were tested and of this

total, four were rejected. The following statements provide a summary

of the findings.

1. The chief academic, administrative, and student affairs

officers did not differ significantly in their perceptions of the

importance of the change strategies. The level of importance of

change was not related to administrative type.

2. The empirical-rational category of change was perceived by

chief student affairs officers as significantly more important than by

academic or administrative officers.

3. There were no significant differences in the perceived

importance of the normative-re-educative strategy by the three types

of administrators.

4. The student affairs officers did not differ significantly from

the academic and administrative officers in their perception of the

importance of the power-coercive change strategy.

5. The chief student affairs officers perceived

empirical-rational as the dominant change strategy by importance. In

terms of frequencies, about 86% of the student affairs officers

perceived normative-re-educative as the dominant strategy.

6. The empirical-rational and the normative-re-educative

strategies were perceived as significantly more important than the

power-coercive strategy as a dominant strategy. By frequency, the

normative-re-educative strategy was identified as the prevalent

strategy by approximately 87% the administrators.











7. There were differences in the 10 areas of recent change and

the perceptions of a dominant strategy used for each area. The two

areas where significant differences existed were drug abuse and the

increased use of technology. By mean score, the power-coercive and

the empirical-rational strategies were rated significantly higher in

the area of drug abuse. By frequency, more administrators perceived

the normative-re-educative strategy as the prevalent strategy. In the

area of the increased use of technology, the empirical-rational

strategy differed from the other two categories and was perceived to

be the most important and also was viewed as the prevalent strategy by

the highest number of administrators

Conclusions

The following conclusions are presented as a result of this

research.

1. The instrument used for this study discriminates for

statistical purposes differences among administrators and the

perceived use of the three categories of change strategies.

2. The results of the study provide support for the theory of

Chin and Benne. The three strategies are perceived to cause change to

occur in the profession of student affairs.

3. While all three strategies were perceived to cause change,

there were differences among the strategies in terms of importance and

frequency. The results indicate that the strategies are not mutually

exclusive and an interaction among them is evident in higher education.

4. The results of the study indicate that this approach to the

study of change in higher education can provide useful insights about











the change process. For example, chief academic, administrative, and

student affairs officers are more similar than different in their

perceptions regarding change.

5. As evidenced by this study, change is a complex process. It

involves various catalysts and diverse approaches to manage change.

The process varies, depending on the type of administrator and the

object of the change.

6. Administrators in higher education have both similar and

different concepts of the importance and the use of strategies for

planned change. This information is valuable to the chief academic,

administrative, and student affairs officers for planning for future

change.

Implications

This study identified differences among the three types of

administrators and their perceptions of the use of the change

strategies theorized by Chin and Benne. There was also evidence that

the three types of administrators viewed change as occurring within the

three categories of change strategies.

The chief student affairs officers tend to perceive the

empirical-rational strategy as more important, in general, than do the

academic and administrative officers. This increased importance may

be due to the recent significant change in the 10 areas within the

profession of student affairs. The magnitude of the change has

created increased attention to the need to understand and manage

change. The main elements of the literature regarding change within




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 - Version 2.9.8 - mvs