Citation
A longitudinal study of the relationship between a special services program and black students Ì“academic performance and economic enhancement

Material Information

Title:
A longitudinal study of the relationship between a special services program and black students Ì“academic performance and economic enhancement
Creator:
Mingo, Gwenuel Wilfred
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
x, 250 leaves : ; 28 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Academic advising ( jstor )
College students ( jstor )
Colleges ( jstor )
Educational evaluation ( jstor )
Grade point average ( jstor )
Graduates ( jstor )
High school students ( jstor )
Minority group students ( jstor )
Service programs ( jstor )
Students ( jstor )
African Americans -- Education (Higher) -- Florida -- Gainesville ( lcsh )
Counseling in higher education -- Florida -- Gainesville ( lcsh )
Counselor Education thesis Ph. D
Dissertations, Academic -- Counselor Education -- UF
Remedial teaching ( lcsh )
City of Gainesville ( local )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 1984.
Bibliography:
Bibliography: leaves 244-248.
General Note:
Typescript.
General Note:
Vita.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Gwenuel Wilfred Mingo.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright [name of dissertation author]. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Resource Identifier:
030502000 ( ALEPH )
11698279 ( OCLC )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text











A LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN A SPECIAL SERVICES PROGRAM AND BLACK STUDENTS' ACADEMIC
PERFORMANCE AND ECONOMIC ENHANCEMENT









BY

GWENUEL WILFRED MINGO















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

1984



































Copyright 0 1984
By
Gwenuel W. Mingo














This dissertation is dedicated to my wonderful family, Cynthia, Anne Marie and Gerald, who supported and encouraged me to finish this requirement for my doctorate. It is also dedicated to some special people in my life, namely, Zerlina

Reckley, Willie Summers, Samuel Summers and Willie Mae Summers, who supported and guided me through my childhood.














ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


It would not have been possible to complete this research without God and the assistance of my wife, the students in the Special Services Program, and many other individuals. I would like to express my deep appreciation to Dr. Harold Riker, the chairman of my doctoral committee, for his time, advice, quality control procedures, encouragement and support while conducting this research. The other

doctoral committee members, Dr. Roderick McDavis and Dr. John Nickens, are also to be commended for the support, expert advice and guidance that they provided to help me complete this requirement.

Dr. Jerrie Scott, Dr. Rosie Bingham, Dr. Ronald

Foreman, Dr. Janet Larsen and Dr. Harry Shaw have been an inspiration, strong pillars of support and encouragement for

me to complete this research. Finally, I would like to express my sincere appreciation and thanks to all individuals who assisted and supported me while attempting to meet the requirements for this degree.








iv














TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................... iv
ABSTRACT ............................................. ix

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ...................... ...... 1
Statement of the Problem ............... 1
Purpose of the Study ................... 4
Rationale for the Study ................ 6
Definition of Terms .................... 12
Organization of the Study .............. 13

II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ................. 14
Philosophical Assumption and Theories.. 15
Heredity Theories .................... 16
Environmental Theories ............... 17
Theories of Learning ................. 19
Research Concerning Special Programs ... 21
Special and Compensatory Programs.... 21 Retention ............................ 24
National Studies ..................... 30
Ford Foundation Study ................ 35
Special Programs at the University of
Florida .............................. 39
Program Elements ..................... 41
Peer Counseling ...................... 42
Summary ................................ 44

III METHODOLOGY .................... ......... 48
Research Design ........................ 48
Research Questions ..................... 50
Population ............................. 50
Selection of Subjects .................. 51
Instrumentation ........................ 52
Pilot Study .......................... 54
Reliability .......................... 55
Validity ............................. 56
Procedures ............................. 57
Data Analysis .......................... 59






v









PAGE

IV RESULTS..................... ........ 62
Research Question #1 ........ 0 ..... 0000 62
An Analysis of Responses of
Rarndomly Selected Special
Services Graduates to Items 1-7
and 10-16 on the QESSP.............o 63
Summary of Responses by Special
Services Graduates ........o......o... 72
Analysis of Graduates' Responses
to Items 20-41 of the QESSP.... .... 73
An Analysis of Responses of
Randomly Selected Special
Services Nongraduates to Items
1-7 and 10-16 on the QESSP. ........o 85
An Analysis of Nongraduates'
Responses to Items 20-41 of
the QESSP................o....... 91
Research Question #2 .............. 104
Analysis of 1974 Transcripts of
Randomly Selected Special
Services Students to Obtain
Their Grade Point Averages ........ 105
Analysis of 1975 Transcripts of
Randomly Selected Special
Services Students to Obtain
Their Grade Point Averages....... 105
Analysis of 1976 Transcripts of
Randomly Selected Special
Services Students to obtain
Their Grade Point Averages ......... 106
Analysis of 1977 Transcripts of
Randomly Selected Special
Services Students to Obtain
Their Grade Point Averages ......... 106
Analysis of 1978 Transcripts of
Randomly Selected Special
Services Students to Obtain
Their Grade Point Averages ............107
Research Question #3 ................. 124
Analysis of Class Enrolling in 1974.. 125 Analysis of Class Enrolling in 1975.. 125 Analysis of Class Enrolling in 1976.. 126 Analysis of Class Enrolling in 1977.. 126 Analysis of Class Enrolling in 1978.. 127
Summnary........................... ... .. 127
Research Question #4................. 141




vi










PAGE

Transcript Analysis of Randomly Selected Special Services Students Who Enrolled in 1974 to
Determine Their Graduation Rates ... 141 Degrees Earned ....................... 142
Courses Attempted and Completed ...... 143 Transcript Analysis of Randomly Selected Special Services Students Who Enrolled in 1975 to
Determine Their Graduation Rates ... 144 Transcript Analysis of Randomly Selected Special Services Students Who Enrolled in 1976 to
Determine Their Graduation Rates ... 146 Degrees Earned ....................... 147
Courses Attempted and Completed .... 147 Transcript Analysis of Randomly Selected Special Services Students Who Enrolled in 1977 to
Determine Their Graduation Rates ... 148 Degrees Earned ....................... 148
Courses Attempted and Completed ...... 149 Transcript Analysis of Randomly Selected Special Services Students Who Enrolled in 1978 to
Determine Their Graduation Rates... 150 Degrees Earned ....................... i5l
Courses Attempted and Completed .... 151 Analysis of Major Fields of Study .... 152 Summary .............................. 153
Research Question #5 ................... 187
Analysis of the Peer Counselors' Effectiveness as Perceived by Randomly Selected Graduates of
the Special Services Program ....... 188 Personal Concerns .................... 189
Academic Concerns .................... 189
Social Concerns ...................... 190
Financial Aid ........................ 190
Tutoring ............................. 191
Summary .............................. 191
Analysis of Peer Counselors' Effectiveness as Perceived by Randomly Selected Nongraduates
of the Special Services Program .... 191 Personal Concerns .................... 193
Academic Concerns .................... 193
Social Concerns ...................... 193


vii









PAG E

Financial Aid ........................ 194
Tutoring ............................. 194
Summary .............................. 194
Research Question #6 ................... 196
Procedure for Making Analysis of
Special Services Program's Value ... 200
Summary .............................. 207

V DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................... 208
Discussion ............................. 209
Academic Services and Activities..... 209 Grade Point Averages ................. 213
Retention Rates ...................... 214
Graduation Rates ..................... 215
Peer Counselors ...................... 217
Economic Status ...................... 217
Conclusions ............................ 219
Implications ........................... 221
Recommendations for Improving the
Special Services Program at the
University of Florida ................ 225
Recommendations for Further Research ... 227

APPENDICES

A LETTER TO SPECIAL SERVICES DIRECTORS ....... 230

B LETTER TO SUBJECTS AND INFORMED CONSENT
FORM.... 9 ...... **...* ................ 232

C QUESTIONNAIRE EVALUATING SPECIAL SERVICES
PROGRAMS (QESSP) ......................... 234

D FOLLOW-UP LETTER ........................ *.. 242

BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................... oo..# ............... 244

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .................................. 249











viii














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


A LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN A
SPECIAL SERVICES PROGRAM AND BLACK STUDENTS' ACADEMIC
PERFORMANCE AND ECONOMIC ENHANCEMENT BY

GWENUEL WILFRED MINGO

April 1984

Chairman: Harold C. Riker
Major Department: Counselor Education


The purpose of this study was to determine the relationshiD between the Special Services Program at the University of Florida and Black student retention, grade point averages, graduation and economic success. The areas

investigated in this study to determine this relationship included: 1) academic services and activities in which the

students participated, 2) grade point averages received during each term, 3) retention rates, 4) graduation rates, 5) influence of peer counselors; and 6) economic status of

participants. A total of 210 students, consisting of two randomly selected groups of 150 students and 60 students, respectively, was included in the sample of this study.




ix









The Questionnaire Evaluating Special Services Programs (QESSP) was the instrument used in this study. The QESSP consists of a cover page with administrative directions and 41 items designed to solicit demographic information, responses about satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the Special Services Program, and evaluative comments regarding the Program's services and activities.

Some key findings of this study were: the Special

Services Program is effective in providing services and activities to its participants, 2) the activities and services provided by the Program are not being used by all o f its participants, 3) the retention efforts of the Special Services Program have significantly increased the University's retention of Black students, 4) the attrition rate of

Black freshmen in the Special Services Program is significantly lower than the rate for all freshmen from the total student body, 5) the graduation rate of Special Services students is not as high or equal to the graduation rate of the total student body, 6) overall, peer counselors are

effective providers of counseling services, 7) the Special Services Program improves the potential spending power of the Special Services students.

The data suggest that the Program is effective and that it has been a major factor contributing to increases in the

retention and graduation rates of Black students at the University of Florida.

x














CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION


Statement of the Problem


The education of Blacks or the lack of it has affected

the social, cultural, and economic progress of Blacks in Florida and throughout the United States (Perkins 1981). Recognizing the need to extend higher education opportunities to Black students, an Affirmative Action Order, number 11246, was issued in 1965 by President Lyndon B. Johnson to eliminate discrimination and provide equal educational opportunities for Blacks.

Institutions of higher education responded in various

ways to eliminate the barriers to higher education for Blacks and other minority students. Harvard University, in 1966, took several positive steps to increase opportunities for Blacks on its campus, including the recruitment of large numbers of Black students. Because of Harvard's teaching and research reputation and its elitist position, the institution did not experience a substantial yearly increase in the number of enrolled Black students (Flemming, Gill, and Swinton 1978).









2


Oberlin College, a predominantly White private Liberal

Arts College located in Ohio, made a conscious effort to diversify its student body by actively seeking and recruiting Black students. The Black Oberlin student retention rate is as high as the college average because of the support systems put into operation. Standards at Oberlin were not lowered, but special tutoring programs were made available for students who needed them. Although 50 percent of

the students who used these special services were Black in 1978, the program was designed to aid all students with deficiencies in reading, writing, mathematics, and other courses in which they were having difficulty. The philosophy behind Oberlin's Special Services Program is not to lower standards but to bring deficient students at least up to the average (Flemming, Gill, and Swinton 1978).

At Florida State University, a program called "Horizon Unlimited" was created in 1966 to increase the Black student representation on that campus. By utilizing a Florida Board

of Regents' policy, which states that 10 percent of the freshman class need not meet admission requirements, the University was authorized to enroll Blacks who did not meet minimum standards for admission. Consequently, the University, through the Horizon Unlimited Program and the Board of Regents' policy, substantially increased the number of Black students on its campus (Flemming, Gill, and Swinton 1978).









3


The University of Florida responded to the call to educate Black youths by creating the "Critical Freshman Year Program" in 1970. This program was designed to assist Black students academically by rendering to them services such as tutoring and counseling. The Florida Board of Regents' 10

percent policy for students who did not meet the minimum standards for admission was also used to increase the Black student population on the University of Florida campus.

Black students enrolled in many institutions often

found it difficult to complete their courses of study. The revolving door situation was too often the pattern of Black student participation. Recognizing the need to assist these Black students and the institutions of higher education, the United States Congress amended the Higher Education Act of 1965 to create the Special Services Program in 1970. Services under this program were designed to assist students from low-income families. These students had academic potential but lacked adequate secondary school preparation to enter, continue or resume programs of postsecondary education.

The main goal of the Special Services Program is to increase the retention and graduation rates of low-incom students. The Special Services authorized by the Higher Education Act of 1965 included the following:









4


a) Counseling, tutoring, summer and remedial programs.

b) Career guidance, placement and other services to

encourage or facilitate the students' continuance

in higher education.

c) identification, encouragement or counseling of students for graduate or professional schools.

Instead of acknowledging inadequacies of their programs, some administrators of the special programs have prepared reports which have been more of a defense of the program and of the students than evaluation (Cross 1976). The Special Services Program at the University of Florida has been administered primarily on the basis of such reports. The Special Services Program has been operating for

more than a decade without an objective analysis of its effectiveness. The program has been planned and modified primarily on the basis of administrative experiences and not evaluative data. This study focuses on the federally funded program, Special Services, that is designed to provide support services such as counseling, tutoring and academic advisement.


Purpose of the Stud


The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between the Special Services Program at the University of Florida and Black student retention, grade












success. The questions examined in this study were as follows:

1. How effective are the academic services and activities of the Special Services Program as perceived

by Black students at the University of Florida?

2. What are the grade point averages of Black students

in the Special Services Program at the University

of Florida?

3. What are the retention rates of the Black students

in the Special Services Program at the University

of Florida.

4. What are the graduation rates of the Black students

in the Special Services Program at the University

of Florida?

5. What influence does the peer counselor component

have on the academic performance of Black students in the Special Services Program at the University

of Florida?

6. What is the economic status after graduation of

Black students who participated in the Special Services Program at the University of Florida.?

Specifically, this study investigated and reported on the types of academic services and activities in the Special Services Program that are most effective for its students.









6


Rationale of the Study


Institutions of higher education similar to the University of Florida are expected to continue responding to the needs of their Black students and to increase their Black student enrollment. Like most predominantly White institutions of higher education, the University of Florida has shown a growing sensitivity to the problems of equal educational opportunities for Black students. This growing commitment to the solution of their problems is readily apparent in the number of programs available to Black students at the University of Florida and similar institutions nationwide.

in spite of this growing commitment and desire of the University of Florida as administrators to provide academic support programs for its Black students, it is easy to see that the implementation of these programs is not a result of

evaluative data. Government grants, court orders, humanistic feelings and politics appear to influence most of the decisions to design and implement the academic supports programs for Blacks at many of this nation's institutions of higher education.

The University of Florida, like other universities in the United States, needs to re-examine its efforts and the effect of those efforts to provide academic support for its









7


Black students. A cursory examination of the Special Services Programs in the southeastern United States reveals a need for the improvement and augmentation of their efforts

to retain Black students at many of the institutions like the University of Florida.

Retention of Black students and their graduation from these institutions are major goals of the Special Services Program. Significant improvements in the Special Services Program could directly affect the recruitment, retention, and graduation of Black students. Increases in Black student retention rates also could help the institution comply with its state commitment to equal access and equal opportunity in public higher education.

In spite of this commitment, the University of Florida is tightening its admission policies by raising its entrance requirements. The high cost of education and the current reductions in state and federal aid will cause many institutions like the University of Florida to reconsider their present equal access admissions policies and consider ways to become more cost effective.

The effectiveness of the Special Services Program in terms of retaining and facilitating the graduation of Black students is a focus of this study and is of significance in









8


these times of limited funding for education. McGrath (1982) has reported that few detailed studies exist about the actual cost of Special Programs in higher education and their effectiveness. This situation is true at the University of Florida, which has had a Special Services Program for over 10 years, but for which no longitudinal evaluation has been conducted.

In order to provide adequate support systems for Black

students, staff involved in the Special Services Program should have more specific information about the factors that

influence successful completion of academic programs by Black students. The absence of evaluative data regarding this program makes it almost impossible to determine if the University of Florida has been meeting the needs and solving the problems of its Black students.

Evaluative data obtained through this study should enable other institutions of higher education to evaluate the current support systems on their campuses that operate in conjunction with Special Services Programs. These data

could be used to modify or delete services that are not effective. Evaluative data from local and national studies could be the basis for making program changes or designing

and implementing present and future supportive services programs.









9


A data base upon which to build a more responsive Special Services Program will help to insure the best possible development of Black students, who represent important human resources for Florida and the nation. Studies such as this one can be used to develop a delivery

system or model that will improve the quality of the services and activities rendered to present and future Special Services students at institutions of higher education. The development and design of such a model have general applicability both statewide and nationally because of the similarity of Special Services Programs in scope and objectives.

There have been only two national studies conducted to evaluate Special Services Programs and their effectiveness or impact. One study was conducted by Educational Testing

Service and Research Triangle in 1971 and the other study was conducted by System Development Corporation in 1979 (Coulson, Bradford, and Kaye 1981). The investigators of the 1971 study of Special Services Programs did not find any

clear and consistent evidence that the program related to the success of the students involved (Davis, Burkheimer, and Borders-Patterson 1975). The investigators of the second study in 1979 found some evidence of beneficial program impact on the students (Coulson, Bradford, and Kaye 1981).










10


To what extent do such programs af fect the academic

success of students? What is the cost effectiveness of such programs? What benefits do students derive from such programs? Are such programs still needed at the University of Florida? Questions such as these require answers based on carefully evaluated data. The support for Special Services Programs is uncertain in many of the institutions in which they exist. All too often universities and colleges make

little effort to accommodate these programs within their operating procedures. The status of these programs also is

uncertain because the nation seems to be turning away from expanding educational opportunities to all parts of its population (Gordon 1977).

Longitudinal studies of counseling programs rarely

appear in the literature. This situation seems tc be due to

the difficulties in planning and carrying out long-term studies. The rarity of research papers on longitudinal evaluation studies at American Personnel and Guidance Association (APGA) conventions suggests that most counselors are not conducting such evaluation studies. At the 1982 APGA convention in Detroit, there were five and seven individuals, respectively, in attendance at the sessions dealing with longitudinal studies and evaluations (Barclay 1962).

Rothney (1982) reports that the titles of research conducted by most counselors do not include words such as









11


evaluation, longitudinal evaluation, accountability, assessment, effect or effectiveness and results. He found that

less than two percent of the listed programs at the 1982 APGA Convention included such words in the titles of their presentations.

Research studies identified exclusively as studies of Special Services Programs are rarely found in the literature. Using as a guide the key word "Special" in a search of the Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) for research studies of federally funded Special Services Programs, this researcher found a total of 13 studies with the word "Special" in their titles from the period 1971 to 1981. Only three out of 13 could be identified as research studies of federally funded Special Services Programs.

The scarcity of national and local studies of Special Services Programs indicates a definite need for this study. Such a study could benefit the University of Florida greatly

as a basis for making decisions about supportive services for specially admitted students.









12


Definition of Terms


Compensatory _Program--A program designed to make up for the debilitating consequences of discrimination and poverty (Frost and Rowland 1971).

Developmental Program--A program designed to achieve skills

or attitudes and is not necessarily a prerequisite for another program (Cross 1976).

Expanded Educational Opportunities Prog~rams (EEOP)--A state

funded program designed to assist Black students at the University of Florida.

Regular Admit Student--A Student who has met the admission standards for enrolling at the University of Florida. Remedial Program--A program designed to correct educational deficiencies before a student may enter a course or program (Cross 1976).

Special Admit Student--A student who does not meet the admission standards for enrolling at the University of Florida.

Special Services Program--A federally funded program designed to provide academic supportive services to low-income

students and increase their retention and graduation rates in postsecondary institutions (Federal Register, Vol. 41, No. 95, Fri., May 14, 1976).









13


Special Academic Services and Activities--Those services and

activities provided to Special Services students such as instruction in reading, writing, study skills, mathematics and other subjects; personal counseling; academic advice and

assistance in course selection; tutorial services; and activities designed to acquaint students with career options available to them (Federal Register, Vol. 47, No. 42, Wed., March 3, 1982).


organization of the Stud


Chapter II of this study contains a review of pertinent literature. The research method, research questions, subjects, population, instrument, data collection, and data analysis are described in Chapter III. The findings resulting from the analysis and evaluation of the data are presented in Chapter IV. A brief summary of the study, discussion of the findings, conclusions, implications and recommendations for further research are presented in Chapter V.














CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE


Philosophical assumptions underlying Special Services Programs and theories that are related to the education of

Blacks and other minorities are first discussed in this chapter. Research studies pertaining to Black students, along with implications of these studies, follow. Finally, there is an overview of the Special Services Program at the

University of Floridal together with the program's peer counseling component.

Research studies identified exclusively as studies of the Special Services Programs in the State of Florida are few. Those which have been made are difficult to identi.-Ly since investigators often do not narre the specific programs

but use such terms as compensatory programs, educational opportunities programs, or special educational program. For example, one study which was conducted by a director of a

Special Services Program was described as a disadvantaged student program.

The various labels used to refer to Special Services Programs pose a problem for persons seeking to find research




1.4









15


reports on such programs. As explained by Sowell 1972), any attempt to produce quality education for Blacks must begin

by f finding out what has been done and with what results. According to Sowell, therein lies another problem for Special Services researchers. On most campuses this question of what has een done for Blacks has scarcely been asked, much less answered (Sowell 1972). Despite these problems, it is still important to consider the studies which have been made so far and their results.


Philosophical Assumptions and Theories


The drive for civil rights in the 19601s, President Johnson's War on Poverty, and the Higher Education Act of 1965 were major factors responsible for an emphasis on equal

access for minorities to educational opportunities and Special Services Programs (Cross 1976 and Franklin 1980). The main philosophical assumption of these programs was that Black students with educational deficiencies can profit fran special assistance through traditional educational mechanisms such as counseling, tutoring, and remedial instruction,

rendered in a facilitative manner (Davis, Burkheimer, and Borders-Patterson 1975). Franklin (1980) also reports that programmatic initiatives for equal access to education provides the best hope for breaking the cycle of poverty and isolation for the nation's minorities.









16


One of the motivating factors in the initiation of

these and similar programs resulted from the involvement of

the relationships between college students and faculty in the civil rights movements. Students and faculty who participated in these movements in the South were amazed by the plight of the poor and underprivileged and urged their institutions to offer their educational expertise to aid these groups with special needs (Abert 197/9).

In the literature, conflicting views may be found on the benefit of special educational programs for Black students. Similarly, conflicting views have been offered to explain why minority groups have difficulty with traditional

educational programs. At least two groups have debated these issues.

Heredity Theories

In one camp of the controversy is Shuey (1958), who argued that Blacks do not possess as much capacity for learning as do Whites. Shuey, a psychologist, espoused genetics as the basis for learning difficulties of Blacks and not their impoverished environment. In the same camp a

decade later, Jensen (1969) argued that federally funded compensatory education efforts were unsuccessful because they were aimed at changing what cannot be changed appreciably. Jensen also felt that the reported deficiencies of









17


disadvantaged students were due to genetic factors rather than environmental factors.

Elkind (1969) agreed with Jensen and others, noting

further that the intellectual development of children cannot be accelerated by compensatory schooling. Evans and Dubois (1972) took the position that such students should not be in

college. They also agreed with the prior researchers and stated that underachievers are individuals with limited intellectual capacity. The arguments presented by this group of researchers place the blame for educational deficiencies

on individual capabilities and the genetically inferior ethnic group, but not on the environment. Environment Theories

However, there are other researchers who believe that the environment can produce educational deficiencies in a person. Hunt (1969) contends that the environment affects a

person's behavior and that a child who is subjected to an enriched environment with reinforcements can develop adequate intellectual skills. The overwhelming opinion of many

psychologists is that the educational differences observed between Black and White children are largely the result of

environmental factors and not genetic factors (Pettigrew 1966).









18


Baratz and Baratz (1970) criticize both the genetic and

environmental explanations for race difference in intelligence and academic achievement. They suggest that the main reason for the differences is the inappropriateness of most school programs for Black children.

Valentine (1972) rejects both genetic and environmental theories on intelligence and academic achievement. He argues that the genetics theory cannot be proven but that

the environmental theory, which may be sound, needs to be extended. Valentine subscribed to the theory that all individuals are uniquely creative and continually developing.

Gordon and Green (1976) state that even if genetic factors influence mental functions, schooling and other environmental factors cannot be ignored. These writers further state that no matter what factors are responsible for the development of the intellect, human development requires diversity of facilitative treatments and adequate resources.

Although the heredity versus environment controversy has not been completely resolved, most authorities agree that environment influences learning in important urays. Consequently, there has been a shift from discussions of whether or not Blacks can make it in college to how they can be helped in college (Cross 1976).









19


Theories of Learning

Prior to the arrival of large numbers of Black students at the University of Florida, some thought was given to the

question of how Black students could be helped with their academic courses. Administrative and counseling personnel

sensitive to the needs of Black students were hired and academic programs were implemented to help the Black students who lacked adequate skills for successful matriculation at the University of Florida.

From 1971 to the present, most Black students who were

admitted to the Special Services Program at the University of Florida were from deprived educational backgrounds. Ausubel (1964),provides some relevant evidence for counteracting the effects of cultural deprivation on the learning

patterns of Blacks. He hypothesizes that an optional learning environment could stimulate intellectual development. However, he notes that some students' learning patterns may be irreversible as a result of a consistently deprived environment during their early formative years. Ausubel (1965),further states that adequate attention to the cognitive readiness for learning and the use of appropriate instructional materials create an optional learning environment for Black students.

Bloom (1971) theorizes that more than 90 percent of the students in schools can learn what the schools have to teach









20


them if given the proper instruction and adequate time for studying. Bloom's theory of learning is one of learning for mastery. The basis for Bloom's theory lies in allowing students sufficient time to master a subject or a course. This

condition might mean extending the time for the course, subject, or term. Bloom's theory provides a basis for establishing programs and courses to meet the special needs

of the individual. Individual differences, even within subcultures, must be taken into consideration when learning theories are applied to any group.

Wittmer and Myrick (1974) reported on the theory and practices of facilitative teaching and recommended at least

100 facilitative procedures for enhancing students' learning. These researchers state that individuals learn best when: (1) the learning is meaningful to the learner; (2) it

is voluntary and not forced upon the learner; (3) the learning is.the result of self-initiation; (4) the learning

is self-evaluated and it is the learner who is deciding if what is being taught is of any value; and (5) the materials and techniques have an affective base.

Wittmer and Myrick (1974) also reported that teachers are key individuals in the process of facilitating learning. Teachers need to be aware of their own -feelings in order to provide the psychological openness for understanding their students. These researchers go on to say that teachers









21


cannot facilitate learning by prescribing similar goals for all students or adhering to inflexible classroom plans.

Klausmeier (1980) reported that learning theories, with few exceptions, ignore both individual differences and rates of learning among students. Klausmeier further stated that some learning theories have not taken into consideration the developmental differences in either the internal or external conditions of learning.


Research Concerning Special Programs


The research discussed in this section includes studies

of Special Services Programs and Compensatory Education Programs in Higher Education. The focus of these studies was on the purposes of the Special Services Programs and their effectiveness.

Special and Compensatory Programs

In a study of Special and Compensatory Education Programs in Ohio, Williams (1978) found that private and public institutions of higher education differed considerably in their concepts of providing assistance to disadvantaged students. The study involved 22 institutions: 11 were public and 11 were private. Programs directors at each of

the institutions were asked to complete an inventory that included the following subject areas: (1) Program rationale and objectives; (2) recruitment and selection of students;









22


(3) program implementation to include academic adjustment, special assistance with studies, financial assistance,

counseling services and physical facilities; (4) faculty; and (5) evaluation of the program. The main purpose of this study was to examine the growth and development of special

and compensatory education programs in a select group of public and private four-year institutions in Ohio during the time period of 1969-1970 to 1973-1974.

Williams found that directors from both private and public institutions felt that the most important purpose of their programs was to provide educational support for persons who were socially, economically, and academically deficient. The private institutions identified two other purposes that were important to their programs: (1) to assist culturally or ethnically different students in becoming acclimated to the college or university community; and

(2) to foster positive attitudes within disadvantaged students about education, self, and their potential for success.

Williams' study also showed that public institutions were more inclined to make changes or modifications in established procedures to facilitate the success of the students than were private institutions. For example, private institutions did not support the overall use of academic adjustment services; they did not sep the need for









23


special faculty or special facilities for compensatory programs. Finally, the private colleges did not support the use of an evaluation process for special or compensatory programs.

After reviewing the data from the private and public institutions, making site visits and conducting interviews, Williams recommended the following:

1. That institutions insure the continuous development

of sound and effective special or compensatory

programs.

2. That institutions serve both the disadvantaged student as well as the traditional student.

3. That institutions devise a general model for a comprehensive curriculum.

4. That credit for all remedial or compensatory education courses count toward graduation.

5. That instruction accommodate individual differences

and permit students to learn and proceed at their

own paces.

6. That more effective use of instructional resources

for special programs, such as faculty, media

centers and facilities, be made.

7. That grading policies and practices be nonpunitive.









24


8. That only competent instructors who actively seek

to teach disadvantaged students be involved in special or compensatory programs.

9. That efforts be made to alleviate the abrupt transition from special compensatory education to regular or traditional college curricula.

Williams did not indicate how these recommendations should be undertaken.

Retention

During the 1979-1980 school year at the University of Florida, a report prepared by the Affirmative Action Officer

revealed, that the Black students' drop-out rate was twice that of White students. In the Fall of 1980, the drop-out rate for White students was 10 percent and the drop-out rate for Black students was 20.83 percent.

In a report prepared by the United States Bureau of Census in 1974 on school enrollment, it was found that Blacks and other minorities had attrition rates much higher

than White students, particularly in traditionally White institutions (Franklin 1980). The College Board, in a report on financing low-income and minority students in higher education, found that a student from the bottom income cuartile has less than one-third the chance of completing a college program than a student in the top income quartile (Franklin 1980).









25


In a 1978 study that was originally planned for eight predominantly White universities, located in each of the four geographical regions of the United States, the statistics on attrition of Black students was disturbing (The National Advisory Committee on Black Higher Education and Black Colleges and Universities 1980). The institutions participating in this study were identified only by geographical region and whether they were public or private to

protect their identity. As a result of a Southern public institution declining to participate in the study, only seven institutions were studied. The refusal came too late to select another Southern public institution.

The National Advisory Committee on Black Higher Education and Black Colleges and Universities which conducted this study found that, at the Midwestern private and Midwestern public institution, the Black attrition rate was about 43 percent. Considering the fact that Midwestern private institutions are very selective in their admissions policies, this failure rate for Black students is high. The

Western public institution had a reported Black freshman failure rate of 31 percent. No data were available for the Western private institution.

A 28 percent attrition rate for Black students enrolled in the Eastern public institution of this study was obtained from the Equal Opportunity Program at that institution. The









26


researchers reported that the university could not provide attrition data on its Black students. Students at that institution believed that the attrition rate was at least twice the reported figure. The attrition rate for Blacks at the Eastern public and private institutions was reported as negligible. At the private institution, 50 percent of the

Black student population was doing honors work, compared with 80 percent of the White population. The Southern private institution participating in this 1978 study reported a 20 percent attrition rate of Black students.

Statistical information on the attrition and retention

of Black students enrolled in higher educational institutions must be made readily available so that educators-can identify problems and seek strategies for retention of Black students. The researchers of this study found that the existence of special programs on the campuses of the White institutions seemed to have little impact on Black retention at the seven universities. It was reported that attrition was a major problem at the Eastern public, Midwestern public and Western public colleges despite the special academic and financial assistance offered to the Blacks at those institutions. The Midwestern private institution, which provides

financial assistance, also had a major attrition problem with its Black students. The Southern private institution









27


which makes available both academic and financial assistance

was reported to have a modest Black student attrition problem. The Eastern private institution, which admits the

best of the Black students, had no attrition problem. Financial assistance and special seminars were provided by the Eastern private institution for its Black students.

The researchers reported that many of the university policy makers who participated in this study seemed to believe that raising admission standards and favoring Black

students from private schools are the best ways to reduce the higher attrition rates.

The data obtained from this study showed that attrition statistics for Black students varied significantly among the seven universities. However the researchers reported that

the underlying causes of Black attrition appeared to be found in the poor quality of life on campus for the Black students. For example, Black students perceived themselves

as being in a hostile environment. The data also showed that the universities offered too few support systems to help Black students cope with racial, cultural and academic problems. There was a scarcity of Black role models, inadequate financial aid and an almost total absence of trained Black counselors on all of the campuses investigated.

The researchers of this study concluded that university policies and programs need substantial changes if Black









28


students are to gain increased access to predominantly White

institutions and enjoy opportunities for academic success. These researchers recommended that special financial aid and academic assistance programs should be expanded along with efforts to provide orientation and counseling facilities and inore Black role models for students. The researchers of this Committee on Black Higher Education concluded that only when these changes are made will there be a realistic prospect of increased admission, retention and graduation frcm college for America's Black youth.

Central (1970), in a study of Black students at predominantly White colleges, compared the background characteristics, activities, goals, and perceptions of Black students with those of their White counterparts. A questionnaire on student and college characteristics was administered to 249

Black students at 83 predominantly white institutions. A comparison group of 249 White students was selected from the same 83 institutions. The White students were matched with the Black students on the basis of sex and major field of study.

The results revealed that there were large differences in the socioeconomic backgrounds of the Black and White students. The White students were found to be heavily involved in organized campus-based activities while the Black students selected activities aimed at improving society in









29


general and those aimed at improving the status of Blacks in particular. Central (1970) also found that more Black students than White students planned to attend graduate or professional school.

Boyd (1977), in a study to refute the myth that Black students are only able to attend highly selective colleges because of special admission policies, found that Black students not only are successful at these schools, but have a strong interest in graduate education.

Turner (1980) has reported that the greatest factor affecting retention of Black students is the degree of institutional commitment to retention efforts. Previous

studies and reports (Williams, 1969; Etzioni, 1971; and Davis, 1974) have stated that institutional commitment was a

necessary component for Special Services and similar programs to be effective in their operations and in the retention of students.

West (1975) studied the retention of minority students

in a program for the disadvantaged at Central Florida Community College and found that there was a 38 percent retention and graduation rate for Black students at that community college. West reported that the study was conducted over a three-year period and that the students were taught by an open-ended, nonpunitive, humanistic, instructional technique. The program also provided individualized









30


counseling and tutoring, as well as group tutoring. The documented educational outcomes, as reported by West, a Special Services Director, are rarely found in the literature.

National Studies

Since 1971, the first year of the Special Services

Programs, only two national studies designed to evaluate the

effectiveness of Special Services Programs have been contracted for and financed by the United States Office. of Education. The first national study of Special Services Programs was conducted jointly by the Educational Testing Services and the Research Triangle under a contract from the office of Education. Davis, Burkheimer and BordersPatterson (1975) reported that 190 programs were studied to determine their effectiveness as reflected by the progress, satisfaction, goals, and perceptions of the programs' participants.

The findings of the first national study of Special

Services Programs failed to show either negative or positive

,effects of Special Services Programs for disadvantaged students. Davis, Burkheimer, and Borders-Patterson (1975) explained that their findings were inconclusive because individual programs differed in a variety of ways. Differences in ethnic groups, variations within the groups, prevailing climates of morale at institutions, programs









31


offered, standards, retention and attrition rates were some of the areas in which the programs were unique. The fact that these programs were in existence for a short period of time might have contributed to the inconclusive findings of

the researchers. These programs were studied in 1971, the second year of operation for most of them. A study of other

well established special educational opportunity programs might have yielded more definite findings.

Even with the inconclusiveness of this study, the

researchers did make some recommendations for future action. The first recommendation, directed to institutions of higher education, was to establish effective programs. The second

recommend at ion, directed to the federal government, was to improve guidelines for the awarding of Special Services grants, and the management and monitoring of these programs. The third recommendation was directed to all concerned, to conduct more research to determine the effects of Special Services Programs.

Vernetson (1981), a University of Florida researcher who developed guidelines for disadvantaged programs, also suggests that more research is needed to investigate the effects of programs for disadvantaged college students.

The second national study of Special Services Programs was conducted by the System Development Corporation, under a









32


contract with the U. S. Department of Education, during the

1979-80 academic school year.

Coulson, Bradford and Kaye (1980) reported some of the

most notable findings:

1. There is some evidence of beneficial program impact
on participating students. This evidence is manifested in the form of increased retention rates and
the students' successful academic progress.

2. Students receiving a full range of program services, such as counseling, academic advisement and
special courses, are more likely to persist through their freshman year than are students receiving few
or no services from the Special Services Program.

3. Students receiving more counseling, academic advisement, and other support services are likely to
attempt and to complete more course units.

4. Students receiving a full range of academic support
services have lower grade point averages than students receiving fewer services. This situation
might be due to a selection effect rather than a
negative effect of services. For example, projects
tend to concentrate academic support services on
students with poorer entry skills and more obvious
learning deficiencies.

5. In institutions where personnel expressed greater
acceptance and regard for the students, it was more
likely that students would attempt and complete
more courses, The researchers were not sure whether the institutional personnel were an effect or
a cause of the increased number of courses
attempted and completed by the Special Services
students.

6. Students receiving more financial aid were more
likely to persist through their freshman year, and
tended to attempt and complete more course units.
They also obtained higher grades. (Pp. 8-18 to
8-19)









33

This study focused on a nationally representative

sample of 58 Special Services Projects at colleges and universities within the contiguous 48 states. Vocational and technical schools with Special Services Programs or Projects designed exclusively for the physically handicapped were excluded from the study. Two hundred students from each of the 58 projects comprised the sample, yielding a total of 11,600 student participants.

Two sets of student outcome measures were examined to

determine the effects of student participation on Special Services. One set was taken from transcripts, including the

students' persistence (whether the students were still enrolled at the end of the 1979-80 school years); the students' intensity of effort (how many courses the students attempted); the students' progress (how many courses the students completed); and the students' performance (grade point average).

The second set of outcome measures was taken from student surveys, which included measures of changes in the students' educational aspirations and expectations, changes in the students' job expectations, changes in the students'

self-perceived skill levels and changes in the students' self-perceived education-related problems.









34


The outcome measures in the second set did not reveal any consistent or interpretive relationships with participation data or program characteristics, so only transcriptderived outcome measures were presented. The relationship among persistence, intensity, progress and the various supportive services provided to students was positive. No particular service was observed as being more significant than another in contributing to this positive relationship. An analysis of the data showed that students receiving the

full range of services had predictable odds of persisting

2.26 times more than students who received no services.

The grade point averages of the students participating and receiving full services were lower than the averages of students who received fewer services. The researchers indicated that this was not a negative finding, but it might suggest that the students receiving full services might have had a greater need for those services.

Research of the programs and strategies that facilitate the success of Black students in higher educational institutions continues today just as it did in the sixties and seventies. Verification of the effectiveness of Special Services Programs may not rest with a single study but with a combination of studies. National studies, such as those presented here, in conjunction with local studies, might









35


provide more evidence and clues for implementation of effective programs and strategies for facilitating the successful learning of Black students.

Ford Foundation Stud

Boyd (1974) conducted a national study to answer questions on such topics as the recruitment and admission of Black students, relationships between Black and White students and the responsiveness of institutions to the needs of Blacks. This nationwide survey involving 785 Black students and 94 faculty and administrators was conducted at 40 institutions during the 1972-73 school year. It showed that, while institutions provided for lower entrance requirements

and lower performance standards for Black students, few offered programs that could help Black students adjust socially and academically to the institution.

As a result of this national survey of Black students

enrolled in predominantly White institutions, Boyd (1974) reported that Black students considered some of the academic

policies for facilitating access of Blacks to institutions of higher education to have serious negative effects.

Boyd (1974) found that significant but insufficient progress had been made toward equal opportunities in the institutions studied. Although there were colleges where race relations were extremely strained, Boyd (1974) found that segregation did not persist as an official sanction of









36


the institution. He found that students and staff reflected

the social conditions in the country and divided along racial lines because they were more comfortable with this division. However, Boyd (1974) did report that many of the predominantly White institutions were unprepared and in many

cases unwilling to meet the needs of their Black students. Boyd's data indicated that some colleges had not made it clear that they were willing to work to overcome gaps in their preparation for helping Blacks.

Boyd reported that Black students were still able to obtain their education and degree even though experiencing discrimination, being stereotyped as special admit students, being advised by institutional officials not to try certain academic disciplines and sometimes being neglected by faculty and staff. He stated that most of the Black students wanted to go on to graduate school even though it was likely that they would have the same kind of obstacle course to run there.

Most of the students who participated in Boyd's (1974) study were within the accepted admissions criteria for the

colleges where they were enrolled. The overall pattern of success was attributed to being qualified and the fact that must of the Black students took education seriously enough

to overcome the barriers to their educational pursuits. Boyd's (1974) data dismissed the demeaning and damaging









37


rhetoric that Black students are getting a free ride through college. His data about loans and jobs showed that, if Black students were getting a free ride, it was provided by their own families.

Information from this study concerning students' satisfaction with their overall college experiences suggests that colleges should emphasize matching the preparation, ability, interests, and style of each prospective Black student with

the academic reputation, requirements and style of the college.

Boyd's presentation of his data was simple and direct.

He avoided using complex statistical techniques, which he feels tend to be understood only by those with statistical backgrounds. However, he did present much of the raw data in the appendix of his study for those who wanted to draw their own conclusions. Analysis of these data reveals some insights and recommendations for use as reference points ir removing barriers which Black students face in predominantly White institutions. The recommendations offered by Boyd are as follows:

1. Colleges should attempt to be more responsive to
the needs of Blacks.

2. Financial aid should be maintained at current
levels or increased.

3. Continued financial aid should be assured.









38


4. The emphasis on loans in the aid packages should be decreased for those whose family income is less
than $5,000.

5. The number of Black students in predominantly White institutions should continue to increase.

6. The number of Black staff members in predominantly White institutions should increase dramatically.

7. Colleges should guard against increased bcstility toward Blacks as their numbers increase.

8. Colleges should recruit Black students of diverse backgrounds and interests rather than concentrating their attention on those with multiple educational deficiencies.

9. Colleges should include the study of Blacks in their curricula, either through specific courses
on the topic or through revision of existing
courses.

10. Colleges should provide academic support to Black
students who need it.

11. Colleges should be sure that any special help is
designed to help Black students meet existing
standards rather than to foster tolerance for a
kind of second-class academic citizenship.

12. Colleges should encourage Black students to pursue
a variety of majors.

13. Colleges should provide realistic advice about a
broad range of career options and the educational
experiences which lead to them.

14. Colleges should involve Whites as well as Blacks
in advising and counseling Black students.

15. Colleges should maintain channels of communication
with mcre than a few spokesmen among their Black
students.

16. Colleges should plan ahead in dealing with Blacks
rather than drift from crisis to crisis.

17. Youna Blacks should shop around carefully before
enrolling in a college.









39


18. Black students should struggle primarily for
changes which will be most meaningful to their educational experience, even if colleges resist these changes strongly while making other less
important changes. (Pp. 67-73)

Boyd was careful to point out that not all of the above recommendations apply to all colleges or provide "how to do it" instructions. Effective implementation of changes on any campus must be based on information about that campus and its students and comparative information about groups of similar colleges and students.


Special Programs at the University of Florida


It was not until the late sixties that Blacks began to enroll at the University of Florida in large numbers. In the summer of 1970, an experimental program designed to provide supportive services such as tutoring, counseling, academic advisement and social programs was implemented to determine if the program would contribute to the academic and personal success of the students.

Apparently, the experiment was a success. Cranny and

Larsen (1972) reported that out of the 191 Black students admitted during the summer of 1970, all but 13 were still enrolled in 1971 and that seven of the dropouts had transferred to other colleges. Van Gelder (1973) also reported on this group of students and found that 62 percent of them









40


were progressing satisfactorily after three terms at the University of Florida.

This experimental program, that was state funded and called the "Critical Freshman Year Program," had its name changed to the "Expanded Educational Opportunities Program"

during the 1970-71 school year. In July 1971, the

University of Florida,, with a $50,000 grant from the Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW) established the present Special Services Program for low-income students from all ethnic groups.

The Expanded Educational Opportunities Program was phased out in 1973, leaving the Special Services Program with the responsibility for serving the academic and social

needs of the Black and White students assigned to the Program.

Over the past ten years (1971-1981), the Special

Services Program has gone through four changes in organizational structure and has changed leadership four times. With the change in leadership came the change in leadership style that occurred four times during the period 1971-1974. Since 1971, the Special Services Program has operated as a consolidated unit with the Upward Bound Program, a preparatory program for high school youth. The staffs from these two distinct federal programs were consolidated, but the goals, funds and supplies remained separated. The overall









41


objective of the Special Services Program during this 10year span has been to provide the students with supportive

services to facilitate their retention and subsequent graduation from this institution.

Program Elements

The Special Services project at the University of

Florida has been providing services consistent with the

goals and objectives of the U. S. Department of Education.

Specifically, the services and activities provided are


1. Selecting eligible participants from a pool consisting of students admitted to the University
under the Board of Regents 10 percent special admission policy, who have participated in other federal programs, such as Upward Bound or Talent
Search or who may lack adequate secondary school
preparation;

2. Providing a needs assessment of each selected participant to determine the academic or other educational deficiencies which need particular attention
to enable the participant to graduate from the
University;

3. Providing personal, career and academic guidance
and counseling in those areas affecting student
performance;

4. Arranging for remedial and other services such as
special classes, tutoring and educational and cultural activities which enable the participant to
complete with sufficient academic and personal
skills at the University, yet without creating a
long-range.dependency on the project;

5. Developing and encouraging the use of special curricular and instructional methods which enable participants to complete required course work in a
reasonable period of time;









42


6. Documenting participant performance and progress
while enrolled in the project; and

7. Acting as a referral agent for the participants, to
enable them to deal correctly and efficiently with
situations involving financial aid, housing, academic matters, and educational and career planning. Peer Counseling

A review of the objectives of the Special Services

Program at the University of Florida shows that the program is heavily oriented toward providing counseling services. This situation may result from the fact that the University

does not provide a structured and coordinated approach to teaching remedial courses. However, remedial education is becoming a topic of major concern as more and more students are leaving high school without adequate reading, writing,

and mathematics skills requisite for successful academic survival in college.

Through the use of peer counselors, the program has provided substantial counseling and referral services for its students. These students have been an essential component of the Special Services counseling program since its beginning. These peer counselors have been predominantly undergraduate students who have had no formal training prior to being hired. The professional staff provides formal and ongoing training for them. Weekly meetings in the form of staff development sessions are conducted by the counseling coordinator or the director for peer counselor training.









43


The following topics are covered in training and development sessions: 1) counseling theories; 2) communication skills and training; 3) human relations training; 4) values clarification; 5) problem-solving and feedback exchange; and 6) writing skills for the maintenance of weekly counseling logs.

Peer counselors function as extensions of the Special Services counseling component. They provide the full-time staff feedback from the students who are located all over the campus and the Gainesville community. Peer counselors are required to make weekly contact with their assigned case load of students and to report their findings to the fulltime staf f counselor. with peer counselors seeking out their clients to ascertain their needs, the full-time counselor can determine priorities for intervening in situations too complex for peer counselors.

Research by Zunker and Brown (1966) found that peer counselors can be as effective as professional counselors. Carkhuff (1969) and Durlak (1970) have demonstrated in their

research that peer counselors can successfully function as providers of counseling services. Sussman (1977) found in his research of peer counselors that they are effective at improving grades of students.

As effective and successful providers of counseling services, peer counselors might be an intervening variable









44


that is contributing to the success of Blaclk students in higher educational institutions. The lack of information about the effectiveness of peer counselors with the Black

student population suggests the need for research in this area.


Summary


The Civil Rights movement of the 1960's called attention to the need for improvement of educational opportunities for Blacks and other minorities. Several questions have been raised about how such improvements are to be accomplished. The value of Special Services Programs, the

key mechanism for improving the quality of education for Blacks, has been questioned by some educators. In terms olf the academic potential of Black students, there is a theory that heredity determines intelligence, a theory which leads to the conclusion that Special Services Programs do not have a useful purpose. In contrast to this view, there is a

theory that attributes intelligence primarily to environmental influences. This latter view has been used repeatedly to support the implementation of Special Services Programs in higher education.

The controversy over heredity versus environment as a significant factor which contributes to the intelligence and academic achievement of Black students has been shifted in









45


recent years from whether or not they can make it to how can they be helped (Cross 1976). How an individual can be helped is dependent upon how that individual learns. Application of the learning theories presented in this chapter might facilitate Black students in their learning and also

help to improve their academic performance, retention and graduation rates. As reported by most researchers, indiv *dual differences and developmental differences must be taken into account in assisting with the learning process of Black students.

Research concerning special programs has provided some useful guidelines for program administrators. For example, Williams' (1978) recommendations have value as both general institutional guidelines and more specific academic program guidelines. West's (1975) report on retention rates of Special Services students is also useful to administrators, but more for documenting problems*than for resolving them. Some directions for program changes are found in the national studies which have been conducted to evaluate the Special Services Programs.

Both the national and local evaluation studies reviewed

in this chapter gave some general recommendations for improving Special Services Programs, such as

1. Institutions should insure the continuous development of sound and effective special or compensatory
programs.









46


2. Institutions should accommodate individual differences and permit students to learn and proceed at
their own pace.

3. Institutions should conduct more research to determine the effects of the programs.


The national study by Coulson, Bradford, and Kaye (1980) reported specific examples of increased retention rates and successful academic progress as evidence of beneficial program impact on Special Services students. This impact on students participating in the Special Services Program was attributed to supportive services, such as academic advisement, tutoring and counseling.

At the University of Florida, the Special Services Program emphasizes a peer counseling component which has provided substantial counseling and referral services for its students. Researchers, such as Zunker and Brown (1966),

Carkhuff (1969), and Durlak (1979), have found that peer counselors are effective and successful providers of counseling services.

The literature suggests that there is a relationship between the effectiveness of the Special Services Program and the support rendered to it by the host institution. Even though controversy exists about the benefits of these programs and their affect on Black students, it does appear









47


that the programs are helping the students experience academic success. However, more research is needed to determine the effectiveness of Special Services Programs.














CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY


The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of the Special Services Program at the University of Florida in the retention and graduation of its participants. The flexibility of this study's research design provided the researcher with an economical and efficient method of collecting and analyzing the data for this study.

Chapter III includes a discussion of the research design, the research questions, the characteristics of the population studied, the method used to select the subjects, the

instrument used in this study, the pilot testing of the instrument and the determination of the reliability and validity of the instrument. Finally, this chapter contains the procedures used in collecting and analyzing the data of this study.


Research Design


The correlational research design, a category of

descriptive research, was utilized for this study. Using the correlational design, the researcher examined the following five dependent variables:



48









49


1. Program participation (academic services and activities in which the students participated;

2. Performance (grade point average);

3. Persistence (retention rates);

4. Progress (graduation rates); and

5. Prominence (economic status of participants).

Van Dalen (1973), in explaining the characteristics of correlational research, states that, because of the complexity and nature of social phenomena, an educator cannot always select, control, and manipulate the factors as in an experimental research design. Therefore, Van Dalen suggests

the utilization of the correlational research design when variables do not lend themselves to the experimental method and controlled manipulation.

In studies of causation, many researchers prefer to use the experimental research design to select and control the factors necessary to study cause-effect relations. However,

researchers cannot manipulate socioeconomic status, home environments or personalities, all of which would influence the subjects of a study. Utilization of the experimental research design in these instances would be impractical (Van Dalen 1973). Best (1970) also expressed similar views regarding correlational research.










50


Research Questions


The six research questions for this study were


1. How effective are the academic services and activities of the Special Services Program as perceived
by Black students at the University of Florida?

2. What are the grade point averages of Black students
in the Special Services Program at the University
of Florida?

3. What are the retention rates of the Black students
in the Special Services Program at the University
of Florida?

4. What are the graduation rates of the Black students
in the Special Services Progran at the University
of Florida?

5. What influence does the peer counselor component
have on the academic performance of Black students in the Special Services Program at the University
of Florida?

6. What is the economic status of Black students who
participated in the Special Services Program at the
University of Florida?


Population


The population for this study was comprised of individuals from a variety of backgrounds, ulith the majority coming from deprived economic and educational backgrounds. Some of the individuals comprising the population of interest are from 1 imited-Engl ish- speaking families, such as Vietnamese, Chinese, Haitians and Latin Americans. However,









51


these individuals were not included in the study; only Blacks were studied. The ethnic breakdown of the population is 90 percent Black, with a 10 percent representation from other ethnic groups. Females outnumber the males in the population by a ratio of three females for each male. The

average age of the population is 18 years at the time of initial enrollment and 23 years at time of graduation.

All members of the population were admitted to the University of Florida under special admission guidelines because they did not meet the standards for regular admission. They were all first-time-in-college students who were

required to enter the University of Florida during the summer session and to participate in the Special Services Program. All members of the population were admitted into

the University of Florida with at least a "C" average in core high school courses.


Selection of Subjects


Subjects for the sample were chosen from among approximately 750 students who were enrolled in the University of Florida's Special Services Program during the years 1974-75, 1975-76, 1976-77, 1977-78, and 1978-79. The names and addresses of the subjects were obtained from the files in the









52


Special Services Office. Using the stratified random sampling technique in conjunction with a table of random numbers, the researcher selected two groups of students (150 students and 60 students, respectively), totalling 210 subjects for the sample.

The stratified random selection process was used to

select the 60 students who represented each of the five-year periods of this study. Thirty graduates and 30 nongraduates, totalling 60 subjects, were administered the evaluation instrument and had their transcripts analyzed. The other group of 150 subjects only had their transcripts analyzed.


Instrumentation


The instrument used in this study was designed and developed by the researcher after reviewing several of the instruments used by Special Services directors to evaluate their programs. The instruments used by Boyd (1974), Davis,

Burkheimer and Borders-Patterson (1975), and Coulson, Bradford, and Kaye (1981) were influential in helping the

researcher to design and develop the instrument for this study.

A panel of experts, consisting of Special Services directors from Central Florida Community College, Edward









53


waters College, Florida A & M University, Florida State University, Hillsborough Community College, and Jacksonville

University, was initially consulted for advice on the construction of this instrument (Appendix A). Since all Special Services Programs are operating under the same set of federal guidelines and are attempting to accomplish the same goals, the help of these experts was invaluable in constructing this instrument.

The items in the instrument were formulated based on those conditions, services and activities which, if optimally rendered, would produce successful experiences 1cr the students of Special Services Programs. The specific conditions, services and activities to be evaluated were obtained

from the federal guidelines --for operating the Special Services Programs and from the stated objectives of each program.

The instrument, called the Questionnaire Evaluating Special Services Programs (QESSP), consists of a cover page

with administrative directions and 41 items. The 41 items in the questionnaire were designed to


1. Solicit demographic information (Ttems 1-9);

2. Solicit responses about satisfactions or dissatisfactions with the Special Services Program (Items
10-19); and

3. Solicit the respondent's evaluation of the following services or activities: Orientation, peer









54


counseling, professional counseling, academic advisement, instruction, special classes, tutoring, special activities, referrals and the staff characteristics (Items 20-41).

Pilot Study

Based on the recommendations of the panel. of experts, the evaluation instrument was developed and tested. A pilot

study of the instrument was conducted at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro by the Director of Special Services at that institution. The instrument was administered to 71 Special Services students and the Director reported that all items on the instrument were answered by the students. The findings from this pilot study indicated that the items were clearly understood, relevant to Special Services Programs, and easy to answer. The overall reaction

to the instrument, as reported by the Director at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro, was favorable.

After the pilot study was completed, the researcher

made several modifications of the instrument after consultation with three of the original panel experts and the director who conducted the pilot study. These modifications included rewording portions of the administrative instructions, specifying the special courses and grouping related items.









55


Reliability

The test-retest procedure was used to determine the reliability of this instrument. During the first administration of the instrument, the researcher administered the instrument to 20 Special Services students at the University

of Florida who were enrolled during the 1982 summer term. After a two-week interval, it was administered again to the

same group of students but only 15 out of the original 20 were available for the second administration of the instrument.

The researcher compared each item response recorded by the 15 subjects on the second administration of the instrument with each item response that they recorded during the

first administration of the instrument. The researcher compared each item to determine a percent of agreement between the first administration and the second administration of the instrument.

The reliability was determined by dividing the items agreed upon by the total number of agreements and disagreements. Using this common method for computing reliability

(Huck, Cormier and Bounds, 1974, p. 335), the researcher found the instrument to have a reliability of .87.









56


Validity

The content validity of the Questionnaire Evaluating Special Services Programs (QESSP) was determined by a second panel of experts from the following institutions:


Institution Location

1. Abraham Baldwin Agri- Georgia
cultural College

2. Alcorn State University Mississippi

3. Bayamon Central University Puerto Rico

4. Greenville Technical South Carolina
College

5. Howard University Washington, D.C.

6. Kent State University Ohio

7. Miami University Ohio

8. State University of New York
New York at Buffalo

9. University of Florida Florida

10. University of North North Carolina
Carolina-Charlotte

11. University of Tennessee Tennessee
at Chattanooga


These experts were provided with a copy of the initial instrument and were asked to assess its capability for evaluating a Special Services Program. Specifically, they were asked to check each item to determine if it would produce









57


responses that could be used to evaluate any Special Services Program. This panel of experts, consisting of 11 Special Services directors and four immediate supervisors of the directors, had two days to review the instrument and Present written or verbal comments to the researcher.

The content validity of the instrument was determined, with 100 percent of the experts in agreement that the instrument was capable of effectively evaluating a Special Services Program. However, two of the 15 experts suggested

that the location of counseling items and other related items be grouped in closer proximity to each other. One of the experts also suggested that the items related to stigmatization be reworded to insure clarity and understanding. The changes recommended by these three experts were incorporated into the instrument.


Procedures


Having randomly selected the names of the subjects for

this study from the files located in the Special Services office, the researcher contacted the Alumni Atfairs Office to ascertain and update the addresses of some of the subjects. The researcher also contacted currently enrolled students, faculty and any other persons who could provide the researcher with a current and accurate address for the









58


subjects. After obtaining the correct addresses, the researcher prepared a letter requesting the participation of the randomly selected subjects in the study (Appendix B). These letters were either hand-delivered by the researcher or mailed. The letter also included an informed consent form (Appendix B) and the evaluation instrument (Appendix C)

A follow-up letter was mailed if the consent form and

evaluation instrument were not received within two weeks from the mail-out date (Appendix D) However, the researcher found that it was more convenient and faster to follow-up by telephone. The primary subjects were given two weeks from the mail-out date to return the consent form and

the instrument. After that period of time passed, the researcher selected an alternate subject.

After obtaining the consent forms, the researcher re-quested copies of the subject's transcripts from the University of Florida Registrar's Office and began collecting data from their transcripts. The researcher reviewed each subject's transcript for each term that the subject was

enrolled until graduation, suspension or voluntary withdrawal from the University of Florida.

Specifically, the subjects' transcripts were visually and manually checked to determine if they remained enrolled until graduation, the number of years required to graduate









59


from the University of Florida, the number of courses attempted, the number of courses completed and the grade point average at graduation. For the nongraduates, the researcher also collected data on the number of courses attempted and completed and the grade point averages at the time of withdrawal from this institution or as of August 9, 1983.

In summary, the data gathered from the transcripts were

used to determine the subjects' retention and graduation rates and grade point averages. The evaluation instrument was used to collect data on the academic services and activities utilized by the Special Services students. The instrument was also used to determine the economic status of

the subjects after participating in the Special Services Program.


Data Analysi


The analysis of all data for this study was performed manually by the researcher except for the data used to determine the economic impact of this program on its participants. The researcher analyzed the data so as to answer research questions 2, 3, 4, 5, 1, and 6, in that order, respectively.

By manually analyzing the subjects' transcripts, the researcher was able to observe trends and patterns more









60


readily while recording the grade point average of each subject and mean grade point averages of all the subjects.

The data were analyzed to determine what the grade point averages were individually and collectively for each term over a six-to-eight-year period (Research Question #2).

In the process of analyzing the data to answer research question #2, the researcher also ascertained the enrollment status of each subject for each term of their enrollment to determine the collective retention rates (Research Question #3).

The transcripts were also analyzed to determine the number of terms that were required for the subjects to graduate from the University of Florida (Research Question #4).

Data from items 17-19, 21 and 26 of the instrument were analyzed for information about the influence of peer counselors on the academic performances of the subjects. The relationship between peer counselor effectiveness as perceived by the subjects and the amount of contact with the peer counselors was also investigated (Research Question #5).

Data from the evaluation instrument, specifically Items 20-41, were checked closely for subjects' responses regarding academic services and activities that they perceived as most effective (Research Question #1).









61


Data provided by Items 8 and 9 of the evaluation instrument yielded information regarding the economic value of the Special Services Program to the subjects. These data were analyzed by a computer program called the Program Impact Assessment System, developed by Dr. John Nickens and

prepared by the Office of Instructional Research at the University of Florida. The computer program determined the economic value of the Special Services Program for each subject by adjusting the subject's yearly earnings to produce a

present value of earnings. In determining the economic value of the Special Services students, the computer program

considered the factors of inflation, age, and earnings (Research Question #6).

Data from Items 1-7 and 10-16 of the evaluation instrument were analyzed to provide a profile of the subjects and to identify any patterns and factors which might suggest the effectiveness of the Special Services Program.

The information obtained was recorded and summarized to provide answers to the appropriate research questions. Measures of central tendency and variability, simple correlations and relationships and graphic representations of data were used to report the results.














CHAPTER IV
RESULTS


This study was designed to determine the effectiveness of the Special Services Program at the University of Florida

in the retention and graduation of its participants. The population for this study consisted of those students who participated in the Special Services Program during the 1974-1978 school years. A total of 150 randomly selected

student transcripts was used to answer the research questions pertaining to grade point averages, graduation and retention rates. Sixty students were randomly selected and administered the Questionnaire Evaluating Special Services Programs (QESSP) to answer the research questions pertaining to the effectiveness of the program, peer counseling influence and economic status of former participants. This chapter reports the researcher's findings, which includes information regarding each of the six research questions.


Research Question #1


How effective are the academic services and activities of the Special Services Program as perceived
by Black students at the University of Florida?






62









63


In order to answer the f irst research question, the

researcher analyzed Items 1-7 and 10-16 of the Questionnaire Evaluating Special Services Programs (QESSP) that solicited responses from 60 randomly selected students who initially enrolled during the summer terms between 1974 and 1978. The

sample of 60 students contained 30 graduates of the University of Florida and 30 nongraduates.

The analysis of the items on the QESSP and the findings of the researcher are presented in the same numerical order as they appear on the QESSP. The responses of the

graduates and nongraduates are presented, illustrated and discussed separately, beginning with the graduates.


An Analysis of Responses of Randomly Selected Special Services Graduates to Items 1-7 and 10-16 on the QESSP


The first item on the QESSP inquired about the sex and marital status of the Special Services graduates. The data

show that 9 of the 30 graduates (30 percent) are married; the remaining 21 (70 percent) are single.

Item 2 asked the students to describe themselves. The researcher found that all of the students in this study were

Black, of United States origin. Blacks of Hispanic and Caribbean origins have participated in the Special Services Program, but none were included in the random selection.









64


In Item 3, the students were asked to indicate the

highest degree that they now hold. The researcher confirmed that 30 students had received bachelor's degrees; 2 students had completed requirements for the master's degree; 1 student was graduated from law school; and 1 student is in the last year of medical school, expecting to graduate in June of 1984.

Information concerning institutions that the students had attended was solicited by Item 4. The researcher found that the students listed seven institutions that they had

attended or planned to attend after graduating from the University of Florida. The other institutions are as follows: Florida International University; Howard University;

Jacksonville University; University of Arizona; University of Central Florida; University of North Florida; and the University of Oklahoma. These students indicated that they had not received a degree from the above institutions.

Item 5 asked the students if they were currently enrolled in any of the institutions listed in Itent 4 and, if not, whether they planned to re-enroll. Seven students indicated that they are currently enrolled, with five of the seven being enrolled at the University of Florida. Five students who are not enrolled plan to re-enroll at the University of Florida, but ten others plan to re-enroll at









65


other institutions. Additionally, seven students indicated they do not plan to re-enroll at any institution.

Item 6 solicited data concerning the year in which the student enrolled at the University of Florida. All 30 students entered the University of Florida between the years 1974 and 1978. Item 7 asked if they were former Upward Bound or Talent Search participants. The respondents indicated that eight of them were former Upward Bound students and two were former Talent Search students. The federally funded Upward Bound and Talent Search Projects provided the

University of Florida's Special Services Program with 30 percent of its students during the years between 1974 and 1978.

The Higher Education Act of 1965 created the Upward Bound and Talent Search Programs, which had as their purposes the development of academic skills, motivation for academic success and the identification of low-income youth with academic potential. The Talent Search Program identifies low-income youth who have academic potential and encourages them to complete their secondary education and to subsequently enroll in postsecondary institutions. The

Upward Bound Program is a pre-college preparatory activity that develops academic skills and motivation for success in

students attending secondary school and eventually in a postsecondary institution.









66


The University of Florida has an Upward Bound Program but not a Talent Search Program. The Upward Bound Program is to provide an opportunity for potentially capable lowincome students in Alachua County from academically and/or

environmentally deprived backgrounds to develop motivational, personal and academic competencies necessary to pursue and succeed in higher education.

When asked in Item 10 to rate their academic preparation before coming to the University of Florida, 3 students (10 percent) rated their preparation as being excellent; 19

students (63.3 percent) rated their preparation as being good; and 8 students (26.7 percent) rated their academic preparation as being fair.

When asked in Item 11 to rate their academic preparation at the University of Florida, 20 students (66.7 percent) rated their preparation as good; 7 (23.3 percent) rated their preparation as being excellent; and 3 (10 percent rated their preparation as being fair.

The three most important reasons that the respondents listed in Item 12 for deciding to enroll at the University

of Florida were (1) the academic reputation of the University, (2) it was close to home, and (3) the financial aid awarded. These three reasons are listed in the order of most number one responses. The Special Services Program ranked fourth.









67


In the analysis of Item 13, which gathered data concerning feelings, the researcher found that 43.3 percent of

the graduates associated positive feelings with their participation in the Special Services Program. A majority of the

graduates (53.3 percent) associated both positive and negative feelings with their participation in the Special

Services Program. One graduate did not respond to the

question.

The following comments were made by the graduates in

describing their feelings associated with their participation in the Special Services Program:


1. Even though I was benefited from the counseling and educational assistance of the Special Services staff, I've had to deal with feeling like an admission exception.

2. Almost even-handed ambivalence, beina
Black in an astronomical white climate,
feelings were somewhat negative. I was in
the "Special Services" Program very much
my first two quarters, and afterwards rapidly moved from the "S.S." courses
(curriculum). Due to adversive and hostile categorizing as a 2nd-rate (class)
student, pride and self-esteem, morale was
cut.

3. Positive in the sense it gave me a chance
to go to the school of my choice. A bit
negative sometimes when people told you it
wouldn't be the same when you enter the
mainstream of regular classes.

4. Staff was interested in the student learning and obtaining their degree.









68


5. Positive--Due to the support and encouragement being given. Negative--Reinforced the idea of not being able to
succeed in the highly competitive environment under normal conditions (not
being able to retake tests).

6. Very helpful in adjusting.

7. Many of the White instructors exhibited racist attitudes to the students. The inferiority complex given students by those professors help cause the withdrawal of many of these students.

8. Negative derived from the stigma placed on SIS students. Positive from the dedication from the faculty and staff.

9. Positive in the sense that Blacks were able to see more Blacks. Negative in the sense that the program supposedly catered to less intelligent persons. The program
had a spill-over effect on me. That is, from my doing well in the program, this gave me confidence that I could do well in professional school. The program is
definitely needed, at least for a year or
so for the incoming student.

10. Positive being admitted to the University;
given an opportunity. Negative image of
not being smart enough to get in under
"regular admission."

11. Definitely positive; only negative feelings associated with the Program were frw, outsiders who didn't know what the Program
was all about.

12. There were some people whose influence and
concern brought about good results and yet some people's attitude toward me was cold
and insensitive. Some made me feel dumb and incompetent. The ones that did more
to help me were the instructors and tutors at the Special Services Building (Learning
Center). They deserve gold ribbons.









69


13. Several educational experiences were positive because of the Special Services
Program.

14. 1 felt like I was considered as a person
who could not compete with the majority.

15. Program provided excellent assistance in
academic counseling.

16. 1 noticed positive feelings from many of
my peers concerning the program. Only
once did I experience any negative feelings--from my 1st quarter English
professor.

17. Academic and personal advising were readily available. The program was extremely
informative of the academic and business
systems of the University of Florida.

18. Cared about. Concerned with you as a person and achieving the best possible goals.

19. Positive--you got to know people. Negative--professors stereotyped classes.

20. Positive in that the Program really does
a lot for incoming freshmen. Negative in
the sense that the program can become a
crutch at times. Academics must be
stressed more. Make it clear that having
a good time is part of college but academics are #1.

21. Positive--gave me an opportunity to obtain my education. Negative--some teachers treated me as if I were dumb. They also talked to me as if they were apologizing that I was Black.

22. I think the benefits of the program were
positive, but being at an all White university and being in an all Black class
initially did not mix with me.

23. 1 think the academic preparation received
through Upward Bound greatly enhanced my
academic success.









70


24. 1 was civen motivation through the members of Special Services.

25. The feelings were positive because the
Special Services Program enables me to
gradually be broken into the academic
system at the University of Florida.


In summary, the graduates appear to have been appreciative of the Special Services Program, but not the University as a whole. They expressed some negative effects of being Black in a White environment. Half of the graduates said that they experienced negative feelings as a result of nonsupportive or noncaring attitudes of professors. Five graduates explicitly said that the professors exhibited

racist attitudes, they stereotyped the class, treated the students as if they were dumb and incompetent, and made them feel inferior. Many of the graduates said that they had experienced positive feelings as a result of the actions taken by the Special Services staff to assist them.

Should the Special Services Program be continued was the question asked in Item 14 on the QESSP. Twenty-eight (93.3 percent) of the graduates said that the program should be continued; two graduates (6.7 percent) were not sure. An

analysis of Item 15, which asked the students to describe their experiences from participation in the Special Services Program, revealed that the students experienced more positive than negative feelings toward themselves and their education. The students overwhelmingly felt that the









71


Special Services Program increased their motivation to study and made them more determined to graduate.

The following comments generally reveal positive experiences:


1. Made me more cognizant of the need of
Blacks to be better prepared for college
admission requirements.

2. Allowed me to enter college even though I
didn't achieve the required score on the
SAT for college entrance.

3. Gave me the start I needed to realize I
could later make it without the Program.

4. 1 was/am very grateful to the Special
Services administrative staff because it
was this staff which gave me the opportunity to "prove" myself at a major university--after bombing out on the SAT (not
in the right frame of mind the day I took it). The Special Services staff saw the
potential in me. I wanted to prove to
them and myself that I could survive at
the University of Florida.

5. Helped me adjust to the University of
Florida at a good pace.


The students were asked to describe the effectiveness of the Special Services Program in Item 16. Their overall reaction to the Special Services Program was positive. Ten students (33.3 percent) described it as extremely effective; 7 students (23.3 percent) as very effective; and the remaining 13 (43.3 percent) as effective.









72


Summary of Responses by Special Services Graduates

From the analysis of Items 1-7 and 10-16, the researcher found that the Special Services graduates expressed strong positive satisfaction with the Program. One of their

three major reasons for enrolling at the University of Florida was that they were informed by friends of the help provided by the Special Services Program.

It should be noted that the students were not completely satisfied with everything associated with the

Program. The students reported both positive and negative feelings concerning their participation in the Special Services Program. However, when asked if they thought that

the Special Services Program should be continued, 93.3 percent indicated yes and 6.7 percent were not sure.

Following, in Table 1, is a summary of student responses regarding services, activities, or staff actions rendered or arranged for by the Special Services Program. The students were asked to indicate whether or not they received the service, participated in the activity or experienced the staff action by marking yes or no in the columns. If they marked yes, they were to indicate their perceptions of the effectiveness of the service, activity or staff action in helping them while at this institution. if









73


their response was no, no further evaluation was appropriate. Table 1 indicates the number and type of responses given by the graduates of the Special Services Program. Analysis of Graduates' Responses to Items 20-41 of the QESSP

The researcher's analysis of the participation columns, Items 20-41, of the QESSP, revealed that 57.5 percent of the graduates indicated use of the services or participation in the activities of the Special Services Program. Since it is

not mandatory that students utilize program services or activities, 42.5 percent chose not to do so.

Further analysis of the effectiveness columns, Items 20-41, shows that 42 percent evaluated the services, activities, and staff as-extremely effective; 23 percent evaluated them as very effective; 31 percent evaluated them as effective; 3 percent evaluated them as not effective; and 1 percent evaluated the services activities and staff as extremely ineffective.










74




r-4
4D
(D 44
$4 44
4J >
(%. x -ri
:3 W H 4J
0



0 r4
4 CL 4J 44 > 0 r4 N 0
0 4-4 -H
Z W 4J
rT4 0
>4
r4
U) 4) (D
C4 44 >
w 14 44 -r4
z > 4.)
Z H
0 z
E-4 >
U) w H >4 4) a) rw = 4J 4 44 >
ZD E-4 4) 44 r4
cx >
&4 44
44

E-4
0
E-4 r- fn o CN
4 r-4
U) 0 4J 44 >
w W4 X 44 -ri
U) 914 41
z
0 En
a4 w
0 m Ln 0 %0 IV
z
C4 >

(n GO 0)
W >4 r-I N r-4 C,4
E-i 4 o
en
C-) rj
W >
1:14 z 0
U rn (1) -rq 4 r-I 0 1 ro
to W m 0 04 ic: 0 H
4 w m 04 m m 0 0 1 (a
4) 4J (1) (0 44 04 r-I r. u u r
C ul r- :3 r4 .14 0 4
U M to r-I r-4 u u (a
0 > ri
0 4 rO r-4 u
> -0-4 0 0 0 w w w m w 0
-r4 4J 4-) 0 4-) CU CO 0 0 w r. ro q. q 0 (U
(1) (a m U Q) -4 0 4 W 0 4 U W 0
u 04 4J 0 W U a) 0 Tl a) U a) 0 W -4
a) q 0 w 0 -r-f cn 0 44
4 rq 41 -ri > 1::
4.1 0) 44 4 0
:3 4J 4J m w 0 r. -H (D 0 (1)
0 $4 -r4 4J 0 4J -14 14 CC U 94 (a
>
ro 41
-r-I W U 4 0
Im 0 (U CN P4









75






C) 0
0) 44
M 44
4J W > x a -4 :3 H 4J
0
>1
tr
r. ri
.rq w w
a 4J 44 > N C> 0
r-4 0 44 -r4 (U Z W 4J




.rq
44 > Ln %0 Ln w
w 44 -t-i



>
.rq >1 4) (D 41 4 44 > CN cy) C%4 Ln
u 4) 44 -H
4) >
14-4
4
>1
r-4
Q)
0 C4 0 CN co
r-4
4J 44 > X 44 -ri W 4J


0 CN IRV CN iz


r-4 M > r-4 CN r-q


z
H >
E-4
z 0
ca (D 0 r-q
4 r-4 41 a) 4) 0 0 1
(1) 41 4-4 P-4 ul u U r.
Iz >4 0 (a 0 0
4-) r. W -r4 0 r-4 u r-)
04 u 0 (a -rq ri
0 Cn 0 u C: 4 r-4 0
u r (L)04 OWQWMMZ
-P-1 4J rq c U0 (a ul r. ro r. -H r_ cc
(73 r-I "i -ri (D 4 4 (0 4 U 4 9
04 ca 0) 4J r-I U 0) a., u a; 0 a) -H
a) -ri r. U) 1 (13 rq P4 U) 0 rZ4
u C%- 0 9; r-4 r. >
.rq >. H :3 r-I 0 4
4J 4J (D 0 :3 rq 0 0
4 -H En u ol to 0 tu Q
>1 cc > W
04 -rq 44
V 4J 0
-H 4 U 4 N
in 0 to









76




>4


W 44 r--i r-4 C) #-4
>
x 9 -H
0
>1
Ol
r-q
4J 44 > r.-I 0 44 -r4 Z W 4J


.r4

4J
.ri w (D 00 o rl44 >
44 -P4
to W 4J


>
41 W 44 > r- Ln %o Ln
u Q) 44 -ri
(1) > w 41 44
tW
>1
r-4
0 a
Oo IV 00 w
a) Q)
41 44 > X 44 -rq 94 w 41


0 m r-4
z

ul
(V Lo r- 0 00
>1 N


z
H >
E-4 44 ul
z 0
0 0 ro
u 4 0 w lz a;
(D 4J 044-) r4 41 0 41 4)
4 W ro -r4 -r-4 >
r-I 104 (a tp 171 9 4-) M 0
w cn U r. (A r- 4-1 (U ::% U r. 4
0 -H w -,4 o a) 0 -ri 04
> Q) ul (,I U) g E-4 Q) r-4 M X a
H 4J r-I 0 W w 0 w z Fi 4 r-4 4-; M -r-I
> W W 4 0 0 (0 CO r-4 0 Q$ W 4J (a
V 44 U 04 0 r-i W 9: to ro Ei C 0) 0 p
4 -H Cn U U P4 tP C -ri W En -H Z 4-) ti
u C%- > -r-I rq u ()
.r-I > u > 41 ci 0
4J 4J u w
0 w -H (n z Ln P4
> 4
ra 41
rcl 41 ul
ri 4 0 r. -:r
0 (a C-4 H CN










77




>1
P-i I
w u
e w
W 44 0
4 44
4J 0) > x r. .94
fA H 4J
0
>1


.r4 m 0 m CD 0
$I -W 44 > r-I 044-r4 Z W 4J


-r4
V
.rj co m %o co r- r44 >
w 44 l
4J


>
.rq >1 .0 4 44 > tn co C N Ln o
4) 44 -ri > 41
44
44
>1


Ln 00 %00 r-4 -0
r-4 r-q r-I 4J 44 > X 44 -H w 41


0 U) 0
z r-i

U)
w r-4 ON mm mr>4 Cq C4 r-4 N N N


z rq
H 1 03 U)
E-1 r-I k w
z ILI r-4 0 U)
0 0 w 0 4 w
44 W r4 :3 w
41 w CD e 0 0
rq V >j 44 w u -ri
r4 4.) 9; IQ 0 ra k >
.r4 r. to 4 M V 0 W tp ol 0 w 4
0 v m V 41 04 (a U W 4-4 CD r- r. -ri w rA
4 > 0 w 4 0 M 0 U) -r4 -r4 > -rq -rl
H 4J -rq (D w 0. V fn '0 V rC
m w E U) -1 0) r-4 4J fa -rA 0 M
04 4 W -,4 (a M Z 0 0 W W 0 V 9
ri 0 E-1 U ,c4 E-4 to tyi -rj 0 X 3: M rn
C%- H -rq 0 ra
>1 41 rd w w 0
Z$ V -W r-q CL r w 04V .
0 $4 -H (a 10 U) U) (;3 4 u ra
(13 > 4
04-14
v
-el 4 0
Im 0 (U ml CN










78




>1
r-4

44 0 0 coo
$4 44 Cj 4J W > Cl-. K r. -H :3 H 4J
0
>1


.f4
a -W 44 > r-4 r-4 a r-4
r-4 0 44 -ri 4) Z 04 4J




4J
.r4 co qw co co 0% "q 0 0
4-4 >
-r4



>
.rq >4
4J $4 44 > m w en fn MV m 0 40 0
u 4) 44 -r4
0 > W 4J
4-4
44

r-q
0 rz
(D 0 CN Q 14 r-I IV r-4 0 0
4 r4 rq r-4 r-4 r-I
4J 44 > X 4-4 l 4J


0 CN Ln w v m "-I CN N
z r-4 C,4 C14 C,4


CN (n C14 (n Ln r-4 Cl 0 0
51 (N N r-4


z
H >
E-4 $4
z r-4
0 ul
0) 41 0 U r-4 -ri m
.C u -rq (0 u 4) 4-) 4)
r-4 4- 4-) r-4 0 M -H -rq -rq
(z -r-I 4) 4.) >i 0 W r. 4.)
a al u 'i -rq Q u w -f-I
> (D 0 0 9 ru 9: 4 a) P &r
-H 4J .0 W (D r-4 0) -H (0 4 0 4-) 01
0 W 4J 4 -H 0 -r4 U E r. a) r-q (o w
04 m (a X: U -rq U 0 :j -rq a) Q) W 0 r-I
r-q 2: a4 U2 C4 M W 4 04 k U) u
u 0
41
0 4J 4-) r-i ;j 0 1
0 4 -r-4 (a Q) 44 t; r) E-4 vo .0
>4 (a > F4 4
04-4 0
rO 4J 4J

0 0 (a N









79




>1


W 44 k44 4J W > x -rq
0
>1
tr

41 4-4 > CD CD
0 4-4 -P4 W Z W 4J
4
9

41
.H
44 > to 4+4 r4



>
.ri
4J 44 > V
ID 4) 44 -eq
(D > W -0 44
44
r-4
0
r-4 r-q
4J W > 44 -ri W 4-)


0
z



r-4
W
z
H >
E-4
4J
r. 0 -r4 ul
Q) 4 r.
4-1 u CA 4 4J 0
to r. 0 ri
4J ra m W 0 0 U) >,
1:: -ri -ri -H '0 41 r U)
-rq 41 M 4J 0 0)
> -H W tp-ri w ro r-4 r-4
-rq 4j fo 4.) > cu r. 4.) a) (a w
(a m a) -ri (A H 0 r-4 4.) -H Z
04 w &1 41 Ul 4-J 4J (U u u r.
Q) -ri 0 1.4 u U 04 r. (n -f-4 -ri :3 a 0
$4 U LN- u 0 -H 0 4.) U)
.ri > 0 C4-m ul 4
Z 4.) 4.) r-q 4 0 rO C la4 C -r-f 0
0 4 -ri (0 0 0 (a -14 ta U rZ4 a4
(a > rq
11-4 u
ro Q)
-4 ml g
n 0 (a N CN









80



>1


W 44
W 44
4J >
C x -rq
:3 H 4J
0
>1



4J 44 > r-i 0 44 -r4 0 Z 94 4J



41
-r4 RW Ln a
44 >
fA 44 -r4
m


>
4J k 44 > CN <11 CD
4) 44-,4 r--4
> 4-)
44
44
>1
f-4
0
4) u r-4
w Q) W 4J 44 > 44 -ri
W 41


0 Lr) r-i
z r-I C4






z rq
H >
E-4 k
z
0 U)
0 a) I I 4J >4
4) 41 0 U (1) 4) to r.
4 r-l 4 rc$ k a) 0
-4 4-J ta >1 :3 0 to 41 r= u
4 0 C: 0 q 0 a) -rq cz
U) 0 t;) r-i 0 14-4 4 Ej 0
> rq 0 4) w -ri
-H 4J (1) al tn IS4 V) u ro 41
4) (a F. 9: 9 W 9 C. >1 fu -H
E-4 m u 4 0) r. 0 -r4 0 0 4J U) U r.
-rq :3 W U 0 -,-1 04 >1 --i -.-q (L) ro (a tn
4 U C- Oro 0 0 m U) 070 (A 4J -H w 0
.H > 4) r. P r-q 4 (a P-4 :3 w u x m ro u
0 -W 4J 04 :) (a 04 a) W 4) 4-) (L) 0 0 w
0 $4 -ri M u u 04 > (a U) rd (a
>
-A
rO 4-)
-r4 4 U 0) C)
Q 0 (U c"I rl)










81




>1


44
4 44
4-3 >
X

0




.4.; 44 > rA CD 0 CD 0
0 r4
z 41




41
.r4 4) 0 m 0) r- co a
44 > r-q
w 44 -r4
41


>
4J $4 44 > r-I ko Ln m IT
W 44 -H
> W 4J
44
44

r-q
0 4 1
w 0
w w w
4J 44 >
X 44 -ri
w 41


c Ln Ln P-1 N rz r-4


CD C14 Ln Ln C



z rq
F-4 >
E-4 w w
z 4) 0
0 U) 4) 4 U) 41
C 41 (2) r. M r-4
4J 0 U 0 W 4J 0 ,-q
-r-4 4-i -r4 CO 9: r-4 0 4.J (0 -4 M
r-I 41 0 r-4 F. -4 (0 -4 r. 0 u)
41 U2 m a) r-4 -r-I 4-4 0) 4) D 4-) (L)
4) Q) Q) r-4 W W U 44 9 CU a W r u 41
> rn rA -H rO Q M a) 9; 0 -H U a) (1) N Q) -r-i 4
m 4.; r-I U 0 r. 4.) (0 Cr -r-I U 4J 4J V > 4)
(a (V 4-) r- r 4 0 0 Z :3 44 M r- -H :3 W Ul
04 w w (1) -ri 040 (D -H 0 44 r-i (L) (1) 4J (1) -r4
-H $4 0 ON U U 44 0 A4 U 04 CO V3 E-4
4 U C- W 4) 04 0 04 -C
.H > r-4 4-4 04 r-4 4.)
Z 4-) 4J W :3 4 Q) -ri
0 4 -rq P al 0 C 3: to 4 u ro
(a > 4
ia4 r-i a)
V 4-1 44
l 4 U (1)
C 0 tt Z









82







(V 44
k 44
41 >
x
0

tr

4J 44 > 0 0 0
0 44 -rq 4; Z W 4J
4
r

41
co 00 co
44 >
ca 4-4 -A
4J


>
."I >i CD (V 41 k 4.4 > Ln
u Q) 44 -r4
(L) > 14 4J 44
44
0 >4
r-q
3: 4)
0 5 1
u co (n
a) Q) P-1
4J 44 > L14
r4 41


0
z

co

CN C%4

z
H >
E-4 14
z
0
0
4J ra 44 4
ro :1 4J r-4
r-A 41 4J 14-4 r-I LH a)
'ri -r-I 44 R$ 44 t 4-i
w 4) m ft 4J M C (a ra 0
> rO (0 4J 4J 0 4) JI) 0 r. 44
-H 4J Q) :3 (a W -r-4 -rq CP U) ro 4) Q) 44
(D m 4-) 9 0 41 w fa -rq ro (a
04 ."1 4 (1) tn 0) 1 W 4 a) 0 r. W :3 4J
-H r-4 d) 4.) r. r. r-4 Q) 44 04 4J -r4 44 4-) EO
u (%. (a j -4 4-) r--l 4-4 44 0 4J :3 -r-4
.rq > 0 :3 k 0 0 (a U :3 Z V 4-)
4J 4J 0 0 0 M 44 44 4 4.) >4 0 4) rz 4j 4
0 4 -H EO (d (0 4-J
(U > 44
C4.,q 4-4
4-) M
U 4-) U')
C) 0 (a U'l m m









83






Q CD
44
k 44 (D 4J 4) > x 9: -4 W H 4J
0
>1



4J 44 > Cq
044-pi W Z W 4J
.0
r

41 CD a 0
1+4 > 4-4 -r4



>
.ri >1
4J 4 44 > Q
Q) 44 -r4 > 4J
44
44


E
r-4
4J 44 > 44 -r4 N 41


0 a% Ln CD Ln
z CN C14 CN

U)
cli

10
z
H >
E-4 w 0
z (D r4
0 0 4J
.4 r. cr
Q) 41 0 (D (a r-4
4 r4 Q) 0
r-f :3 4 W fa 144 H 0 rO 4
0 Z 4-4 to >1 all
$4 fl -H >
> 0 0 4j ro r. 4 >
-H 4J 4-4 0 (0 $4 c 41 (0 -rq CA (1) -H
a) to -P 044 >1 fj 0 -H 4J m W 4J
E-4 u Q4 -r-I (a U) 4J 4-) (a
-rq 4 4j V) 0) to 44 Cri '44 t)) r-4
u C%- (0 CO 9Z Ag -4 V 4) 4-J 44 a) U 44 W 0
.rq >1 9 -P4 0 to r-4 > m -l 0 to lz ra
4-3 4J a >jtH 4) 04 1- 0 -rq 44 4-) Q 0 4.) 0
0 -l -,q Q 0 Q CO E U 4J 0 V) 41 u (A (a 14
(a > 4-4
,24.H
rO 4-)
-H 4 U 4J r- 0; a:
4 0 ra U) m










84




>1



(D 4440



.r 4 440

00


P.4 0 4 -r4 a) z W -W







w2 4-4 -r
(a 4






>) >4J
44I 4-4







S 00



z



CI14




E-44 w z ) r4

04J 0 (o r.4
H 0 0
0- 4) 0)
Q) U) >0
r4 4-) 4>
a)(a4 (0)4
uI~ r.4 r
W)- riH 44 m 2H
u IC'. MU 4400)
.9-4 > a"r
4JA 4J 0
0 w- q-H r
(a > 4-4


-HOWU 4J ~









85


An AnalXsis of Responses of Randomly Selected Special Services Non-graduates to Item 1-7 and 10-16 on the QESSP


An analysis of Item 1 indicated that eight (26.7 percent) of these 30 students reported that they are married; 21 (70 percent) are single; and 1 (3.3 percent) is divorced.

All of the students responding to Item 2 described themselves as being Black, of United States origin.

"Indicate the highest degree you now hold," was asked in Item 3. The high school diploma is the highest degree held by 13 (43.3 percent) of these students. Fifteen (50 percent) indicated that their highest degree is the Associate of Arts. However, 2 students (6.7 percent) have obtained bachelor's degrees from Florida A & M University and Savannah State College, respectively.

The institutions listed as requested in Item 4, including the University of Florida, are


1. Bethune-Cookman College
2. Cameron University (Oklahoma)
3. Daytona Beach Community College
4. Florida A & M University
5. Hillsborough Community College
6. Santa Fe Community College
7. Savannah State College 8. University of Maryland
9. University of North Florida
10. University of South Florida
11. University of Texas at El Paso









86


When asked in Item 5 if they were currently enrolled,

out of the 24 respondents, 12 (50 percent) indicated that they were still enrolled at an institution other than the University of Florida. However, 12 others (50 percent) indicated that they were not enrolled. Eight of the 24 students plan to re-enroll at the University of Florida, while 6 others plan to enroll at another institution. Three students indicated that they do not plan to enroll at any institution. Seven students did not indicate their plans for enrollment. In Item 6, the students indicated the year that they enrolled at the University of Florida. All students entered the University of Florida between 1974 and 1-978.

"Are you a former Upward Bound or Talent Search student?" was the question asked in Item 7. The analysis shows that 10 former Upward Bound students and one Talent Search student were nongraduates. Specifically, 36.7 percent of the students in the study who did not graduate from the University of Florida were former Upward Bound and Talent Search students. The two students who received their bachelor's degrees from other institutions were former Upward Bound students.

Item 10 on the OESSP concerning academic preparation before coming to the University of Florida reveals that 19









87


(63.3 percent) of the nongraduates rated their academic preparation before coming to the University of Florida as good, while 6 students (20 percent) rated their academic preparation as fair. There were 3 students (10 percent) who

reported their academic preparation as excellent; 1 (3.3 percent) rated it as poor; and 1 (3.3 percent) did not rate it. In Item 11, when asked about their academic preparation at the University of Florida, 6.7 percent rated it as excellent; 53.3 percent rated it as good; 30 percent rated.it as fair; and 10 percent rated it as poor.

The three most important reasons indicated in Item 12

for deciding to enroll at the University of Florida were

(1) it was close to home, (2) the financial aid awarded, and

(3) the Special Services Program. The researcher arrived at

this finding by locating the three reasons with the most number one responses.

The researcher's analysis of Item 13 concerning the students' feelings regarding their association with the Special Services Program reveals that 20 of the 30 students .(70 percent) felt that there were positive feelings associated with their participation in the Special Services Program. However, 10 students (30 percent) reported both positive and negative feelings.









88


The following comments were made by 24 of the 30 students describing their feelings regarding participation in

the Special Services Program:


1. Very motivational and academically
stimulating.

2. The Program gave me the added confidence
I needed to attend the University of
Florida.

3. In the beginning, there seemed to be a
lot of concern and good advice was found
easily. Later, it became harder to do
the scheduling of classes and my need
for employment.

4. 1 felt as though I was wanted and needed
in this Program.

5. It was all positive, because if it were
not for the Program, I would not have
had the opportunity to attend the
University.

6. Without the Program, I would not have
been able to attend a college of the
U of F standard.

7. Some teachers were unfair in their dealing with me.

8. My feelings are positive towards the
Special Services Program because it acquainted me with a life style that might
have passed me by. This Program also
made it easy to enter other universities.

9. All workers were very helpful, assisted
in tutoring of classes, selection of
classes, etc.

10. It was there when I needed help.

11. 1 think that the counselors could have
been more helpful and available.









89


12. 1 feel like there was help if I needed
help. You get out what you put into the
Program. There is quality help available for those who want it.

13. 1 knew that all the academic help that I
needed would be given to me if I were to
run into any problems.

14. Developed confidence in my ability to
make it in college.

15. Positive--because there was someone
there to help me during the hard times.

16. Positive in that it helped me get
started.

17. Positive--I felt that it helped me to
adjust to the college academic and social life and gave me a good foundation to begin regular college courses. Negative--I did not feel like a normal student until I began to take regular
college courses. It seemed as though we
were slow students taking remedial
courses. Some of the courses were too
easy and no challenge was given in order
for the student to develop one's mind.
One would get dependent on the chance to
retake exams, the constant babysitting
by some instructors and the thought that
you can always drop the course.

18. I felt that the Special Services Program
presented me with an opportunity to
adapt to the academic and social eXpectations of a big university setting.

19. There were positive feelings in that
there were tutors there for your use but on the other hand we were referred to as
the "other" students.

20. Warm, kind, sincere and very amicable.

21. I felt that they were concerned about me
as an individual person, and one of the
family.









90


22. The classes gave me a sense of unity among
Blacks.

23. Positive--knowing that I could attend the
University of Florida. Negative--knowing
that the only way that I would ever get
in was through the Special Services
Program. Knowing that I was not up to
the basic standards of a college student.

24. There was some preparation and help but
not enough help when needed.


Most of the students acknowledged their appreciation for the Special Services Program. They said that the Program made it possible for them to attend the University of Florida. Three students indicated that they were not treated like the regular admission students. They felt that they were treated unfairly by some instructors, looked down upon by many of the students, or were made to feel as though they were slow students taking remedial courses.

The researcher found that 96.7 percent of the students thought that the Special Services Program should be continued. However, there was one student (3.3 percent) who was not sure about continuing the Special Services Program.

An analysis of Item 15 revealed that the Special Services Program caused the students to experience more positive than negative feelings toward themselves and their education. According to students' responses, the Special Services Program increased their motivation to study, made them more determined to graduate, made them feel better




Full Text

PAGE 1

$ /21*,78',1$/ 678'< 2) 7+( 5(/$7,216+,3 %(7:((1 $ 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 352*5$0 $1' %/$&. 678'(176n $&$'(0,& 3(5)250$1&( $1' (&2120,& (1+$1&(0(17 %< *:(18(/ :,/)5(' 0,1*2 $ ',66(57$7,21 35(6(17(' 72 7+( *5$'8$7( 6&+22/ 2) 7+( 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$ ,1 3$57,$/ )8/),//0(17 2) 7+( 5(48,5(0(176 )25 7+( '(*5(( 2) '2&725 2) 3+,/2623+< 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$

PAGE 2

&RS\ULJKWp %\ *ZHQXHO : 0LQJR

PAGE 3

7KLV GLVVHUWDWLRQ LV GHGLFDWHG WR P\ ZRQGHUIXO IDPLO\ &\QWKLD $QQH 0DULH DQG *HUDOG ZKR VXSSRUWHG DQG HQFRXUDJHG PH WR ILQLVK WKLV UHTXLUHPHQW IRU P\ GRFWRUDWH ,W LV DOVR GHGLFDWHG WR VRPH VSHFLDO SHRSOH LQ P\ OLIH QDPHO\ =HUOLQD 5HFNOH\ :LOOLH 6XPPHUV 6DPXHO 6XPPHUV DQG :LOOLH 0DH 6XPPHUV ZKR VXSSRUWHG DQG JXLGHG PH WKURXJK P\ FKLOGKRRG

PAGE 4

3& .12:/('*0(176 ,W ZRXOG QRW KDYH EHHQ SRVVLEOH WR FRPSOHWH WKLV UHn VHDUFK ZLWKRXW *RG DQG WKH DVVLVWDQFH RI P\ ZLIH WKH VWXn GHQWV LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DQG PDQ\ RWKHU LQGLYLGXDOV ZRXOG OLNH WR H[SUHVV P\ GHHS DSSUHFLDWLRQ WR 'U +DUROG 5LNHU WKH FKDLUPDQ RI P\ GRFWRUDO FRPPLWWHH IRU KLV WLPH DGYLFH TXDOLW\ FRQWURO SURFHGXUHV HQFRXUDJHn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n DOV ZKR DVVLVWHG DQG VXSSRUWHG PH ZKLOH DWWHPSWLQJ WR PHHW WKH UHTXLUHPHQWV IRU WKLV GHJUHH ,9

PAGE 5

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

PAGE 6

3$*( ,9 5(68/76 5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQ $Q $QDO\VLV RI 5HVSRQVHV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV *UDGXDWHV WR ,WHPV DQG RQ WKH 4(663 6XPPDU\ RI 5HVSRQVHV E\ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV *UDGXDWHV $QDO\VLV RI *UDGXDWHVn 5HVSRQVHV WR ,WHPV RI WKH 4(663 $Q $QDO\VLV RI 5HVSRQVHV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 1RQJUDGXDWHV WR ,WHPV DQG RQ WKH 4(663 $Q $QDO\VLV RI 1RQJUDGXDWHVn 5HVSRQVHV WR ,WHPV RI WKH 4(663 5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQ $QDO\VLV RI 7UDQVFULSWV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 6WXGHQWV WR 2EWDLQ 7KHLU *UDGH 3RLQW $YHUDJHV $QDO\VLV RI 7UDQVFULSWV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 6WXGHQWV WR 2EWDLQ 7KHLU *UDGH 3RLQW $YHUDJHV $QDO\VLV RI 7UDQVFULSWV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 6WXGHQWV WR 2EWDLQ 7KHLU *UDGH 3RLQW $YHUDJHV $QDO\VLV RI 7UDQVFULSWV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 6WXGHQWV WR 2EWDLQ 7KHLU *UDGH 3RLQW $YHUDJHV $QDO\VLV RI 7UDQVFULSWV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 6WXGHQWV WR 2EWDLQ 7KHLU *UDGH 3RLQW $YHUDJHV 5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQ $QDO\VLV RI &ODVV (QUROOLQJ LQ $QDO\VLV RI &ODVV (QUROOLQJ LQ $QDO\VLV RI &ODVV (QUROOLQJ LQ $QDO\VLV RI &ODVV (QUROOLQJ LQ $QDO\VLV RI &ODVV (QUROOLQJ LQ 6XPPDU\ 5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQ YL

PAGE 7

3$*( 7UDQVFULSW $QDO\VLV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 6WXn GHQWV :KR (QUROOHG LQ WR 'HWHUPLQH 7KHLU *UDGXDWLRQ 5DWHV 'HJUHHV (DUQHG &RXUVHV $WWHPSWHG DQG &RPSOHWHG 7UDQVFULSW $QDO\VLV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 6WXn GHQWV :KR (QUROOHG LQ WR 'HWHUPLQH 7KHLU *UDGXDWLRQ 5DWHV 7UDQVFULSW $QDO\VLV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 6WXn GHQWV :KR (QUROOHG LQ WR 'HWHUPLQH 7KHLU *UDGXDWLRQ 5DWHV 'HJUHHV (DUQHG &RXUVHV $WWHPSWHG DQG &RPSOHWHG 7UDQVFULSW $QDO\VLV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 6WXn GHQWV :KR (QUROOHG LQ WR 'HWHUPLQH 7KHLU *UDGXDWLRQ 5DWHV 'HJUHHV (DUQHG &RXUVHV $WWHPSWHG DQG &RPSOHWHG 7UDQVFULSW $QDO\VLV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 6WXn GHQWV :KR (QUROOHG LQ WR 'HWHUPLQH 7KHLU *UDGXDWLRQ 5DWHV 'HJUHHV (DUQHG &RXUVHV $WWHPSWHG DQG &RPSOHWHG $QDO\VLV RI 0DMRU )LHOGV RI 6WXG\ 6XPPDU\ 5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQ $QDO\VLV RI WKH 3HHU &RXQVHORUVn (IIHFWLYHQHVV DV 3HUFHLYHG E\ 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG *UDGXDWHV RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP 3HUVRQDO &RQFHUQV $FDGHPLF &RQFHUQV 6RFLDO &RQFHUQV )LQDQFLDO $LG 7XWRULQJ 6XPPDU\ $QDO\VLV RI 3HHU &RXQVHORUVn (IIHFWLYHQHVV DV 3HUFHLYHG E\ 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 1RQJUDGXDWHV RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP 3HUVRQDO &RQFHUQV $FDGHPLF &RQFHUQV 6RFLDO &RQFHUQV 9OO

PAGE 8

3$*( )LQDQFLDO $LG 7XWRULQJ 6XPPDU\ 5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQ 3URFHGXUH IRU 0DNLQJ $QDO\VLV RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPn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f )2//2:83 /(77(5 %,%/,2*5$3+< %,2*5$3+,&$/ 6.(7&+ YLLL

PAGE 9

$EVWUDFW RI 'LVVHUWDWLRQ 3UHVHQWHG WR WKH *UDGXDWH 6FKRRO RI WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD LQ 3DUWLDO )XOILOOPHQW RI WKH 5HTXLUHPHQWV IRU WKH 'HJUHH RI 'RFWRU RI 3KLORVRSK\ $ /21*,78',1$/ 678'< 2) 7+( 5(/$7,216+,3 %(7:((1 $ 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 352*5$0 $1' %/$&. 678'(176n $&$'(0,& 3(5)250$1&( $1' (&2120,& (1+$1&(0(17 %< *:(18(/ :,/)5(' 0,1*2 $SULO &KDLUPDQ +DUROG & 5LNHU 0DMRU 'HSDUWPHQW &RXQVHORU (GXFDWLRQ 7KH SXUSRVH RI WKLV VWXG\ ZDV WR GHWHUPLQH WKH UHODn WLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLn YHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD DQG %ODFN VWXGHQW UHWHQWLRQ JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV JUDGXDWLRQ DQG HFRQRPLF VXFFHVV 7KH DUHDV LQYHVWLJDWHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ WR GHWHUPLQH WKLV UHODWLRQVKLS LQFOXGHG f DFDGHPLF VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLWLHV LQ ZKLFK WKH VWXGHQWV SDUWLFLSDWHG f JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV UHFHLYHG GXULQJ HDFK WHUP f UHWHQWLRQ UDWHV f JUDGXDWLRQ UDWHV f LQIOXHQFH RI SHHU FRXQVHORUV DQG f HFRQRPLF VWDWXV RI SDUWLFLSDQWV $ WRWDO RI VWXGHQWV FRQVLVWLQJ RI WZR UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG JURXSV RI VWXGHQWV DQG VWXGHQWV UHVSHFWLYHO\ ZDV LQFOXGHG LQ WKH VDPSOH RI WKLV VWXG\ ,;

PAGE 10

, 7KH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH (YDOXDWLQJ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV 4(663f ZDV WKH LQVWUXPHQW XVHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ 7KH 4(663 FRQVLVWV RI D FRYHU SDJH ZLWK DGPLQLVWUDWLYH GLUHFWLRQV DQG LWHPV GHVLJQHG WR VROLFLW GHPRJUDSKLF LQIRUPDWLRQ UHn VSRQVHV DERXW VDWLVIDFWLRQ RU GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DQG HYDOXDWLYH FRPPHQWV UHJDUGLQJ WKH 3URJUDPnV VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLWLHV 6RPH NH\ ILQGLQJV RI WKLV VWXG\ ZHUH f WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP LV HIIHFWLYH LQ SURYLGLQJ VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLWLHV WR LWV SDUWLFLSDQWV f WKH DFWLYLWLHV DQG VHUn YLFHV SURYLGHG E\ WKH 3URJUDP DUH QRW EHLQJ XVHG E\ DOO RI LWV SDUWLFLSDQWV f WKH UHWHQWLRQ HIIRUWV RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP KDYH VLJQLILFDQWO\ LQFUHDVHG WKH 8QLYHUn VLW\nV UHWHQWLRQ RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV f WKH DWWULWLRQ UDWH RI %ODFN IUHVKPHQ LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP LV VLJQLILn FDQWO\ ORZHU WKDQ WKH UDWH IRU DOO IUHVKPHQ IURP WKH WRWDO VWXGHQW ERG\ f WKH JUDGXDWLRQ UDWH RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV LV QRW DV KLJK RU HTXDO WR WKH JUDGXDWLRQ UDWH RI WKH WRWDO VWXGHQW ERG\ f RYHUDOO SHHU FRXQVHORUV DUH HIIHFWLYH SURYLGHUV RI FRXQVHOLQJ VHUYLFHV f WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP LPSURYHV WKH SRWHQWLDO VSHQGLQJ SRZHU RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV 7KH GDWD VXJJHVW WKDW WKH 3URJUDP LV HIIHFWLYH DQG WKDW LW KDV EHHQ D PDMRU IDFWRU FRQWULEXWLQJ WR LQFUHDVHV LQ WKH UHWHQWLRQ DQG JUDGXDWLRQ UDWHV RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD [

PAGE 11

&+$37(5 ,1752'8&7,21 6WDWHPHQW RI WKH 3UREOHP 7KH HGXFDWLRQ RI %ODFNV RU WKH ODFN RI LW KDV DIIHFWHG WKH VRFLDO FXOWXUDO DQG HFRQRPLF SURJUHVV RI %ODFNV LQ )ORULGD DQG WKURXJKRXW WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV 3HUNLQV f 5HFRJQL]LQJ WKH QHHG WR H[WHQG KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQ RSSRUWXQLn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nV WHDFKLQJ DQG UHVHDUFK UHSXWDWLRQ DQG LWV HOLWLVW SRVLWLRQ WKH LQVWLn WXWLRQ GLG QRW H[SHULHQFH D VXEVWDQWLDO \HDUO\ LQFUHDVH LQ WKH QXPEHU RI HQUROOHG %ODFN VWXGHQWV )OHPPLQJ *LOO DQG 6ZLQWRQ f

PAGE 12

2EHUOLQ &ROOHJH D SUHGRPLQDQWO\ :KLWH SULYDWH /LEHUDO $UWV &ROOHJH ORFDWHG LQ 2KLR PDGH D FRQVFLRXV HIIRUW WR GLYHUVLI\ LWV VWXGHQW ERG\ E\ DFWLYHO\ VHHNLQJ DQG UHFUXLWn LQJ %ODFN VWXGHQWV 7KH %ODFN 2EHUOLQ VWXGHQW UHWHQWLRQ UDWH LV DV KLJK DV WKH FROOHJH DYHUDJH EHFDXVH RI WKH VXSn SRUW V\VWHPV SXW LQWR RSHUDWLRQ 6WDQGDUGV DW 2EHUOLQ ZHUH QRW ORZHUHG EXW VSHFLDO WXWRULQJ SURJUDPV ZHUH PDGH DYDLOn DEOH IRU VWXGHQWV ZKR QHHGHG WKHP $OWKRXJK SHUFHQW RI WKH VWXGHQWV ZKR XVHG WKHVH VSHFLDO VHUYLFHV ZHUH %ODFN LQ WKH SURJUDP ZDV GHVLJQHG WR DLG DOO VWXGHQWV ZLWK GHILFLHQFLHV LQ UHDGLQJ ZULWLQJ PDWKHPDWLFV DQG RWKHU FRXUVHV LQ ZKLFK WKH\ ZHUH KDYLQJ GLIILFXOW\ 7KH SKLORVRn SK\ EHKLQG 2EHUOLQnV 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP LV QRW WR ORZHU VWDQGDUGV EXW WR EULQJ GHILFLHQW VWXGHQWV DW OHDVW XS WR WKH DYHUDJH )OHPPLQJ *LOO DQG 6ZLQWRQ f $W )ORULGD 6WDWH 8QLYHUVLW\ D SURJUDP FDOOHG +RUL]RQ 8QOLPLWHG ZDV FUHDWHG LQ WR LQFUHDVH WKH %ODFN VWXGHQW UHSUHVHQWDWLRQ RQ WKDW FDPSXV %\ XWLOL]LQJ D )ORULGD %RDUG RI 5HJHQWVn SROLF\ ZKLFK VWDWHV WKDW SHUFHQW RI WKH IUHVKPDQ FODVV QHHG QRW PHHW DGPLVVLRQ UHTXLUHPHQWV WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ ZDV DXWKRUL]HG WR HQUROO %ODFNV ZKR GLG QRW PHHW PLQLPXP VWDQGDUGV IRU DGPLVVLRQ &RQVHTXHQWO\ WKH 8QLYHUVn LW\ WKURXJK WKH +RUL]RQ 8QOLPLWHG 3URJUDP DQG WKH %RDUG RI 5HJHQWVn SROLF\ VXEVWDQWLDOO\ LQFUHDVHG WKH QXPEHU RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV RQ LWV FDPSXV )OHPPLQJ *LOO DQG 6ZLQWRQ f

PAGE 13

7KH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD UHVSRQGHG WR WKH FDOO WR HGXn FDWH %ODFN \RXWKV E\ FUHDWLQJ WKH &ULWLFDO )UHVKPDQ
PAGE 14

Df &RXQVHOLQJ WXWRULQJ VXPPHU DQG UHPHGLDO SURJUDPV Ef &DUHHU JXLGDQFH SODFHPHQW DQG RWKHU VHUYLFHV WR HQFRXUDJH RU IDFLOLWDWH WKH VWXGHQWVn FRQWLQXDQFH LQ KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQ Ff ,GHQWLILFDWLRQ HQFRXUDJHPHQW RU FRXQVHOLQJ RI VWXn GHQWV IRU JUDGXDWH RU SURIHVVLRQDO VFKRROV ,QVWHDG RI DFNQRZOHGJLQJ LQDGHTXDFLHV RI WKHLU SURn JUDPV VRPH DGPLQLVWUDWRUV RI WKH VSHFLDO SURJUDPV KDYH SUHSDUHG UHSRUWV ZKLFK KDYH EHHQ PRUH RI D GHIHQVH RI WKH SURJUDP DQG RI WKH VWXGHQWV WKDQ HYDOXDWLRQ &URVV f 7KH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD KDV EHHQ DGPLQLVWHUHG SULPDULO\ RQ WKH EDVLV RI VXFK UHn SRUWV 7KH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP KDV EHHQ RSHUDWLQJ IRU PRUH WKDQ D GHFDGH ZLWKRXW DQ REMHFWLYH DQDO\VLV RI LWV HIIHFWLYHQHVV 7KH SURJUDP KDV EHHQ SODQQHG DQG PRGLILHG SULPDULO\ RQ WKH EDVLV RI DGPLQLVWUDWLYH H[SHULHQFHV DQG QRW HYDOXDWLYH GDWD 7KLV VWXG\ IRFXVHV RQ WKH IHGHUDOO\ IXQGHG SURJUDP 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV WKDW LV GHVLJQHG WR SURYLGH VXSn SRUW VHUYLFHV VXFK DV FRXQVHOLQJ WXWRULQJ DQG DFDGHPLF DGYLVHPHQW 3XUSRVH RI WKH 6WXG\ 7KH SXUSRVH RI WKLV VWXG\ ZDV WR GHWHUPLQH WKH UHODn WLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD DQG %ODFN VWXGHQW UHWHQWLRQ JUDGH

PAGE 15

VXFFHVV 7KH TXHVWLRQV H[DPLQHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ ZHUH DV IROORZV +RZ HIIHFWLYH DUH WKH DFDGHPLF VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLn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n YLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD" 6SHFLILFDOO\ WKLV VWXG\ LQYHVWLJDWHG DQG UHSRUWHG RQ WKH W\SHV RI DFDGHPLF VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLWLHV LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP WKDW DUH PRVW HIIHFWLYH IRU LWV VWXGHQWV

PAGE 16

5DWLRQDOH RI WKH 6WXG\ ,QVWLWXWLRQV RI KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQ VLPLODU WR WKH 8QLYHUn VLW\ RI )ORULGD DUH H[SHFWHG WR FRQWLQXH UHVSRQGLQJ WR WKH QHHGV RI WKHLU %ODFN VWXGHQWV DQG WR LQFUHDVH WKHLU %ODFN VWXGHQW HQUROOPHQW /LNH PRVW SUHGRPLQDQWO\ :KLWH LQVWLWXn WLRQV RI KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQ WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD KDV VKRZQ D JURZLQJ VHQVLWLYLW\ WR WKH SUREOHPV RI HTXDO HGXFDn WLRQDO RSSRUWXQLWLHV IRU %ODFN VWXGHQWV 7KLV JURZLQJ FRPPLWPHQW WR WKH VROXWLRQ RI WKHLU SUREOHPV LV UHDGLO\ DSSDUHQW LQ WKH QXPEHU RI SURJUDPV DYDLODEOH WR %ODFN VWXGHQWV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD DQG VLPLODU LQVWLWXn WLRQV QDWLRQZLGH ,Q VSLWH RI WKLV JURZLQJ FRPPLWPHQW DQG GHVLUH RI WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD DV DGPLQLVWUDWRUV WR SURYLGH DFDGHPLF VXSSRUW SURJUDPV IRU LWV %ODFN VWXGHQWV LW LV HDV\ WR VHH WKDW WKH LPSOHPHQWDWLRQ RI WKHVH SURJUDPV LV QRW D UHVXOW RI HYDOXDWLYH GDWD *RYHUQPHQW JUDQWV FRXUW RUGHUV KXPDQn LVWLF IHHOLQJV DQG SROLWLFV DSSHDU WR LQIOXHQFH PRVW RI WKH GHFLVLRQV WR GHVLJQ DQG LPSOHPHQW WKH DFDGHPLF VXSSRUWV SURn JUDPV IRU %ODFNV DW PDQ\ RI WKLV QDWLRQnV LQVWLWXWLRQV RI KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQ 7KH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD OLNH RWKHU XQLYHUVLWLHV LQ WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV QHHGV WR UHH[DPLQH LWV HIIRUWV DQG WKH HIIHFW RI WKRVH HIIRUWV WR SURYLGH DFDGHPLF VXSSRUW IRU LWV

PAGE 17

%ODFN VWXGHQWV $ FXUVRU\ H[DPLQDWLRQ RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUn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n WLRQV OLNH WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD WR UHFRQVLGHU WKHLU SUHVHQW HTXDO DFFHVV DGPLVVLRQV SROLFLHV DQG FRQVLGHU ZD\V WR EHFRPH PRUH FRVW HIIHFWLYH 7KH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP LQ WHUPV RI UHWDLQLQJ DQG IDFLOLWDWLQJ WKH JUDGXDWLRQ RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV LV D IRFXV RI WKLV VWXG\ DQG LV RI VLJQLILFDQFH LQ

PAGE 18

WKHVH WLPHV RI OLPLWHG IXQGLQJ IRU HGXFDWLRQ 0F*UDWK f KDV UHSRUWHG WKDW IHZ GHWDLOHG VWXGLHV H[LVW DERXW WKH DFWXDO FRVW RI 6SHFLDO 3URJUDPV LQ KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQ DQG WKHLU HIIHFWLYHQHVV 7KLV VLWXDWLRQ LV WUXH DW WKH 8QLYHUn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

PAGE 19

$ GDWD EDVH XSRQ ZKLFK WR EXLOG D PRUH UHVSRQVLYH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP ZLOO KHOS WR LQVXUH WKH EHVW SRVVLEOH GHYHORSPHQW RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV ZKR UHSUHVHQW LPSRUWDQW KXPDQ UHVRXUFHV IRU )ORULGD DQG WKH QDWLRQ 6WXGLHV VXFK DV WKLV RQH FDQ EH XVHG WR GHYHORS D GHOLYHU\ V\VWHP RU PRGHO WKDW ZLOO LPSURYH WKH TXDOLW\ RI WKH VHUn YLFHV DQG DFWLYLWLHV UHQGHUHG WR SUHVHQW DQG IXWXUH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV DW LQVWLWXWLRQV RI KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQ 7KH GHYHORSPHQW DQG GHVLJQ RI VXFK D PRGHO KDYH JHQHUDO DSSOLFDn ELOLW\ ERWK VWDWHZLGH DQG QDWLRQDOO\ EHFDXVH RI WKH VLPLn ODULW\ RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV LQ VFRSH DQG REMHFWLYHV 7KHUH KDYH EHHQ RQO\ WZR QDWLRQDO VWXGLHV FRQGXFWHG WR HYDOXDWH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV DQG WKHLU HIIHFWLYHQHVV RU LPSDFW 2QH VWXG\ ZDV FRQGXFWHG E\ (GXFDWLRQDO 7HVWLQJ 6HUYLFH DQG 5HVHDUFK 7ULDQJOH LQ DQG WKH RWKHU VWXG\ ZDV FRQGXFWHG E\ 6\VWHP 'HYHORSPHQW &RUSRUDWLRQ LQ &RXOVRQ %UDGIRUG DQG .D\H f 7KH LQYHVWLJDWRUV RI WKH VWXG\ RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV GLG QRW ILQG DQ\ FOHDU DQG FRQVLVWHQW HYLGHQFH WKDW WKH SURJUDP UHODWHG WR WKH VXFFHVV RI WKH VWXGHQWV LQYROYHG 'DYLV %XUNKHLPHU DQG %RUGHUV3DWWHUVRQ f 7KH LQYHVWLJDWRUV RI WKH VHFRQG VWXG\ LQ IRXQG VRPH HYLGHQFH RI EHQHILFLDO SURJUDP LPSDFW RQ WKH VWXGHQWV &RXOVRQ %UDGIRUG DQG .D\H f

PAGE 20

7R ZKDW H[WHQW GR VXFK SURJUDPV DIIHFW WKH DFDGHPLF VXFFHVV RI VWXGHQWV" :KDW LV WKH FRVW HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI VXFK SURJUDPV" :KDW EHQHILWV GR VWXGHQWV GHULYH IURP VXFK SURn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f /RQJLWXGLQDO VWXGLHV RI FRXQVHOLQJ SURJUDPV UDUHO\ DSSHDU LQ WKH OLWHUDWXUH 7KLV VLWXDWLRQ VHHPV WR EH GXH WR WKH GLIILFXOWLHV LQ SODQQLQJ DQG FDUU\LQJ RXW ORQJWHUP VWXGLHV 7KH UDULW\ RI UHVHDUFK SDSHUV RQ ORQJLWXGLQDO HYDOXDWLRQ VWXGLHV DW $PHULFDQ 3HUVRQQHO DQG *XLGDQFH $VVRFLDWLRQ $3*$f FRQYHQWLRQV VXJJHVWV WKDW PRVW FRXQVHORUV DUH QRW FRQGXFWLQJ VXFK HYDOXDWLRQ VWXGLHV $W WKH $3*$ FRQYHQWLRQ LQ 'HWURLW WKHUH ZHUH ILYH DQG VHYHQ LQGLn YLGXDOV UHVSHFWLYHO\ LQ DWWHQGDQFH DW WKH VHVVLRQV GHDOLQJ ZLWK ORQJLWXGLQDO VWXGLHV DQG HYDOXDWLRQV (DUFOD\ f 5RWKQH\ f UHSRUWV WKDW WKH WLWOHV RI UHVHDUFK FRQn GXFWHG E\ PRVW FRXQVHORUV GR QRW LQFOXGH ZRUGV VXFK DV

PAGE 21

HYDOXDWLRQ ORQJLWXGLQDO HYDOXDWLRQ DFFRXQWDELOLW\ DVVHVVn PHQW HIIHFW RU HIIHFWLYHQHVV DQG UHVXOWV +H IRXQG WKDW OHVV WKDQ WZR SHUFHQW RI WKH OLVWHG SURJUDPV DW WKH $3*$ &RQYHQWLRQ LQFOXGHG VXFK ZRUGV LQ WKH WLWOHV RI WKHLU SUHVHQWDWLRQV 5HVHDUFK VWXGLHV LGHQWLILHG H[FOXVLYHO\ DV VWXGLHV RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV DUH UDUHO\ IRXQG LQ WKH OLWHUDn WXUH 8VLQJ DV D JXLGH WKH NH\ ZRUG 6SHFLDO LQ D VHDUFK RI WKH (GXFDWLRQDO 5HVRXUFHV ,QIRUPDWLRQ &HQWHU (5,&f IRU UHVHDUFK VWXGLHV RI IHGHUDOO\ IXQGHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URn JUDPV WKLV UHVHDUFKHU IRXQG D WRWDO RI VWXGLHV ZLWK WKH ZRUG 6SHFLDO LQ WKHLU WLWOHV IURP WKH SHULRG WR 2QO\ WKUHH RXW RI FRXOG EH LGHQWLILHG DV UHVHDUFK VWXGLHV RI IHGHUDOO\ IXQGHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV 7KH VFDUFLW\ RI QDWLRQDO DQG ORFDO VWXGLHV RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV LQGLFDWHV D GHILQLWH QHHG IRU WKLV VWXG\ 6XFK D VWXG\ FRXOG EHQHILW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD JUHDWO\ DV D EDVLV IRU PDNLQJ GHFLVLRQV DERXW VXSSRUWLYH VHUYLFHV IRU VSHFLDOO\ DGPLWWHG VWXGHQWV

PAGE 22

'HILQLWLRQ RI 7HUPV &RPSHQVDWRU\ 3URJUDPf§$ SURJUDP GHVLJQHG WR PDNH XS IRU WKH GHELOLWDWLQJ FRQVHTXHQFHV RI GLVFULPLQDWLRQ DQG SRYHUW\ )URVW DQG 5RZODQG f 'HYHORSPHQWDO 3URJUDPf§$ SURJUDP GHVLJQHG WR DFKLHYH VNLOOV RU DWWLWXGHV DQG LV QRW QHFHVVDULO\ D SUHUHTXLVLWH IRU DQRWKHU SURJUDP &URVV f ([SDQGHG (GXFDWLRQDO 2SSRUWXQLWLHV 3URJUDPV ((23ff§$ VWDWH IXQGHG SURJUDP GHVLJQHG WR DVVLVW %ODFN VWXGHQWV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 5HJXODU $GPLW 6WXGHQWf§$ 6WXGHQW ZKR KDV PHW WKH DGPLVVLRQ VWDQGDUGV IRU HQUROOLQJ DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 5HPHGLDO 3URJUDPf§$ SURJUDP GHVLJQHG WR FRUUHFW HGXFDWLRQDO GHILFLHQFLHV EHIRUH D VWXGHQW PD\ HQWHU D FRXUVH RU SURJUDP &URVV f 6SHFLDO $GPLW 6WXGHQWf§$ VWXGHQW ZKR GRHV QRW PHHW WKH DGPLVVLRQ VWDQGDUGV IRU HQUROOLQJ DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPf§$ IHGHUDOO\ IXQGHG SURJUDP GHn VLJQHG WR SURYLGH DFDGHPLF VXSSRUWLYH VHUYLFHV WR ORZLQFRPH VWXGHQWV DQG LQFUHDVH WKHLU UHWHQWLRQ DQG JUDGXDWLRQ UDWHV LQ SRVWVHFRQGDU\ LQVWLWXWLRQV )HGHUDO 5HJLVWHU 9RO 1R )UL 0D\ f

PAGE 23

6SHFLDO $FDGHPLF 6HUYLFHV DQG $FWLYLWLHVf§7KRVH VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLWLHV SURYLGHG WR 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV VXFK DV LQVWUXFWLRQ LQ UHDGLQJ ZULWLQJ VWXG\ VNLOOV PDWKHPDWLFV DQG RWKHU VXEMHFWV SHUVRQDO FRXQVHOLQJ DFDGHPLF DGYLFH DQG DVVLVWDQFH LQ FRXUVH VHOHFWLRQ WXWRULDO VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLWLHV GHVLJQHG WR DFTXDLQW VWXGHQWV ZLWK FDUHHU RSWLRQV DYDLODEOH WR WKHP )HGHUDO 5HJLVWHU 9RO 1R :HG 0DUFK f 2UJDQL]DWLRQ RI WKH 6WXG\ &KDSWHU ,, RI WKLV VWXG\ FRQWDLQV D UHYLHZ RI SHUWLQHQW OLWHUDWXUH 7KH UHVHDUFK PHWKRG UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQV VXEn MHFWV SRSXODWLRQ LQVWUXPHQW GDWD FROOHFWLRQ DQG GDWD DQDO\VLV DUH GHVFULEHG LQ &KDSWHU ,,, 7KH ILQGLQJV UHn VXOWLQJ IURP WKH DQDO\VLV DQG HYDOXDWLRQ RI WKH GDWD DUH SUHVHQWHG LQ &KDSWHU ,9 $ EULHI VXPPDU\ RI WKH VWXG\ GLVFXVVLRQ RI WKH ILQGLQJV FRQFOXVLRQV LPSOLFDWLRQV DQG UHFRPPHQGDWLRQV IRU IXUWKHU UHVHDUFK DUH SUHVHQWHG LQ &KDSWHU 9

PAGE 24

&+$37(5 ,, 5(9,(: 2) 7+( /,7(5$785( 3KLORVRSKLFDO DVVXPSWLRQV XQGHUO\LQJ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV DQG WKHRULHV WKDW DUH UHODWHG WR WKH HGXFDWLRQ RI %ODFNV DQG RWKHU PLQRULWLHV DUH ILUVW GLVFXVVHG LQ WKLV FKDSWHU 5HVHDUFK VWXGLHV SHUWDLQLQJ WR %ODFN VWXGHQWV DORQJ ZLWK LPSOLFDWLRQV RI WKHVH VWXGLHV IROORZ )LQDOO\ WKHUH LV DQ RYHUYLHZ RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD WRJHWKHU ZLWK WKH SURJUDPn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

PAGE 25

UHSRUWV RQ VXFK SURJUDPV $V H[SODLQHG E\ 6RZHOO f DQ\ DWWHPSW WR SURGXFH TXDOLW\ HGXFDWLRQ IRU %ODFNV PXVW EHJLQ E\ ILQGLQJ RXW ZKDW KDV EHHQ GRQH DQG ZLWK ZKDW UHVXOWV $FFRUGLQJ WR 6RZHOO WKHUHLQ OLHV DQRWKHU SUREOHP IRU 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV UHVHDUFKHUV 2Q PRVW FDPSXVHV WKLV TXHVn WLRQ RI ZKDW KDV EHHQ GRQH IRU %ODFNV KDV VFDUFHO\ EHHQ DVNHG PXFK OHVV DQVZHUHG 6RZHOO f 'HVSLWH WKHVH SUREOHPV LW LV VWLOO LPSRUWDQW WR FRQVLGHU WKH VWXGLHV ZKLFK KDYH EHHQ PDGH VR IDU DQG WKHLU UHVXOWV 3KLORVRSKLFDO $VVXPSWLRQV DQG 7KHRULHV 7KH GULYH IRU FLYLO ULJKWV LQ WKH nV 3UHVLGHQW -RKQVRQnV :DU RQ 3RYHUW\ DQG WKH +LJKHU (GXFDWLRQ $FW RI ZHUH PDMRU IDFWRUV UHVSRQVLEOH IRU DQ HPSKDVLV RQ HTXDO DFFHVV IRU PLQRULWLHV WR HGXFDWLRQDO RSSRUWXQLWLHV DQG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV &URVV DQG )UDQNOLQ f 7KH PDLQ SKLORVRSKLFDO DVVXPSWLRQ RI WKHVH SURJUDPV ZDV WKDW %ODFN VWXGHQWV ZLWK HGXFDWLRQDO GHILFLHQFLHV FDQ SURILW IURP VSHFLDO DVVLVWDQFH WKURXJK WUDGLWLRQDO HGXFDWLRQDO PHFKDQn LVPV VXFK DV FRXQVHOLQJ WXWRULQJ DQG UHPHGLDO LQVWUXFWLRQ UHQGHUHG LQ D IDFLOLWDWLYH PDQQHU 'DYLV %XUNKHLPHU DQG %RUGHUV3DWWHUVRQ f )UDQNOLQ f DOVR UHSRUWV WKDW SURJUDPPDWLF LQLWLDWLYHV IRU HTXDO DFFHVV WR HGXFDWLRQ SURn YLGHV WKH EHVW KRSH IRU EUHDNLQJ WKH F\FOH RI SRYHUW\ DQG LVRODWLRQ IRU WKH QDWLRQnV PLQRULWLHV

PAGE 26

2QH RI WKH PRWLYDWLQJ IDFWRUV LQ WKH LQLWLDWLRQ RI WKHVH DQG VLPLODU SURJUDPV UHVXOWHG IURP WKH LQYROYHPHQW RI WKH UHODWLRQVKLSV EHWZHHQ FROOHJH VWXGHQWV DQG IDFXOW\ LQ WKH FLYLO ULJKWV PRYHPHQWV 6WXGHQWV DQG IDFXOW\ ZKR SDUWLn FLSDWHG LQ WKHVH PRYHPHQWV LQ WKH 6RXWK ZHUH DPD]HG E\ WKH SOLJKW RI WKH SRRU DQG XQGHUSULYLOHJHG DQG XUJHG WKHLU LQn VWLWXWLRQV WR RIIHU WKHLU HGXFDWLRQDO H[SHUWLVH WR DLG WKHVH JURXSV ZLWK VSHFLDO QHHGV $EHUW f ,Q WKH OLWHUDWXUH FRQIOLFWLQJ YLHZV PD\ EH IRXQG RQ WKH EHQHILW RI VSHFLDO HGXFDWLRQDO SURJUDPV IRU %ODFN VWXn GHQWV 6LPLODUO\ FRQIOLFWLQJ YLHZV KDYH EHHQ RIIHUHG WR H[SODLQ ZK\ PLQRULW\ JURXSV KDYH GLIILFXOW\ ZLWK WUDGLWLRQDO HGXFDWLRQDO SURJUDPV $W OHDVW WZR JURXSV KDYH GHEDWHG WKHVH LVVXHV +HUHGLW\ 7KHRULHV ,Q RQH FDPS RI WKH FRQWURYHUV\ LV 6KXH\ f ZKR DUJXHG WKDW %ODFNV GR QRW SRVVHVV DV PXFK FDSDFLW\ IRU OHDUQLQJ DV GR :KLWHV 6KXH\ D SV\FKRORJLVW HVSRXVHG JHQHWLFV DV WKH EDVLV IRU OHDUQLQJ GLIILFXOWLHV RI %ODFNV DQG QRW WKHLU LPSRYHULVKHG HQYLURQPHQW ,Q WKH VDPH FDPS D GHFDGH ODWHU -HQVHQ f DUJXHG WKDW IHGHUDOO\ IXQGHG FRPSHQVDWRU\ HGXFDWLRQ HIIRUWV ZHUH XQVXFFHVVIXO EHFDXVH WKH\ ZHUH DLPHG DW FKDQJLQJ ZKDW FDQQRW EH FKDQJHG DSSUHn FLDEO\ -HQVHQ DOVR IHOW WKDW WKH UHSRUWHG GHILFLHQFLHV RI

PAGE 27

GLVDGYDQWDJHG VWXGHQWV ZHUH GXH WR JHQHWLF IDFWRUV UDWKHU WKDQ HQYLURQPHQWDO IDFWRUV (ONLQG f DJUHHG ZLWK -HQVHQ DQG RWKHUV QRWLQJ IXUWKHU WKDW WKH LQWHOOHFWXDO GHYHORSPHQW RI FKLOGUHQ FDQQRW EH DFFHOHUDWHG E\ FRPSHQVDWRU\ VFKRROLQJV (YDQV DQG 'XERLV f WRRN WKH SRVLWLRQ WKDW VXFK VWXGHQWV VKRXOG QRW EH LQ FROOHJH 7KH\ DOVR DJUHHG ZLWK WKH SULRU UHVHDUFKHUV DQG VWDWHG WKDW XQGHUDFKLHYHUV DUH LQGLYLGXDOV ZLWK OLPLWHG LQn WHOOHFWXDO FDSDFLW\ 7KH DUJXPHQWV SUHVHQWHG E\ WKLV JURXS RI UHVHDUFKHUV SODFH WKH EODPH IRU HGXFDWLRQDO GHILFLHQFLHV RQ LQGLYLGXDO FDSDELOLWLHV DQG WKH JHQHWLFDOO\ LQIHULRU HWKQLF JURXS EXW QRW RQ WKH HQYLURQPHQW (QYLURQPHQW 7KHRULHV +RZHYHU WKHUH DUH RWKHU UHVHDUFKHUV ZKR EHOLHYH WKDW WKH HQYLURQPHQW FDQ SURGXFH HGXFDWLRQDO GHILFLHQFLHV LQ D SHUVRQ +XQW f FRQWHQGV WKDW WKH HQYLURQPHQW DIIHFWV D SHUVRQnV EHKDYLRU DQG WKDW D FKLOG ZKR LV VXEMHFWHG WR DQ HQULFKHG HQYLURQPHQW ZLWK UHLQIRUFHPHQWV FDQ GHYHORS DGHn TXDWH LQWHOOHFWXDO VNLOOV 7KH RYHUZKHOPLQJ RSLQLRQ RI PDQ\ SV\FKRORJLVWV LV WKDW WKH HGXFDWLRQDO GLIIHUHQFHV REVHUYHG EHWZHHQ %ODFN DQG :KLWH FKLOGUHQ DUH ODUJHO\ WKH UHVXOW RI HQYLURQPHQWDO IDFWRUV DQG QRW JHQHWLF IDFWRUV 3HWWLJUHZ f

PAGE 28

%DUDW] DQG %DUDW] f FULWLFL]H ERWK WKH JHQHWLF DQG HQYLURQPHQWDO H[SODQDWLRQV IRU UDFH GLIIHUHQFH LQ LQWHOOLn JHQFH DQG DFDGHPLF DFKLHYHPHQW 7KH\ VXJJHVW WKDW WKH PDLQ UHDVRQ IRU WKH GLIIHUHQFHV LV WKH LQDSSURSULDWHQHVV RI PRVW VFKRRO SURJUDPV IRU %ODFN FKLOGUHQ 9DOHQWLQH f UHMHFWV ERWK JHQHWLF DQG HQYLURQPHQWDO WKHRULHV RQ LQWHOOLJHQFH DQG DFDGHPLF DFKLHYHPHQW +H DUJXHV WKDW WKH JHQHWLFV WKHRU\ FDQQRW EH SURYHQ EXW WKDW WKH HQYLURQPHQWDO WKHRU\ ZKLFK PD\ EH VRXQG QHHGV WR EH H[WHQGHG 9DOHQWLQH VXEVFULEHG WR WKH WKHRU\ WKDW DOO LQn GLYLGXDOV DUH XQLTXHO\ FUHDWLYH DQG FRQWLQXDOO\ GHYHORSLQJ *RUGRQ DQG *UHHQ f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f

PAGE 29

7KHRULHV RI /HDUQLQJ 3ULRU WR WKH DUULYDO RI ODUJH QXPEHUV RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD VRPH WKRXJKW ZDV JLYHQ WR WKH TXHVWLRQ RI KRZ %ODFN VWXGHQWV FRXOG EH KHOSHG ZLWK WKHLU DFDGHPLF FRXUVHV $GPLQLVWUDWLYH DQG FRXQVHOLQJ SHUVRQQHO VHQVLWLYH WR WKH QHHGV RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV ZHUH KLUHG DQG DFDGHPLF SURJUDPV ZHUH LPSOHPHQWHG WR KHOS WKH %ODFN VWXn GHQWV ZKR ODFNHG DGHTXDWH VNLOOV IRU VXFFHVVIXO PDWULFXODn WLRQ DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD )URP WR WKH SUHVHQW PRVW %ODFN VWXGHQWV ZKR ZHUH DGPLWWHG WR WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD ZHUH IURP GHSULYHG HGXFDWLRQDO EDFNJURXQGV $XVXEHO f SURYLGHV VRPH UHOHYDQW HYLGHQFH IRU FRXQWHUn DFWLQJ WKH HIIHFWV RI FXOWXUDO GHSULYDWLRQ RQ WKH OHDUQLQJ SDWWHUQV RI %ODFNV +H K\SRWKHVL]HV WKDW DQ RSWLRQDO OHDUQLQJ HQYLURQPHQW FRXOG VWLPXODWH LQWHOOHFWXDO GHYHORSn PHQW +RZHYHU KH QRWHV WKDW VRPH VWXGHQWVn OHDUQLQJ SDWn WHUQV PD\ EH LUUHYHUVLEOH DV D UHVXOW RI D FRQVLVWHQWO\ GHSULYHG HQYLURQPHQW GXULQJ WKHLU HDUO\ IRUPDWLYH \HDUV $XVXEHO fIXUWKHU VWDWHV WKDW DGHTXDWH DWWHQWLRQ WR WKH FRJQLWLYH UHDGLQHVV IRU OHDUQLQJ DQG WKH XVH RI DSSURSULDWH LQVWUXFWLRQDO PDWHULDOV FUHDWH DQ RSWLRQDO OHDUQLQJ HQYLURQn PHQW IRU %ODFN VWXGHQWV %ORRP f WKHRUL]HV WKDW PRUH WKDQ SHUFHQW RI WKH VWXGHQWV LQ VFKRROV FDQ OHDUQ ZKDW WKH VFKRROV KDYH WR WHDFK

PAGE 30

WKHP LI JLYHQ WKH SURSHU LQVWUXFWLRQ DQG DGHTXDWH WLPH IRU VWXG\LQJ %ORRPnV WKHRU\ RI OHDUQLQJ LV RQH RI OHDUQLQJ IRU PDVWHU\ 7KH EDVLV IRU %ORRPnV WKHRU\ OLHV LQ DOORZLQJ VWXn GHQWV VXIILFLHQW WLPH WR PDVWHU D VXEMHFW RU D FRXUVH 7KLV FRQGLWLRQ PLJKW PHDQ H[WHQGLQJ WKH WLPH IRU WKH FRXUVH VXEMHFW RU WHUP %ORRPnV WKHRU\ SURYLGHV D EDVLV IRU HVWDEOLVKLQJ SURJUDPV DQG FRXUVHV WR PHHW WKH VSHFLDO QHHGV RI WKH LQGLYLGXDO ,QGLYLGXDO GLIIHUHQFHV HYHQ ZLWKLQ VXEFXOWXUHV PXVW EH WDNHQ LQWR FRQVLGHUDWLRQ ZKHQ OHDUQLQJ WKHRULHV DUH DSSOLHG WR DQ\ JURXS :LWWPHU DQG 0\ULFN f UHSRUWHG RQ WKH WKHRU\ DQG SUDFWLFHV RI IDFLOLWDWLYH WHDFKLQJ DQG UHFRPPHQGHG DW OHDVW IDFLOLWDWLYH SURFHGXUHV IRU HQKDQFLQJ VWXGHQWVn OHDUQn LQJ 7KHVH UHVHDUFKHUV VWDWH WKDW LQGLYLGXDOV OHDUQ EHVW ZKHQ f WKH OHDUQLQJ LV PHDQLQJIXO WR WKH OHDUQHU f LW LV YROXQWDU\ DQG QRW IRUFHG XSRQ WKH OHDUQHU f WKH OHDUQLQJ LV WKH UHVXOW RI VHOILQLWLDWLRQ f WKH OHDUQLQJ LV VHOIHYDOXDWHG DQG LW LV WKH OHDUQHU ZKR LV GHFLGLQJ LI ZKDW LV EHLQJ WDXJKW LV RI DQ\ YDOXH DQG f WKH PDWHULDOV DQG WHFKQLTXHV KDYH DQ DIIHFWLYH EDVH :LWWPHU DQG 0\ULFN f DOVR UHSRUWHG WKDW WHDFKHUV DUH NH\ LQGLYLGXDOV LQ WKH SURFHVV RI IDFLOLWDWLQJ OHDUQLQJ 7HDFKHUV QHHG WR EH DZDUH RI WKHLU RZQ IHHOLQJV LQ RUGHU WR SURYLGH WKH SV\FKRORJLFDO RSHQQHVV IRU XQGHUVWDQGLQJ WKHLU VWXGHQWV 7KHVH UHVHDUFKHUV JR RQ WR VD\ WKDW WHDFKHUV

PAGE 31

FDQQRW IDFLOLWDWH OHDUQLQJ E\ SUHVFULELQJ VLPLODU JRDOV IRU DOO VWXGHQWV RU DGKHULQJ WR LQIOH[LEOH FODVVURRP SODQV .ODXVPHLHU f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f IRXQG WKDW SULYDWH DQG SXEOLF LQVWLWXWLRQV RI KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQ GLIIHUHG FRQVLGHUn DEO\ LQ WKHLU FRQFHSWV RI SURYLGLQJ DVVLVWDQFH WR GLVDGYDQWn DJHG VWXGHQWV 7KH VWXG\ LQYROYHG LQVWLWXWLRQV ZHUH SXEOLF DQG ZHUH SULYDWH 3URJUDPV GLUHFWRUV DW HDFK RI WKH LQVWLWXWLRQV ZHUH DVNHG WR FRPSOHWH DQ LQYHQWRU\ WKDW LQFOXGHG WKH IROORZLQJ VXEMHFW DUHDV f 3URJUDP UDWLRQDOH DQG REMHFWLYHV f UHFUXLWPHQW DQG VHOHFWLRQ RI VWXGHQWV

PAGE 32

f SURJUDP LPSOHPHQWDWLRQ WR LQFOXGH DFDGHPLF DGMXVWPHQW VSHFLDO DVVLVWDQFH ZLWK VWXGLHV ILQDQFLDO DVVLVWDQFH FRXQVHOLQJ VHUYLFHV DQG SK\VLFDO IDFLOLWLHV f IDFXOW\ DQG f HYDOXDWLRQ RI WKH SURJUDP 7KH PDLQ SXUSRVH RI WKLV VWXG\ ZDV WR H[DPLQH WKH JURZWK DQG GHYHORSPHQW RI VSHFLDO DQG FRPSHQVDWRU\ HGXFDWLRQ SURJUDPV LQ D VHOHFW JURXS RI SXEOLF DQG SULYDWH IRXU\HDU LQVWLWXWLRQV LQ 2KLR GXULQJ WKH WLPH SHULRG RI WR :LOOLDPV IRXQG WKDW GLUHFWRUV IURP ERWK SULYDWH DQG SXEOLF LQVWLWXWLRQV IHOW WKDW WKH PRVW LPSRUWDQW SXUSRVH RI WKHLU SURJUDPV ZDV WR SURYLGH HGXFDWLRQDO VXSSRUW IRU SHUn VRQV ZKR ZHUH VRFLDOO\ HFRQRPLFDOO\ DQG DFDGHPLFDOO\ GHILFLHQW 7KH SULYDWH LQVWLWXWLRQV LGHQWLILHG WZR RWKHU SXUSRVHV WKDW ZHUH LPSRUWDQW WR WKHLU SURJUDPV f WR DVVLVW FXOWXUDOO\ RU HWKQLFDOO\ GLIIHUHQW VWXGHQWV LQ EHFRPn LQJ DFFOLPDWHG WR WKH FROOHJH RU XQLYHUVLW\ FRPPXQLW\ DQG f WR IRVWHU SRVLWLYH DWWLWXGHV ZLWKLQ GLVDGYDQWDJHG VWXn GHQWV DERXW HGXFDWLRQ VHOI DQG WKHLU SRWHQWLDO IRU VXFFHVV :LOOLDPVn VWXG\ DOVR VKRZHG WKDW SXEOLF LQVWLWXWLRQV ZHUH PRUH LQFOLQHG WR PDNH FKDQJHV RU PRGLILFDWLRQV LQ HVWDEOLVKHG SURFHGXUHV WR IDFLOLWDWH WKH VXFFHVV RI WKH VWXGHQWV WKDQ ZHUH SULYDWH LQVWLWXWLRQV )RU H[DPSOH SULYDWH LQVWLWXWLRQV GLG QRW VXSSRUW WKH RYHUDOO XVH RI DFDGHPLF DGMXVWPHQW VHUYLFHV WKH\ GLG QRW VHH WKH QHHG IRU

PAGE 33

VSHFLDO IDFXOW\ RU VSHFLDO IDFLOLWLHV IRU FRPSHQVDWRU\ SURn JUDPV )LQDOO\ WKH SULYDWH FROOHJHV GLG QRW VXSSRUW WKH XVH RI DQ HYDOXDWLRQ SURFHVV IRU VSHFLDO RU FRPSHQVDWRU\ SURJUDPV $IWHU UHYLHZLQJ WKH GDWD IURP WKH SULYDWH DQG SXEOLF LQVWLWXWLRQV PDNLQJ VLWH YLVLWV DQG FRQGXFWLQJ LQWHUYLHZV :LOOLDPV UHFRPPHQGHG WKH IROORZLQJ 7KDW LQVWLWXWLRQV LQVXUH WKH FRQWLQXRXV GHYHORSPHQW RI VRXQG DQG HIIHFWLYH VSHFLDO RU FRPSHQVDWRU\ SURJUDPV 7KDW LQVWLWXWLRQV VHUYH ERWK WKH GLVDGYDQWDJHG VWXn GHQW DV ZHOO DV WKH WUDGLWLRQDO VWXGHQW 7KDW LQVWLWXWLRQV GHYLVH D JHQHUDO PRGHO IRU D FRPn SUHKHQVLYH FXUULFXOXP 7KDW FUHGLW IRU DOO UHPHGLDO RU FRPSHQVDWRU\ HGXFDn WLRQ FRXUVHV FRXQW WRZDUG JUDGXDWLRQ 7KDW LQVWUXFWLRQ DFFRPPRGDWH LQGLYLGXDO GLIIHUHQFHV DQG SHUPLW VWXGHQWV WR OHDUQ DQG SURFHHG DW WKHLU RZQ SDFHV 7KDW PRUH HIIHFWLYH XVH RI LQVWUXFWLRQDO UHVRXUFHV IRU VSHFLDO SURJUDPV VXFK DV IDFXOW\ PHGLD FHQWHUV DQG IDFLOLWLHV EH PDGH 7KDW JUDGLQJ SROLFLHV DQG SUDFWLFHV EH QRUSXQLWLYH

PAGE 34

7KDW RQO\ FRPSHWHQW LQVWUXFWRUV ZKR DFWLYHO\ VHHN WR WHDFK GLVDGYDQWDJHG VWXGHQWV EH LQYROYHG LQ VSHn FLDO RU FRPSHQVDWRU\ SURJUDPV 7KDW HIIRUWV EH PDGH WR DOOHYLDWH WKH DEUXSW WUDQn VLWLRQ IURP VSHFLDO FRPSHQVDWRU\ HGXFDWLRQ WR UHJXn ODU RU WUDGLWLRQDO FROOHJH FXUULFXOD :LOOLDPV GLG QRW LQGLFDWH KRZ WKHVH UHFRPPHQGDWLRQV VKRXOG EH XQGHUWDNHQ 5HWHQWLRQ 'XULQJ WKH VFKRRO \HDU DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD D UHSRUW SUHSDUHG E\ WKH $IILUPDWLYH $FWLRQ 2IILFHU UHYHDOHG WKDW WKH %ODFN VWXGHQWVn GURSRXW UDWH ZDV WZLFH WKDW RI :KLWH VWXGHQWV ,Q WKH )DOO RI WKH GURSRXW UDWH IRU :KLWH VWXGHQWV ZDV SHUFHQW DQG WKH GURSRXW UDWH IRU %ODFN VWXGHQWV ZDV SHUFHQW ,Q D UHSRUW SUHSDUHG E\ WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV %XUHDX RI &HQVXV LQ RQ VFKRRO HQUROOPHQW LW ZDV IRXQG WKDW %ODFNV DQG RWKHU PLQRULWLHV KDG DWWULWLRQ UDWHV PXFK KLJKHU WKDQ :KLWH VWXGHQWV SDUWLFXODUO\ LQ WUDGLWLRQDOO\ :KLWH LQVWLWXWLRQV )UDQNOLQ f 7KH &ROOHJH %RDUG LQ D UHn SRUW RQ ILQDQFLQJ ORZLQFRPH DQG PLQRULW\ VWXGHQWV LQ KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQ IRXQG WKDW D VWXGHQW IURP WKH ERWWRP LQFRPH JXDU WLOH KDV OHVV WKDQ RQHWKLUG WKH FKDQFH RI FRPSOHWLQJ D FROn OHJH SURJUDP WKDQ D VWXGHQW LQ WKH WRS LQFRPH TXDUWLOH )UDQNOLQ f

PAGE 35

,Q D VWXG\ WKDW ZDV RULJLQDOO\ SODQQHG IRU HLJKW SUHGRPLQDQWO\ :KLWH XQLYHUVLWLHV ORFDWHG LQ HDFK RI WKH IRXU JHRJUDSKLFDO UHJLRQV RI WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV WKH VWDWLVn WLFV RQ DWWULWLRQ RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV ZDV GLVWXUELQJ 7KH 1DWLRQDO $GYLVRU\ &RPPLWWHH RQ %ODFN +LJKHU (GXFDWLRQ DQG %ODFN &ROOHJHV DQG 8QLYHUVLWLHV f 7KH LQVWLWXWLRQV SDUWLFLSDWLQJ LQ WKLV VWXG\ ZHUH LGHQWLILHG RQO\ E\ JHRn JUDSKLFDO UHJLRQ DQG ZKHWKHU WKH\ ZHUH SXEOLF RU SULYDWH WR SURWHFW WKHLU LGHQWLW\ $V D UHVXOW RI D 6RXWKHUQ SXEOLF LQVWLWXWLRQ GHFOLQLQJ WR SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH VWXG\ RQO\ VHYHQ LQVWLWXWLRQV ZHUH VWXGLHG 7KH UHIXVDO FDPH WRR ODWH WR VHOHFW DQRWKHU 6RXWKHUQ SXEOLF LQVWLWXWLRQ 7KH 1DWLRQDO $GYLVRU\ &RPPLWWHH RQ %ODFN +LJKHU (GXFDn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

PAGE 36

UHVHDUFKHUV UHSRUWHG WKDW WKH XQLYHUVLW\ FRXOG QRW SURYLGH DWWULWLRQ GDWD RQ LWV %ODFN VWXGHQWV 6WXGHQWV DW WKDW LQVWLWXWLRQ EHOLHYHG WKDW WKH DWWULWLRQ UDWH ZDV DW OHDVW WZLFH WKH UHSRUWHG ILJXUH 7KH DWWULWLRQ UDWH IRU %ODFNV DW WKH (DVWHUQ SXEOLF DQG SULYDWH LQVWLWXWLRQV ZDV UHSRUWHG DV QHJOLJLEOH $W WKH SULYDWH LQVWLWXWLRQ SHUFHQW RI WKH %ODFN VWXGHQW SRSXODWLRQ ZDV GRLQJ KRQRUV ZRUN FRPSDUHG ZLWK SHUFHQW RI WKH :KLWH SRSXODWLRQ 7KH 6RXWKHUQ SULn YDWH LQVWLWXWLRQ SDUWLFLSDWLQJ LQ WKLV VWXG\ UHSRUWHG D SHUFHQW DWWULWLRQ UDWH RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV 6WDWLVWLFDO LQIRUPDWLRQ RQ WKH DWWULWLRQ DQG UHWHQWLRQ RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV HQUROOHG LQ KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQDO LQVWLWXn WLRQV PXVW EH PDGH UHDGLO\ DYDLODEOH VR WKDW HGXFDWRUV FDQ LGHQWLI\ SUREOHPV DQG VHHN VWUDWHJLHV IRU UHWHQWLRQ RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV 7KH UHVHDUFKHUV RI WKLV VWXG\ IRXQG WKDW WKH H[n LVWHQFH RI VSHFLDO SURJUDPV RQ WKH FDPSXVHV RI WKH :KLWH LQVWLWXWLRQV VHHPHG WR KDYH OLWWOH LPSDFW RQ %ODFN UHWHQWLRQ DW WKH VHYHQ XQLYHUVLWLHV ,W ZDV UHSRUWHG WKDW DWWULWLRQ ZDV D PDMRU SUREOHP DW WKH (DVWHUQ SXEOLF 0LGZHVWHUQ SXEOLF DQG :HVWHUQ SXEOLF FROOHJHV GHVSLWH WKH VSHFLDO DFDGHPLF DQG ILQDQFLDO DVVLVWDQFH RIIHUHG WR WKH %ODFNV DW WKRVH LQVWLWXn WLRQV 7KH 0LGZHVWHUQ SULYDWH LQVWLWXWLRQ ZKLFK SURYLGHV ILQDQFLDO DVVLVWDQFH DOVR KDG D PDMRU DWWULWLRQ SUREOHP ZLWK LWV %ODFN VWXGHQWV 7KH 6RXWKHUQ SULYDWH LQVWLWXWLRQ

PAGE 37

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n TXDWH ILQDQFLDO DLG DQG DQ DOPRVW WRWDO DEVHQFH RI WUDLQHG %ODFN FRXQVHORUV RQ DOO RI WKH FDPSXVHV LQYHVWLJDWHG 7KH UHVHDUFKHUV RI WKLV VWXG\ FRQFOXGHG WKDW XQLYHUVLW\ SROLFLHV DQG SURJUDPV QHHG VXEVWDQWLDO FKDQJHV LI %ODFN

PAGE 38

VWXGHQWV DUH WR JDLQ LQFUHDVHG DFFHVV WR SUHGRPLQDQWO\ :KLWH LQVWLWXWLRQV DQG HQMR\ RSSRUWXQLWLHV IRU DFDGHPLF VXFFHVV 7KHVH UHVHDUFKHUV UHFRPPHQGHG WKDW VSHFLDO ILQDQFLDO DLG DQG DFDGHPLF DVVLVWDQFH SURJUDPV VKRXOG EH H[SDQGHG DORQJ ZLWK HIIRUWV WR SURYLGH RULHQWDWLRQ DQG FRXQVHOLQJ IDFLOLWLHV DQG PRUH %ODFN UROH PRGHOV IRU VWXGHQWV 7KH UHVHDUFKHUV RI WKLV &RPPLWWHH RQ %ODFN +LJKHU (GXFDWLRQ FRQFOXGHG WKDW RQO\ ZKHQ WKHVH FKDQJHV DUH PDGH ZLOO WKHUH EH D UHDOLVWLF SURVn SHFW RI LQFUHDVHG DGPLVVLRQ UHWHQWLRQ DQG JUDGXDWLRQ LURQ FROOHJH IRU $PHULFDnV %ODFN \RXWK &HQWUD f LQ D VWXG\ RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV DW SUHGRPLn QDQWO\ :KLWH FROOHJHV FRPSDUHG WKH EDFNJURXQG FKDUDFWHUn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n YROYHG LQ RUJDQL]HG FDPSXVEDVHG DFWLYLWLHV ZKLOH WKH %ODFN VWXGHQWV VHOHFWHG DFWLYLWLHV DLPHG DW LPSURYLQJ VRFLHW\ LQ

PAGE 39

JHQHUDO DQG WKRVH DLPHG DW LPSURYLQJ WKH VWDWXV RI %ODFNV LQ SDUWLFXODU &HQWUD f DOVR IRXQG WKDW PRUH %ODFN VWXn GHQWV WKDQ :KLWH VWXGHQWV SODQQHG WR DWWHQG JUDGXDWH RU SURIHVVLRQDO VFKRRO %R\G f LQ D VWXG\ WR UHIXWH WKH P\WK WKDW %ODFN VWXGHQWV DUH RQO\ DEOH WR DWWHQG KLJKO\ VHOHFWLYH FROOHJHV EHFDXVH RI VSHFLDO DGPLVVLRQ SROLFLHV IRXQG WKDW %ODFN VWXn GHQWV QRW RQO\ DUH VXFFHVVIXO DW WKHVH VFKRROV EXW KDYH D VWURQJ LQWHUHVW LQ JUDGXDWH HGXFDWLRQ 7XUQHU f KDV UHSRUWHG WKDW WKH JUHDWHVW IDFWRU DIIHFWLQJ UHWHQWLRQ RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV LV WKH GHJUHH RI LQn VWLWXWLRQDO FRPPLWPHQW WR UHWHQWLRQ HIIRUWV 3UHYLRXV VWXGLHV DQG UHSRUWV :LOOLDPV (W]LRQL DQG 'DYLV f KDYH VWDWHG WKDW LQVWLWXWLRQDO FRPPLWPHQW ZDV D QHFHVVDU\ FRPSRQHQW IRU 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV DQG VLPLODU SURn JUDPV WR EH HIIHFWLYH LQ WKHLU RSHUDWLRQV DQG LQ WKH UHWHQn WLRQ RI VWXGHQWV :HVW f VWXGLHG WKH UHWHQWLRQ RI PLQRULW\ VWXGHQWV LQ D SURJUDP IRU WKH GLVDGYDQWDJHG DW &HQWUDO )ORULGD &RPPXQLW\ &ROOHJH DQG IRXQG WKDW WKHUH ZDV D SHUFHQW UHWHQWLRQ DQG JUDGXDWLRQ UDWH IRU %ODFN VWXGHQWV DW WKDW FRPPXQLW\ FROOHJH :HVW UHSRUWHG WKDW WKH VWXG\ ZDV FRQn GXFWHG RYHU D WKUHH\HDU SHULRG DQG WKDW WKH VWXGHQWV ZHUH WDXJKW E\ DQ RSHQHQGHG QRQSXQLWLYH KXPDQLVWLF LQVWUXFn WLRQDO WHFKQLTXH 7KH SURJUDP DOVR SURYLGHG LQGLYLGXDOL]HG

PAGE 40

FRXQVHOLQJ DQG WXWRULQJ DV ZHOO DV JURXS WXWRULQJ 7KH GRFXPHQWHG HGXFDWLRQDO RXWFRPHV DV UHSRUWHG E\ :HVW D 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 'LUHFWRU DUH UDUHO\ IRXQG LQ WKH OLWHUDWXUH 1DWLRQDO 6WXGLHV 6LQFH WKH ILUVW \HDU RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV RQO\ WZR QDWLRQDO VWXGLHV GHVLJQHG WR HYDOXDWH WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV KDYH EHHQ FRQn WUDFWHG IRU DQG ILQDQFHG E\ WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV 2IILFH RI (GXFDWLRQ 7KH ILUVW QDWLRQDO VWXG\ RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV ZDV FRQGXFWHG MRLQWO\ E\ WKH (GXFDWLRQDO 7HVWLQJ 6HUYLFHV DQG WKH 5HVHDUFK 7ULDQJOH XQGHU D FRQWUDFW IURP WKH 2IILFH RI (GXFDWLRQ 'DYLV %XUNKHLPHU DQG %RUGHUV 3DWWHUVRQ f UHSRUWHG WKDW SURJUDPV ZHUH VWXGLHG WR GHWHUPLQH WKHLU HIIHFWLYHQHVV DV UHIOHFWHG E\ WKH SURJUHVV VDWLVIDFWLRQ JRDOV DQG SHUFHSWLRQV RI WKH SURJUDPVn SDUWLFLSDQWV 7KH ILQGLQJV RI WKH ILUVW QDWLRQDO VWXG\ RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV IDLOHG WR VKRZ HLWKHU QHJDWLYH RU SRVLWLYH HIIHFWV RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV IRU GLVDGYDQWDJHG VWXGHQWV 'DYLV %XUNKHLPHU DQG %RUGHUV3DWWHUVRQ f H[SODLQHG WKDW WKHLU ILQGLQJV ZHUH LQFRQFOXVLYH EHFDXVH LQGLYLGXDO SURJUDPV GLIIHUHG LQ D YDULHW\ RI ZD\V 'LIIHUn HQFHV LQ HWKQLF JURXSV YDULDWLRQV ZLWKLQ WKH JURXSV SUHYDLOLQJ FOLPDWHV RI PRUDOH DW LQVWLWXWLRQV SURJUDPV

PAGE 41

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f D 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD UHVHDUFKHU ZKR GHYHORSHG JXLGHOLQHV IRU GLVDGYDQWDJHG SURJUDPV DOVR VXJJHVWV WKDW PRUH UHVHDUFK LV QHHGHG WR LQYHVWLJDWH WKH HIIHFWV RI SURJUDPV IRU GLVDGYDQWDJHG FROOHJH VWXGHQWV 7KH VHFRQG QDWLRQDO VWXG\ RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV ZDV FRQGXFWHG E\ WKH 6\VWHP 'HYHORSPHQW &RUSRUDWLRQ XQGHU D

PAGE 42

FRQWUDFW ZLWK WKH 8 6 'HSDUWPHQW RI (GXFDWLRQ GXULQJ WKH DFDGHPLF VFKRRO \HDU &RXOVRQ %UDGIRUG DQG .D\H f UHSRUWHG VRPH RI WKH PRVW QRWDEOH ILQGLQJV 7KHUH LV VRPH HYLGHQFH RI EHQHILFLDO SURJUDP LPSDFW RQ SDUWLFLSDWLQJ VWXGHQWV 7KLV HYLGHQFH LV PDQLn IHVWHG LQ WKH IRUP RI LQFUHDVHG UHWHQWLRQ UDWHV DQG WKH VWXGHQWVn VXFFHVVIXO DFDGHPLF SURJUHVV 6WXGHQWV UHFHLYLQJ D IXOO UDQJH RI SURJUDP VHUn YLFHV VXFK DV FRXQVHOLQJ DFDGHPLF DGYLVHPHQW DQG VSHFLDO FRXUVHV DUH PRUH OLNHO\ WR SHUVLVW WKURXJK WKHLU IUHVKPDQ \HDU WKDQ DUH VWXGHQWV UHFHLYLQJ IHZ RU QR VHUYLFHV IURP WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP 6WXGHQWV UHFHLYLQJ PRUH FRXQVHOLQJ DFDGHPLF DGn YLVHPHQW DQG RWKHU VXSSRUW VHUYLFHV DUH OLNHO\ WR DWWHPSW DQG WR FRPSOHWH PRUH FRXUVH XQLWV 6WXGHQWV UHFHLYLQJ D IXOO UDQJH RI DFDGHPLF VXSSRUW VHUYLFHV KDYH ORZHU JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV WKDQ VWXn GHQWV UHFHLYLQJ IHZHU VHUYLFHV 7KLV VLWXDWLRQ PLJKW EH GXH WR D VHOHFWLRQ HIIHFW UDWKHU WKDQ D QHJDWLYH HIIHFW RI VHUYLFHV )RU H[DPSOH SURMHFWV WHQG WR FRQFHQWUDWH DFDGHPLF VXSSRUW VHUYLFHV RQ VWXGHQWV ZLWK SRRUHU HQWU\ VNLOOV DQG PRUH REYLRXV OHDUQLQJ GHILFLHQFLHV ,Q LQVWLWXWLRQV ZKHUH SHUVRQQHO H[SUHVVHG JUHDWHU DFFHSWDQFH DQG UHJDUG IRU WKH VWXGHQWV LW ZDV PRUH OLNHO\ WKDW VWXGHQWV ZRXOG DWWHPSW DQG FRPSOHWH PRUH FRXUVHV 7KH UHVHDUFKHUV ZHUH QRW VXUH ZKHn WKHU WKH LQVWLWXWLRQDO SHUVRQQHO ZHUH DQ HIIHFW RU D FDXVH RI WKH LQFUHDVHG QXPEHU RI FRXUVHV DWWHPSWHG DQG FRPSOHWHG E\ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV 6WXGHQWV UHFHLYLQJ PRUH ILQDQFLDO DLG ZHUH PRUH OLNHO\ WR SHUVLVW WKURXJK WKHLU IUHVKPDQ \HDU DQG WHQGHG WR DWWHPSW DQG FRPSOHWH PRUH FRXUVH XQLWV 7KH\ DOVR REWDLQHG KLJKHU JUDGHV 3S WR f

PAGE 43

7KLV VWXG\ IRFXVHG RQ D QDWLRQDOO\ UHSUHVHQWDWLYH VDPSOH RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URMHFWV DW FROOHJHV DQG XQLn YHUVLWLHV ZLWKLQ WKH FRQWLJXRXV VWDWHV 9RFDWLRQDO DQG WHFKQLFDO VFKRROV ZLWK 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV RU 3URMHFWV GHVLJQHG H[FOXVLYHO\ IRU WKH SK\VLFDOO\ KDQGLFDSSHG ZHUH H[n FOXGHG IURP WKH VWXG\ 7ZR KXQGUHG VWXGHQWV IURP HDFK RI WKH SURMHFWV FRPSULVHG WKH VDPSOH \LHOGLQJ D WRWDO RI VWXGHQW SDUWLFLSDQWV 7ZR VHWV RI VWXGHQW RXWFRPH PHDVXUHV ZHUH H[DPLQHG WR GHWHUPLQH WKH HIIHFWV RI VWXGHQW SDUWLFLSDWLRQ RQ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 2QH VHW ZDV WDNHQ IURP WUDQVFULSWV LQFOXGLQJ WKH VWXGHQWVn SHUVLVWHQFH ZKHWKHU WKH VWXGHQWV ZHUH VWLOO HQn UROOHG DW WKH HQG RI WKH VFKRRO \HDUVf WKH VWXn GHQWVn LQWHQVLW\ RI HIIRUW KRZ PDQ\ FRXUVHV WKH VWXGHQWV DWWHPSWHGf WKH VWXGHQWVn SURJUHVV KRZ PDQ\ FRXUVHV WKH VWXGHQWV FRPSOHWHGf DQG WKH VWXGHQWVn SHUIRUPDQFH JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHf 7KH VHFRQG VHW RI RXWFRPH PHDVXUHV ZDV WDNHQ IURP VWXn GHQW VXUYH\V ZKLFK LQFOXGHG PHDVXUHV RI FKDQJHV LQ WKH VWXGHQWVn HGXFDWLRQDO DVSLUDWLRQV DQG H[SHFWDWLRQV FKDQJHV LQ WKH VWXGHQWVn MRE H[SHFWDWLRQV FKDQJHV LQ WKH VWXGHQWVn VHOISHUFHLYHG VNLOO OHYHOV DQG FKDQJHV LQ WKH VWXGHQWVn VHOISHUFHLYHG HGXFDWLRQUHODWHG SUREOHPV

PAGE 44

7KH RXWFRPH PHDVXUHV LQ WKH VHFRQG VHW GLG QRW UHYHDO DQ\ FRQVLVWHQW RU LQWHUSUHWLYH UHODWLRQVKLSV ZLWK SDUWLFLSDn WLRQ GDWD RU SURJUDP FKDUDFWHULVWLFV VR RQO\ WUDQVFULSW GHULYHG RXWFRPH PHDVXUHV ZHUH SUHVHQWHG 7KH UHODWLRQVKLS DPRQJ SHUVLVWHQFH LQWHQVLW\ SURJUHVV DQG WKH YDULRXV VXSn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n FDWHG WKDW WKLV ZDV QRW D QHJDWLYH ILQGLQJ EXW LW PLJKW VXJJHVW WKDW WKH VWXGHQWV UHFHLYLQJ IXOO VHUYLFHV PLJKW KDYH KDG D JUHDWHU QHHG IRU WKRVH VHUYLFHV 5HVHDUFK RI WKH SURJUDPV DQG VWUDWHJLHV WKDW IDFLOLWDWH WKH VXFFHVV RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV LQ KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQDO LQVWLWXn WLRQV FRQWLQXHV WRGD\ MXVW DV LW GLG LQ WKH VL[WLHV DQG VHYHQWLHV 9HULILFDWLRQ RI WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV PD\ QRW UHVW ZLWK D VLQJOH VWXG\ EXW ZLWK D FRPELQDWLRQ RI VWXGLHV 1DWLRQDO VWXGLHV VXFK DV WKRVH SUHVHQWHG KHUH LQ FRQMXQFWLRQ ZLWK ORFDO VWXGLHV PLJKW

PAGE 45

SURYLGH PRUH HYLGHQFH DQG FOXHV IRU LPSOHPHQWDWLRQ RI HIIHFn WLYH SURJUDPV DQG VWUDWHJLHV IRU IDFLOLWDWLQJ WKH VXFFHVVIXO OHDUQLQJ RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV )RUG )RXQGDWLRQ 6WXG\ %R\G f FRQGXFWHG D QDWLRQDO VWXG\ WR DQVZHU TXHVn WLRQV RQ VXFK WRSLFV DV WKH UHFUXLWPHQW DQG DGPLVVLRQ RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV UHODWLRQVKLSV EHWZHHQ %ODFN DQG :KLWH VWXn GHQWV DQG WKH UHVSRQVLYHQHVV RI LQVWLWXWLRQV WR WKH QHHGV RI %ODFNV 7KLV QDWLRQZLGH VXUYH\ LQYROYLQJ (ODFN VWXGHQWV DQG IDFXOW\ DQD DGPLQLVWUDWRUV ZDV FRQGXFWHG DW LQVWLn WXWLRQV GXULQJ WKH VFKRRO \HDU ,W VKRZHG WKDW ZKLOH LQVWLWXWLRQV SURYLGHG IRU ORZHU HQWUDQFH UHTXLUHPHQWV DQG ORZHU SHUIRUPDQFH VWDQGDUGV IRU %ODFN VWXGHQWV IHZ RIIHUHG SURJUDPV WKDW FRXOG KHOS %ODFN VWXGHQWV DGMXVW VRFLDOO\ DQG DFDGHPLFDOO\ WR WKH LQVWLWXWLRQ $V D UHVXOW RI WKLV QDWLRQDO VXUYH\ RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV HQUROOHG LQ SUHGRPLQDQWO\ :KLWH LQVWLWXWLRQV %R\G f UHSRUWHG WKDW %ODFN VWXGHQWV FRQVLGHUHG VRPH RI WKH DFDGHPLF SROLFLHV IRU IDFLOLWDWLQJ DFFHVV RI %ODFNV WR LQVWLWXWLRQV RI KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQ WR KDYH VHULRXV QHJDWLYH HIIHFWV %R\G f IRXQG WKDW VLJQLILFDQW EXW LQVXIILFLHQW SURJUHVV KDG EHHQ PDGH WRZDUG HTXDO RSSRUWXQLWLHV LQ WKH LQVWLWXWLRQV VWXGLHG $OWKRXJK WKHUH ZHUH FROOHJHV ZKHUH UDFH UHODWLRQV ZHUH H[WUHPHO\ VWUDLQHG %F\G f IRXQG WKDW VHJUHJDWLRQ GLG QRW SHUVLVW DV DQ RIILFLDO VDQFWLRQ RI

PAGE 46

WKH LQVWLWXWLRQ +H IRXQG WKDW VWXGHQWV DQG VWDII UHIOHFWHG WKH VRFLDO FRQGLWLRQV LQ WKH FRXQWU\ DQG GLYLGHG DORQJ UDFLDO OLQHV EHFDXVH WKH\ ZHUH PRUH FRPIRUWDEOH ZLWK WKLV GLYLVLRQ +RZHYHU %R\G f GLG UHSRUW WKDW PDQ\ RI WKH SUHGRPLQDQWO\ :KLWH LQVWLWXWLRQV ZHUH XQSUHSDUHG DQG LQ PDQ\ FDVHV XQZLOOLQJ WR PHHW WKH QHHGV RI WKHLU %ODFN VWXGHQWV %R\GnV GDWD LQGLFDWHG WKDW VRPH FROOHJHV KDG QRW PDGH LW FOHDU WKDW WKH\ ZHUH ZLOOLQJ WR ZRUN WR RYHUFRPH JDSV LQ WKHLU SUHSDUDWLRQ IRU KHOSLQJ %ODFNV %R\G UHSRUWHG WKDW %ODFN VWXGHQWV ZHUH VWLOO DEOH WR REWDLQ WKHLU HGXFDWLRQ DQG GHJUHH HYHQ WKRXJK H[SHULHQFLQJ GLVFULPLQDWLRQ EHLQJ VWHUHRW\SHG DV VSHFLDO DGPLW VWXGHQWV EHLQJ DGYLVHG E\ LQVWLWXWLRQDO RIILFLDOV QRW WR WU\ FHUWDLQ DFDGHPLF GLVFLSOLQHV DQG VRPHWLPHV EHLQJ QHJOHFWHG E\ IDFn XOW\ DQG VWDII +H VWDWHG WKDW PRVW RI WKH %ODFN VWXGHQWV ZDQWHG WR JR RQ WR JUDGXDWH VFKRRO HYHQ WKRXJK LW ZDV OLNHO\ WKDW WKH\ ZRXOG KDYH WKH VDPH NLQG RI REVWDFOH FRXUVH WR UXQ WKHUH 0RVW RI WKH VWXGHQWV ZKR SDUWLFLSDWHG LQ %R\GnV f VWXG\ ZHUH ZLWKLQ WKH DFFHSWHG DGPLVVLRQV FULWHULD IRU WKH FROOHJHV ZKHUH WKH\ ZHUH HQUROOHG 7KH RYHUDOO SDWWHUQ RI VXFFHVV ZDV DWWULEXWHG WR EHLQJ TXDOLILHG DQG WKH IDFW WKDW PRVW RI WKH %ODFN VWXGHQWV WRRN HGXFDWLRQ VHULRXVO\ HQRXJK WR RYHUFRPH WKH EDUULHUV WR WKHLU HGXFDWLRQDO SXUVXLWV %R\GnV f GDWD GLVPLVVHG WKH GHPHDQLQJ DQG GDPDJLQJ

PAGE 47

UKHWRULF WKDW %ODFN VWXGHQWV DUH JHWWLQJ D IUHH ULGH WKURXJK FROOHJH +LV GDWD DERXW ORDQV DQG MREV VKRZHG WKDW LI %ODFN VWXGHQWV ZHUH JHWWLQJ D IUHH ULGH LW ZDV SURYLGHG E\ WKHLU RZQ IDPLOLHV ,QIRUPDWLRQ IURP WKLV VWXG\ FRQFHUQLQJ VWXGHQWVn VDWLVn IDFWLRQ ZLWK WKHLU RYHUDOO FROOHJH H[SHULHQFHV VXJJHVWV WKDW FROOHJHV VKRXOG HPSKDVL]H PDWFKLQJ WKH SUHSDUDWLRQ DELOLW\ LQWHUHVWV DQG VW\OH RI HDFK SURVSHFWLYH %ODFN VWXGHQW ZLWK WKH DFDGHPLF UHSXWDWLRQ UHTXLUHPHQWV DQG VW\OH RI WKH FROOHJH %R\GnV SUHVHQWDWLRQ RI KLV GDWD ZDV VLPSOH DQG GLUHFW +H DYRLGHG XVLQJ FRPSOH[ VWDWLVWLFDO WHFKQLTXHV ZKLFK KH IHHOV WHQG WR EH XQGHUVWRRG RQO\ E\ WKRVH ZLWK VWDWLVWLFDO EDFNJURXQGV +RZHYHU KH GLG SUHVHQW PXFK RI WKH UDZ GDWD LQ WKH DSSHQGL[ RI KLV VWXG\ IRU WKRVH ZKR ZDQWHG WR GUDZ WKHLU RZQ FRQFOXVLRQV $QDO\VLV RI WKHVH GDWD UHYHDOV VRPH LQVLJKWV DQG UHFRPPHQGDWLRQV IRU XVH DV UHIHUHQFH SRLQWV LU UHPRYLQJ EDUULHUV ZKLFK %ODFN VWXGHQWV IDFH LQ SUHGRPLQDQWO\ :KLWH LQVWLWXWLRQV 7KH UHFRPPHQGDWLRQV RIIHUHG E\ (R\G DUH DV IROORZV &ROOHJHV VKRXOG DWWHPSW WR EH PRUH UHVSRQVLYH WR WKH QHHGV RI %ODFNV )LQDQFLDO DLG VKRXOG EH PDLQWDLQHG DW FXUUHQW OHYHOV RU LQFUHDVHG &RQWLQXHG ILQDQFLDO DLG VKRXOG EH DVVXUHG

PAGE 48

7KH HPSKDVLV RQ ORDQV LQ WKH DLG SDFNDJHV VKRXOG EH GHFUHDVHG IRU WKRVH ZKRVH IDPLO\ LQFRPH LV OHVV WKDQ 7KH QXPEHU RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV LQ SUHGRPLQDQWO\ :KLWH LQVWLWXWLRQV VKRXOG FRQWLQXH WR LQFUHDVH 7KH QXPEHU RI %ODFN VWDII PHPEHUV LQ SUHGRPLQDQWO\ :KLWH LQVWLWXWLRQV VKRXOG LQFUHDVH GUDPDWLFDOO\ &ROOHJHV VKRXOG JXDUG DJDLQVW LQFUHDVHG KRVWLOLW\ WRZDUG %ODFNV DV WKHLU QXPEHUV LQFUHDVH &ROOHJHV VKRXOG UHFUXLW %ODFN VWXGHQWV RI GLYHUVH EDFNJURXQGV DQG LQWHUHVWV UDWKHU WKDQ FRQFHQWUDWn LQJ WKHLU DWWHQWLRQ RQ WKRVH ZLWK PXOWLSOH HGXFDn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
PAGE 49

%ODFN VWXGHQWV VKRXOG VWUXJJOH SULPDULO\ IRU FKDQJHV ZKLFK ZLOO EH PRVW PHDQLQJIXO WR WKHLU HGXFDWLRQDO H[SHULHQFH HYHQ LI FROOHJHV UHVLVW WKHVH FKDQJHV VWURQJO\ ZKLOH PDNLQJ RWKHU OHVV LPSRUWDQW FKDQJHV 3S f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f UHSRUWHG WKDW RXW RI WKH %ODFN VWXGHQWV DGPLWWHG GXULQJ WKH VXPPHU RI DOO EXW ZHUH VWLOO HQUROOHG LQ DQG WKDW VHYHQ RI WKH GURSRXWV KDG WUDQVn IHUUHG WR RWKHU FROOHJHV 9DQ *HOGHU f DOVR UHSRUWHG RQ WKLV JURXS RI VWXGHQWV DQG IRXQG WKDW SHUFHQW RI WKHP

PAGE 50

ZHUH SURJUHVVLQJ VDWLVIDFWRULO\ DIWHU WKUHH WHUPV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 7KLV H[SHULPHQWDO SURJUDP WKDW ZDV VWDWH IXQGHG DQG FDOOHG WKH &ULWLFDO )UHVKPDQ
PAGE 51

REMHFWLYH RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP GXULQJ WKLV \HDU VSDQ KDV EHHQ WR SURYLGH WKH VWXGHQWV ZLWK VXSSRUWLYH VHUYLFHV WR IDFLOLWDWH WKHLU UHWHQWLRQ DQG VXEVHTXHQW JUDGXn DWLRQ IURP WKLV LQVWLWXWLRQ 3URJUDP (OHPHQWV 7KH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV SURMHFW DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD KDV EHHQ SURYLGLQJ VHUYLFHV FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK WKH JRDOV DQG REMHFWLYHV RI WKH 8 6 'HSDUWPHQW RI (GXFDWLRQ 6SHFLILFDOO\ WKH VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLWLHV SURYLGHG DUH 6HOHFWLQJ HOLJLEOH SDUWLFLSDQWV IURP D SRRO FRQn VLVWLQJ RI VWXGHQWV DGPLWWHG WR WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ XQGHU WKH %RDUG RI 5HJHQWV SHUFHQW VSHFLDO DGn PLVVLRQ SROLF\ ZKR KDYH SDUWLFLSDWHG LQ RWKHU IHGn HUDO SURJUDPV VXFK DV 8SZDUG %RXQG RU 7DOHQW 6HDUFK RU ZKR PD\ ODFN DGHTXDWH VHFRQGDU\ VFKRRO SUHSDUDWLRQ 3URYLGLQJ D QHHGV DVVHVVPHQW RI HDFK VHOHFWHG SDUn WLFLSDQW WR GHWHUPLQH WKH DFDGHPLF RU RWKHU HGXFDn WLRQDO GHILFLHQFLHV ZKLFK QHHG SDUWLFXODU DWWHQWLRQ WR HQDEOH WKH SDUWLFLSDQW WR JUDGXDWH IURP WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ 3URYLGLQJ SHUVRQDO FDUHHU DQG DFDGHPLF JXLGDQFH DQG FRXQVHOLQJ LQ WKRVH DUHDV DIIHFWLQJ VWXGHQW SHUIRUPDQFH $UUDQJLQJ IRU UHPHGLDO DQG RWKHU VHUYLFHV VXFK DV VSHFLDO FODVVHV WXWRULQJ DQG HGXFDWLRQDO DQG FXOn WXUDO DFWLYLWLHV ZKLFK HQDEOH WKH SDUWLFLSDQW WR FRPSOHWH ZLWK VXIILFLHQW DFDGHPLF DQG SHUVRQDO VNLOOV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ \HW ZLWKRXW FUHDWLQJ D ORQJUDQJH GHSHQGHQF\ RQ WKH SURMHFW 'HYHORSLQJ DQG HQFRXUDJLQJ WKH XVH RI VSHFLDO FXUn ULFXODU DQG LQVWUXFWLRQDO PHWKRGV ZKLFK HQDEOH SDUn WLFLSDQWV WR FRPSOHWH UHTXLUHG FRXUVH ZRUN LQ D UHDVRQDEOH SHULRG RI WLPH

PAGE 52

'RFXPHQWLQJ SDUWLFLSDQW SHUIRUPDQFH DQG SURJUHVV ZKLOH HQUROOHG LQ WKH SURMHFW DQG $FWLQJ DV D UHIHUUDO DJHQW IRU WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV WR HQDEOH WKHP WR GHDO FRUUHFWO\ DQG HIILFLHQWO\ ZLWK VLWXDWLRQV LQYROYLQJ ILQDQFLDO DLG KRXVLQJ DFDn GHPLF PDWWHUV DQG HGXFDWLRQDO DQG FDUHHU SODQQLQJ 3HHU &RXQVHOLQJ $ UHYLHZ RI WKH REMHFWLYHV RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD VKRZV WKDW WKH SURJUDP LV KHDYLO\ RULHQWHG WRZDUG SURYLGLQJ FRXQVHOLQJ VHUYLFHV 7KLV VLWXDWLRQ PD\ UHVXOW IURP WKH IDFW WKDW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ GRHV QRW SURYLGH D VWUXFWXUHG DQG FRRUGLQDWHG DSSURDFK WR WHDFKLQJ UHPHGLDO FRXUVHV +RZHYHU UHPHGLDO HGXFDWLRQ LV EHFRPLQJ D WRSLF RI PDMRU FRQFHUQ DV PRUH DQG PRUH VWXGHQWV DUH OHDYLQJ KLJK VFKRRO ZLWKRXW DGHTXDWH UHDGLQJ ZULWLQJ DQG PDWKHPDWLFV VNLOOV UHTXLVLWH IRU VXFFHVVIXO DFDGHPLF VXUYLYDO LQ FROOHJH 7KURXJK WKH XVH RI SHHU FRXQVHORUV WKH SURJUDP KDV SURYLGHG VXEVWDQWLDO FRXQVHOLQJ DQG UHIHUUDO VHUYLFHV IRU LWV VWXGHQWV 7KHVH VWXGHQWV KDYH EHHQ DQ HVVHQWLDO FRPSRQn HQW RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV FRXQVHOLQJ SURJUDP VLQFH LWV EHJLQQLQJ 7KHVH SHHU FRXQVHORUV KDYH EHHQ SUHGRPLQDQWO\ XQGHUJUDGXDWH VWXGHQWV ZKR KDYH KDG QR IRUPDO WUDLQLQJ SULRU WR EHLQJ KLUHG 7KH SURIHVVLRQDO VWDII SURYLGHV IRUPDO DQG RQJRLQJ WUDLQLQJ IRU WKHP :HHNO\ PHHWLQJV LQ WKH IRUP RI VWDII GHYHORSPHQW VHVVLRQV DUH FRQGXFWHG E\ WKH FRXQVHOLQJ FRRUGLQDWRU RU WKH GLUHFWRU IRU SHHU FRXQVHORU WUDLQLQJ

PAGE 53

7KH IROORZLQJ WRSLFV DUH FRYHUHG LQ WUDLQLQJ DQG GHYHOn RSPHQW VHVVLRQV f FRXQVHOLQJ WKHRULHV f FRPPXQLFDWLRQ VNLOOV DQG WUDLQLQJ f KXPDQ UHODWLRQV WUDLQLQJ f YDOXHV FODULILFDWLRQ f SUREOHPVROYLQJ DQG IHHGEDFN H[FKDQJH DQG f ZULWLQJ VNLOOV IRU WKH PDLQWHQDQFH RI ZHHNO\ FRXQVHOLQJ ORJV 3HHU FRXQVHORUV IXQFWLRQ DV H[WHQVLRQV RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV FRXQVHOLQJ FRPSRQHQW 7KH\ SURYLGH WKH IXOOWLPH VWDII IHHGEDFN IURP WKH VWXGHQWV ZKR DUH ORFDWHG DOO RYHU WKH FDPSXV DQG WKH *DLQHVYLOOH FRPPXQLW\ 3HHU FRXQVHORUV DUH UHTXLUHG WR PDNH ZHHNO\ FRQWDFW ZLWK WKHLU DVVLJQHG FDVH ORDG RI VWXGHQWV DQG WR UHSRUW WKHLU ILQGLQJV WR WKH IXOOn WLPH VWDII FRXQVHORU :LWK SHHU FRXQVHORUV VHHNLQJ RXW WKHLU FOLHQWV WR DVFHUWDLQ WKHLU QHHGV WKH IXOOWLPH FRXQVHORU FDQ GHWHUPLQH SULRULWLHV IRU LQWHUYHQLQJ LQ VLWXn DWLRQV WRR FRPSOH[ IRU SHHU FRXQVHORUV 5HVHDUFK E\ =XQNHU DQG %URZQ f IRXQG WKDW SHHU FRXQVHORUV FDQ EH DV HIIHFWLYH DV SURIHVVLRQDO FRXQVHORUV &DUNKXII f DQG 'XUODN f KDYH GHPRQVWUDWHG LQ WKHLU UHVHDUFK WKDW SHHU FRXQVHORUV FDQ VXFFHVVIXOO\ IXQFWLRQ DV SURYLGHUV RI FRXQVHOLQJ VHUYLFHV 6XVVPDQ f IRXQG LQ KLV UHVHDUFK RI SHHU FRXQVHORUV WKDW WKH\ DUH HIIHFWLYH DW LPSURYLQJ JUDGHV RI VWXGHQWV $V HIIHFWLYH DQG VXFFHVVIXO SURYLGHUV RI FRXQVHOLQJ VHUYLFHV SHHU FRXQVHORUV PLJKW EH DQ LQWHUYHQLQJ YDULDEOH

PAGE 54

WKDW LV FRQWULEXWLQJ WR WKH VXFFHVV RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV LQ KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQDO LQVWLWXWLRQV 7KH ODFN RI LQIRUPDWLRQ DERXW WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI SHHU FRXQVHORUV ZLWK WKH %ODFN VWXGHQW SRSXODWLRQ VXJJHVWV WKH QHHG IRU UHVHDUFK LQ WKLV DUHD 6XPPDU\ 7KH &LYLO 5LJKWV PRYHPHQW RI WKH nV FDOOHG DWWHQn WLRQ WR WKH QHHG IRU LPSURYHPHQW RI HGXFDWLRQDO RSSRUWXQLn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n PHQWDO LQIOXHQFHV 7KLV ODWWHU YLHZ KDV EHHQ XVHG UHSHDWn HGO\ WR VXSSRUW WKH LPSOHPHQWDWLRQ RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV LQ KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQ 7KH FRQWURYHUV\ RYHU KHUHGLW\ YHUVXV HQYLURQPHQW DV D VLJQLILFDQW IDFWRU ZKLFK FRQWULEXWHV WR WKH LQWHOOLJHQFH DQG DFDGHPLF DFKLHYHPHQW RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV KDV EHHQ VKLIWHG LQ

PAGE 55

UHFHQW \HDUV IURP ZKHWKHU RU QRW WKH\ FDQ PDNH LW WR KRZ FDQ WKH\ EH KHOSHG &URVV f +RZ DQ LQGLYLGXDO FDQ EH KHOSHG LV GHSHQGHQW XSRQ KRZ WKDW LQGLYLGXDO OHDUQV $SSOLn FDWLRQ RI WKH OHDUQLQJ WKHRULHV SUHVHQWHG LQ WKLV FKDSWHU PLJKW IDFLOLWDWH %ODFN VWXGHQWV LQ WKHLU OHDUQLQJ DQG DOVR KHOS WR LPSURYH WKHLU DFDGHPLF SHUIRUPDQFH UHWHQWLRQ DQG JUDGXDWLRQ UDWHV $V UHSRUWHG E\ PRVW UHVHDUFKHUV LQGLn YLGXDO GLIIHUHQFHV DQG GHYHORSPHQWDO GLIIHUHQFHV PXVW EH WDNHQ LQWR DFFRXQW LQ DVVLVWLQJ ZLWK WKH OHDUQLQJ SURFHVV RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV 5HVHDUFK FRQFHUQLQJ VSHFLDO SURJUDPV KDV SURYLGHG VRPH XVHIXO JXLGHOLQHV IRU SURJUDP DGPLQLVWUDWRUV )RU H[DPSOH :LOOLDPVn f UHFRPPHQGDWLRQV KDYH YDOXH DV ERWK JHQHUDO LQVWLWXWLRQDO JXLGHOLQHV DQG PRUH VSHFLILF DFDGHPLF SURJUDP JXLGHOLQHV :HVWnV f UHSRUW RQ UHWHQWLRQ UDWHV RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV LV DOVR XVHIXO WR DGPLQLVWUDWRUV EXW PRUH IRU GRFXPHQWLQJ SUREOHPV WKDQ IRU UHVROYLQJ WKHP 6RPH GLUHFWLRQV IRU SURJUDP FKDQJHV DUH IRXQG LQ WKH QDWLRQn DO VWXGLHV ZKLFK KDYH EHHQ FRQGXFWHG WR HYDOXDWH WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV %RWK WKH QDWLRQDO DQG ORFDO HYDOXDWLRQ VWXGLHV UHYLHZHG LQ WKLV FKDSWHU JDYH VRPH JHQHUDO UHFRPPHQGDWLRQV IRU LPn SURYLQJ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV VXFK DV ,QVWLWXWLRQV VKRXOG LQVXUH WKH FRQWLQXRXV GHYHORSn PHQW RI VRXQG DQG HIIHFWLYH VSHFLDO RU FRPSHQVDWRU\ SURJUDPV

PAGE 56

,QVWLWXWLRQV VKRXOG DFFRPPRGDWH LQGLYLGXDO GLIIHUn HQFHV DQG SHUPLW VWXGHQWV WR OHDUQ DQG SURFHHG DW WKHLU RZQ SDFH ,QVWLWXWLRQV VKRXOG FRQGXFW PRUH UHVHDUFK WR GHWHUn PLQH WKH HIIHFWV RI WKH SURJUDPV 7KH QDWLRQDO VWXG\ E\ &RXOVRQ %UDGIRUG DQG .D\H f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f &DUNKXII f DQG 'XUODN f KDYH IRXQG WKDW SHHU FRXQVHORUV DUH HIIHFWLYH DQG VXFFHVVIXO SURYLGHUV RI FRXQn VHOLQJ VHUYLFHV 7KH OLWHUDWXUH VXJJHVWV WKDW WKHUH LV D UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DQG WKH VXSSRUW UHQGHUHG WR LW E\ WKH KRVW LQVWLWXWLRQ (YHQ WKRXJK FRQWURYHUV\ H[LVWV DERXW WKH EHQHILWV RI WKHVH SURJUDPV DQG WKHLU DIIHFW RQ %ODFN VWXGHQWV LW GRHV DSSHDU

PAGE 57

WKDW WKH SURJUDPV DUH KHOSLQJ WKH VWXGHQWV H[SHULHQFH DFD GHPLF VXFFHVV +RZHYHU PRUH UHVHDUFK LV QHHGHG WR GHWHU PLQH WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV

PAGE 58

&+$37(5 ,,, 0(7+2'2/2*< 7KH SXUSRVH RI WKLV VWXG\ ZDV WR GHWHUPLQH WKH HIIHFn WLYHQHVV RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD LQ WKH UHWHQWLRQ DQG JUDGXDWLRQ RI LWV SDUWLFLn SDQWV 7KH IOH[LELOLW\ RI WKLV VWXG\nV UHVHDUFK GHVLJQ SURYLGHG WKH UHVHDUFKHU ZLWK DQ HFRQRPLFDO DQG HIILFLHQW PHWKRG RI FROOHFWLQJ DQG DQDO\]LQJ WKH GDWD IRU WKLV VWXG\ &KDSWHU ,,, LQFOXGHV D GLVFXVVLRQ RI WKH UHVHDUFK GHVLJQ WKH UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQV WKH FKDUDFWHULVWLFV RI WKH SRSXODn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

PAGE 59

3URJUDP SDUWLFLSDWLRQ DFDGHPLF VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYn LWLHV LQ ZKLFK WKH VWXGHQWV SDUWLFLSDWHG 3HUIRUPDQFH JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHf 3HUVLVWHQFH UHWHQWLRQ UDWHVf 3URJUHVV JUDGXDWLRQ UDWHVf DQG 3URPLQHQFH HFRQRPLF VWDWXV RI SDUWLFLSDQWVf 9DQ 'DOHQ f LQ H[SODLQLQJ WKH FKDUDFWHULVWLFV RI FRUUHODWLRQDO UHVHDUFK VWDWHV WKDW EHFDXVH RI WKH FRPSOH[n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f %HVW f DOVR H[SUHVVHG VLPLODU YLHZV UHn JDUGLQJ FRUUHODWLRQDO UHVHDUFK

PAGE 60

5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQV 7KH VL[ UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQV IRU WKLV VWXG\ ZHUH +RZ HIIHFWLYH DUH WKH DFDGHPLF VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLn WLHV RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DV SHUFHLYHG E\ %ODFN VWXGHQWV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD" :KDW DUH WKH JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD" :KDW DUH WKH UHWHQWLRQ UDWHV RI WKH %ODFN VWXGHQWV LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD" :KDW DUH WKH JUDGXDWLRQ UDWHV RI WKH %ODFN VWXGHQWV LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD" :KDW LQIOXHQFH GRHV WKH SHHU FRXQVHORU FRPSRQHQW KDYH RQ WKH DFDGHPLF SHUIRUPDQFH RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD" :KDW LV WKH HFRQRPLF VWDWXV RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV ZKR SDUWLFLSDWHG LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD" 3RSXODWLRQ 7KH SRSXODWLRQ IRU WKLV VWXG\ ZDV FRPSULVHG RI LQGLn YLGXDOV IURP D YDULHW\ RI EDFNJURXQGV ZLWK WKH PDMRULW\ FRPLQJ IURP GHSULYHG HFRQRPLF DQG HGXFDWLRQDO EDFNJURXQGV 6RPH RI WKH LQGLYLGXDOV FRPSULVLQJ WKH SRSXODWLRQ RI LQWHUn HVW DUH IURP OLPLWHG(QJOLVKVSHDNLQJ IDPLOLHV VXFK DV 9LHWQDPHVH &KLQHVH +DLWLDQV DQG /DWLQ $PHULFDQV +RZHYHU

PAGE 61

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n VLRQ 7KH\ ZHUH DOO ILUVWWLPHLQFROOHJH VWXGHQWV ZKR ZHUH UHTXLUHG WR HQWHU WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD GXULQJ WKH VXPPHU VHVVLRQ DQG WR SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP $OO PHPEHUV RI WKH SRSXODWLRQ ZHUH DGPLWWHG LQWR WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD ZLWK DW OHDVW D & DYHUDJH LQ FRUH KLJK VFKRRO FRXUVHV 6HOHFWLRQ RI 6XEMHFWV 6XEMHFWV IRU WKH VDPSOH ZHUH FKRVHQ IURP DPRQJ DSSUR[Ln PDWHO\ VWXGHQWV ZKR ZHUH HQUROOHG LQ WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGDnV 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP GXULQJ WKH \HDUV DQG 7KH QDPHV DQG DGn GUHVVHV RI WKH VXEMHFWV ZHUH REWDLQHG IURP WKH ILOHV LQ WKH

PAGE 62

6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 2IILFH 8VLQJ WKH VWUDWLILHG UDQGRP VDPn SOLQJ WHFKQLTXH LQ FRQMXQFWLRQ ZLWK D WDEOH RI UDQGRP QXPn EHUV WKH UHVHDUFKHU VHOHFWHG WZR JURXSV RI VWXGHQWV VWXGHQWV DQG VWXGHQWV UHVSHFWLYHO\f WRWDOOLQJ VXEMHFWV IRU WKH VDPSOH 7KH VWUDWLILHG UDQGRP VHOHFWLRQ SURFHVV ZDV XVHG WR VHOHFW WKH VWXGHQWV ZKR UHSUHVHQWHG HDFK RI WKH ILYH\HDU SHULRGV RI WKLV VWXG\ 7KLUW\ JUDGXDWHV DQG QRQJUDGXn DWHV WRWDOOLQJ VXEMHFWV ZHUH DGPLQLVWHUHG WKH HYDOXn DWLRQ LQVWUXPHQW DQG KDG WKHLU WUDQVFULSWV DQDO\]HG 7KH RWKHU JURXS RI VXEMHFWV RQO\ KDG WKHLU WUDQVFULSWV DQDO\]HG ,QVWUXPHQWDWLRQ 7KH LQVWUXPHQW XVHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ ZDV GHVLJQHG DQG GHYHORSHG E\ WKH UHVHDUFKHU DIWHU UHYLHZLQJ VHYHUDO RI WKH LQVWUXPHQWV XVHG E\ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV GLUHFWRUV WR HYDOXDWH WKHLU SURJUDPV 7KH LQVWUXPHQWV XVHG E\ %R\G f 'DYLV %XUNKHLPHU DQG %RUGHUV3DWWHUVRQ f DQG &RXOVRQ %UDGIRUG DQG .D\H f ZHUH LQIOXHQWLDO LQ KHOSLQJ WKH UHVHDUFKHU WR GHVLJQ DQG GHYHORS WKH LQVWUXPHQW IRU WKLV VWXG\ $ SDQHO RI H[SHUWV FRQVLVWLQJ RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV GLUHFWRUV IURP &HQWUDO )ORULGD &RPPXQLW\ &ROOHJH (GZDUG

PAGE 63

:DWHUV &ROOHJH )ORULGD $ t 0 8QLYHUVLW\ )ORULGD 6WDWH 8QLYHUVLW\ +LOOVERURXJK &RPPXQLW\ &ROOHJH DQG -DFNVRQYLOOH 8QLYHUVLW\ ZDV LQLWLDOO\ FRQVXOWHG IRU DGYLFH RQ WKH FRQVWUXFWLRQ RI WKLV LQVWUXPHQW $SSHQGL[ $f 6LQFH DOO 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV DUH RSHUDWLQJ XQGHU WKH VDPH VHW RI IHGHUDO JXLGHOLQHV DQG DUH DWWHPSWLQJ WR DFFRPSOLVK WKH VDPH JRDOV WKH KHOS RI WKHVH H[SHUWV ZDV LQYDOXDEOH LQ FRQVWUXFWLQJ WKLV LQVWUXPHQW 7KH LWHPV LQ WKH LQVWUXPHQW ZHUH IRUPXODWHG EDVHG RQ WKRVH FRQGLWLRQV VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLWLHV ZKLFK LI RSWLn PDOO\ UHQGHUHG ZRXOG SURGXFH VXFFHVVIXO H[SHULHQFHV IFU WKH VWXGHQWV RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV 7KH VSHFLILF FRQGLn WLRQV VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLWLHV WR EH HYDOXDWHG ZHUH REWDLQHG IURP WKH IHGHUDO JXLGHOLQHV IRU RSHUDWLQJ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV DQG IURP WKH VWDWHG REMHFWLYHV RI HDFK SURJUDP 7KH LQVWUXPHQW FDOOHG WKH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH (YDOXDWLQJ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV 4(663f FRQVLVWV RI D FRYHU SDJH ZLWK DGPLQLVWUDWLYH GLUHFWLRQV DQG LWHPV 7KH LWHPV LQ WKH TXHVWLRQQDLUH ZHUH GHVLJQHG WR 6ROLFLW GHPRJUDSKLF LQIRUPDWLRQ ,WHPV f 6ROLFLW UHVSRQVHV DERXW VDWLVIDFWLRQV RU GLVVDWLVn IDFWLRQV ZLWK WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP ,WHPV f DQG 6ROLFLW WKH UHVSRQGHQWnV HYDOXDWLRQ RI WKH IROORZn LQJ VHUYLFHV RU DFWLYLWLHV 2ULHQWDWLRQ SHHU

PAGE 64

FRXQVHOLQJ SURIHVVLRQDO FRXQVHOLQJ DFDGHPLF DGn YLVHPHQW LQVWUXFWLRQ VSHFLDO FODVVHV WXWRULQJ VSHFLDO DFWLYLWLHV UHIHUUDOV DQG WKH VWDII FKDUDFn WHULVWLFV ,WHPV f 3LORW 6WXG\ %DVHG RQ WKH UHFRPPHQGDWLRQV RI WKH SDQHO RI H[SHUWV WKH HYDOXDWLRQ LQVWUXPHQW ZDV GHYHORSHG DQG WHVWHG $ SLORW VWXG\ RI WKH LQVWUXPHQW ZDV FRQGXFWHG DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 1RUWK &DUROLQD DW *UHHQVERUR E\ WKH 'LUHFWRU RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV DW WKDW LQVWLWXWLRQ 7KH LQVWUXPHQW ZDV DGPLQLn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n WLRQ ZLWK WKUHH RI WKH RULJLQDO SDQHO H[SHUWV DQG WKH GLUHFn WRU ZKR FRQGXFWHG WKH SLORW VWXG\ 7KHVH PRGLILFDWLRQV LQFOXGHG UHZRUGLQJ SRUWLRQV RI WKH DGPLQLVWUDWLYH LQVWUXFn WLRQV VSHFLI\LQJ WKH VSHFLDO FRXUVHV DQG JURXSLQJ UHODWHG LWHPV

PAGE 65

5HOLDELOLW\ 7KH WHVWUHWHVW SURFHGXUH ZDV XVHG WR GHWHUPLQH WKH UHOLDELOLW\ RI WKLV LQVWUXPHQW 'XULQJ WKH ILUVW DGPLQLn VWUDWLRQ RI WKH LQVWUXPHQW WKH UHVHDUFKHU DGPLQLVWHUHG WKH LQVWUXPHQW WR 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD ZKR ZHUH HQUROOHG GXULQJ WKH VXPPHU WHUP $IWHU D WZRZHHN LQWHUYDO LW ZDV DGPLQLVWHUHG DJDLQ WR WKH VDPH JURXS RI VWXGHQWV EXW RQO\ RXW RI WKH RULJLQDO ZHUH DYDLODEOH IRU WKH VHFRQG DGPLQLVWUDWLRQ RI WKH LQVWUXPHQW 7KH UHVHDUFKHU FRPSDUHG HDFK LWHP UHVSRQVH UHFRUGHG E\ WKH VXEMHFWV RQ WKH VHFRQG DGPLQLVWUDWLRQ RI WKH LQVWUXn PHQW ZLWK HDFK LWHP UHVSRQVH WKDW WKH\ UHFRUGHG GXULQJ WKH ILUVW DGPLQLVWUDWLRQ RI WKH LQVWUXPHQW 7KH UHVHDUFKHU FRPSDUHG HDFK LWHP WR GHWHUPLQH D SHUFHQW RI DJUHHPHQW EHn WZHHQ WKH ILUVW DGPLQLVWUDWLRQ DQG WKH VHFRQG DGPLQLVWUDWLRQ RI WKH LQVWUXPHQW 7KH UHOLDELOLW\ ZDV GHWHUPLQHG E\ GLYLGLQJ WKH LWHPV DJUHHG XSRQ E\ WKH WRWDO QXPEHU RI DJUHHPHQWV DQG GLVDJUHHn PHQWV 8VLQJ WKLV FRPPRQ PHWKRG IRU FRPSXWLQJ UHOLDELOLW\ +XFN &RUPLHU DQG %RXQGV S f WKH UHVHDUFKHU IRXQG WKH LQVWUXPHQW WR KDYH D UHOLDELOLW\ RI

PAGE 66

9DOLGLW\ 7KH FRQWHQW YDOLGLW\ RI WKH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH (YDOXDWLQJ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV 4(663f ZDV GHWHUPLQHG E\ D VHFRQG SDQHO RI H[SHUWV IURP WKH IROORZLQJ LQVWLWXWLRQV ,QVWLWXWLRQ /RFDWLRQ $EUDKDP %DOGZLQ $JULn FXOWXUDO &ROOHJH *HRUJLD A f $OFRUQ 6WDWH 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LVVLVVLSSL %D\DPRQ &HQWUDO 8QLYHUVLW\ 3XHUWR 5LFR *UHHQYLOOH 7HFKQLFDO &ROOHJH 6RXWK &DUROLQD +RZDUG 8QLYHUVLW\ :DVKLQJWRQ .HQW 6WDWH 8QLYHUVLW\ 2KLR 0LDPL 8QLYHUVLW\ 2KLR 6WDWH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 1HZ
PAGE 67

UHVSRQVHV WKDW FRXOG EH XVHG WR HYDOXDWH DQ\ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP 7KLV SDQHO RI H[SHUWV FRQVLVWLQJ RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV GLUHFWRUV DQG IRXU LPPHGLDWH VXSHUYLVRUV RI WKH GLUHFWRUV KDG WZR GD\V WR UHYLHZ WKH LQVWUXPHQW DQG SUHVHQW ZULWWHQ RU YHUEDO FRPPHQWV WR WKH UHVHDUFKHU 7KH FRQWHQW YDOLGLW\ RI WKH LQVWUXPHQW ZDV GHWHUPLQHG ZLWK SHUFHQW RI WKH H[SHUWV LQ DJUHHPHQW WKDW WKH LQn VWUXPHQW ZDV FDSDEOH RI HIIHFWLYHO\ HYDOXDWLQJ D 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP +RZHYHU WZR RI WKH H[SHUWV VXJJHVWHG WKDW WKH ORFDWLRQ RI FRXQVHOLQJ LWHPV DQG RWKHU UHODWHG LWHPV EH JURXSHG LQ FORVHU SUR[LPLW\ WR HDFK RWKHU 2QH RI WKH H[SHUWV DOVR VXJJHVWHG WKDW WKH LWHPV UHODWHG WR VWLJPDn WL]DWLRQ EH UHZRUGHG WR LQVXUH FODULW\ DQG XQGHUVWDQGLQJ 7KH FKDQJHV UHFRPPHQGHG E\ WKHVH WKUHH H[SHUWV ZHUH LQFRUSRn UDWHG LQWR WKH LQVWUXPHQW 3URFHGXUH V +DYLQJ UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG WKH QDPHV RI WKH VXEMHFWV IRU WKLV VWXG\ IURP WKH ILOHV ORFDWHG LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV RIILFH WKH UHVHDUFKHU FRQWDFWHG WKH $OXPQL $IIDLUV 2IILFH WR DVFHUWDLQ DQG XSGDWH WKH DGGUHVVHV RI VRPH RI WKH VXEn MHFWV 7KH UHVHDUFKHU DOVR FRQWDFWHG FXUUHQWO\ HQUROOHG VWXGHQWV IDFXOW\ DQG DQ\ RWKHU SHUVRQV ZKR FRXOG SURYLGH WKH UHVHDUFKHU ZLWK D FXUUHQW DQG DFFXUDWH DGGUHVV IRU WKH

PAGE 68

VXEMHFWV $IWHU REWDLQLQJ WKH FRUUHFW DGGUHVVHV WKH UHn VHDUFKHU SUHSDUHG D OHWWHU UHTXHVWLQJ WKH SDUWLFLSDWLRQ RI WKH UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG VXEMHFWV LQ WKH VWXG\ $SSHQGL[ %f 7KHVH OHWWHUV ZHUH HLWKHU KDQGGHOLYHUHG E\ WKH UHVHDUFKHU RU PDLOHG 7KH OHWWHU DOVR LQFOXGHG DQ LQIRUPHG FRQVHQW IRUP $SSHQGL[ %f DQG WKH HYDOXDWLRQ LQVWUXPHQW $SSHQGL[ &f $ IROORZXS OHWWHU ZDV PDLOHG LI WKH FRQVHQW IRUP DQG HYDOXDWLRQ LQVWUXPHQW ZHUH QRW UHFHLYHG ZLWKLQ WZR ZHHNV IURP WKH PDLORXW GDWH $SSHQGL[ 'f +RZHYHU WKH UHn VHDUFKHU IRXQG WKDW LW ZDV PRUH FRQYHQLHQW DQG IDVWHU WR IROORZXS E\ WHOHSKRQH 7KH SULPDU\ VXEMHFWV ZHUH JLYHQ WZR ZHHNV IURP WKH PDLORXW GDWH WR UHWXUQ WKH FRQVHQW IRUP DQG WKH LQVWUXPHQW $IWHU WKDW SHULRG RI WLPH SDVVHG WKH UHVHDUFKHU VHOHFWHG DQ DOWHUQDWH VXEMHFW $IWHU REWDLQLQJ WKH FRQVHQW IRUPV WKH UHVHDUFKHU UHn TXHVWHG FRSLHV RI WKH VXEMHFWnV WUDQVFULSWV IURP WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 5HJLVWUDUnV 2IILFH DQG EHJDQ FROOHFWn LQJ GDWD IURP WKHLU WUDQVFULSWV 7KH UHVHDUFKHU UHYLHZHG HDFK VXEMHFWnV WUDQVFULSW IRU HDFK WHUP WKDW WKH VXEMHFW ZDV HQUROOHG XQWLO JUDGXDWLRQ VXVSHQVLRQ RU YROXQWDU\ ZLWKn GUDZDO IURP WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 6SHFLILFDOO\ WKH VXEMHFWVn WUDQVFULSWV ZHUH YLVXDOO\ DQG PDQXDOO\ FKHFNHG WR GHWHUPLQH LI WKH\ UHPDLQHG HQUROOHG XQWLO JUDGXDWLRQ WKH QXPEHU RI \HDUV UHTXLUHG WR JUDGXDWH

PAGE 69

IURP WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD WKH QXPEHU RI FRXUVHV DWWHPSWHG WKH QXPEHU RI FRXUVHV FRPSOHWHG DQG WKH JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJH DW JUDGXDWLRQ )RU WKH QRQJUDGXDWHV WKH UHVHDUFKHU DOVR FROOHFWHG GDWD RQ WKH QXPEHU RI FRXUVHV DWWHPSWHG DQG FRPSOHWHG DQG WKH JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV DW WKH WLPH RI ZLWKGUDZDO IURP WKLV LQVWLWXWLRQ RU DV RI $XJXVW ,Q VXPPDU\ WKH GDWD JDWKHUHG IURP WKH WUDQVFULSWV ZHUH XVHG WR GHWHUPLQH WKH VXEMHFWVn UHWHQWLRQ DQG JUDGXDWLRQ UDWHV DQG JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV 7KH HYDOXDWLRQ LQVWUXPHQW ZDV XVHG WR FROOHFW GDWD RQ WKH DFDGHPLF VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYn LWLHV XWLOL]HG E\ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV 7KH LQn VWUXPHQW ZDV DOVR XVHG WR GHWHUPLQH WKH HFRQRPLF VWDWXV RI WKH VXEMHFWV DIWHU SDUWLFLSDWLQJ LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP 'DWD $QDO\VLV 7KH DQDO\VLV RI DOO GDWD IRU WKLV VWXG\ ZDV SHUIRUPHG PDQXDOO\ E\ WKH UHVHDUFKHU H[FHSW IRU WKH GDWD XVHG WR GHn WHUPLQH WKH HFRQRPLF LPSDFW RI WKLV SURJUDP RQ LWV SDUWLFLn SDQWV 7KH UHVHDUFKHU DQDO\]HG WKH GDWD VR DV WR DQVZHU UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQV DQG LQ WKDW RUGHU UHVSHFWLYHO\ %\ PDQXDOO\ DQDO\]LQJ WKH VXEMHFWVn WUDQVFULSWV WKH UHVHDUFKHU ZDV DEOH WR REVHUYH WUHQGV DQG SDWWHUQV PRUH

PAGE 70

UHDGLO\ ZKLOH UHFRUGLQJ WKH JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJH RI HDFK VXEMHFW DQG PHDQ JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV RI DOO WKH VXEMHFWV 7KH GDWD ZHUH DQDO\]HG WR GHWHUPLQH ZKDW WKH JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV ZHUH LQGLYLGXDOO\ DQG FROOHFWLYHO\ IRU HDFK WHUP RYHU D VL[WRHLJKW\HDU SHULRG 5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQ f ,Q WKH SURFHVV RI DQDO\]LQJ WKH GDWD WR DQVZHU UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQ WKH UHVHDUFKHU DOVR DVFHUWDLQHG WKH HQUROOPHQW VWDWXV RI HDFK VXEMHFW IRU HDFK WHUP RI WKHLU HQUROOPHQW WR GHWHUPLQH WKH FROOHFWLYH UHWHQWLRQ UDWHV 5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQ f 7KH WUDQVFULSWV ZHUH DOVR DQDO\]HG WR GHWHUPLQH WKH QXPEHU RI WHUPV WKDW ZHUH UHTXLUHG IRU WKH VXEMHFWV WR JUDGXDWH IURP WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQ f 'DWD IURP LWHPV DQG RI WKH LQVWUXPHQW ZHUH DQDO\]HG IRU LQIRUPDWLRQ DERXW WKH LQIOXHQFH RI SHHU FRXQn VHORUV RQ WKH DFDGHPLF SHUIRUPDQFHV RI WKH VXEMHFWV 7KH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ SHHU FRXQVHORU HIIHFWLYHQHVV DV SHUn FHLYHG E\ WKH VXEMHFWV DQG WKH DPRXQW RI FRQWDFW ZLWK WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV ZDV DOVR LQYHVWLJDWHG 5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQ f 'DWD IURP WKH HYDOXDWLRQ LQVWUXPHQW VSHFLILFDOO\ ,WHPV ZHUH FKHFNHG FORVHO\ IRU VXEMHFWVn UHVSRQVHV UHJDUGn LQJ DFDGHPLF VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLWLHV WKDW WKH\ SHUFHLYHG DV PRVW HIIHFWLYH 5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQ f

PAGE 71

'DWD SURYLGHG E\ ,WHPV DQG RI WKH HYDOXDWLRQ LQn VWUXPHQW \LHOGHG LQIRUPDWLRQ UHJDUGLQJ WKH HFRQRPLF YDOXH RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP WR WKH VXEMHFWV 7KHVH GDWD ZHUH DQDO\]HG E\ D FRPSXWHU SURJUDP FDOOHG WKH 3URJUDP ,PSDFW $VVHVVPHQW 6\VWHP GHYHORSHG E\ 'U -RKQ 1LFNHQV DQG SUHSDUHG E\ WKH 2IILFH RI ,QVWUXFWLRQDO 5HVHDUFK DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 7KH FRPSXWHU SURJUDP GHWHUPLQHG WKH HFRQRPLF YDOXH RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP IRU HDFK VXEn MHFW E\ DGMXVWLQJ WKH VXEMHFWnV \HDUO\ HDUQLQJV WR SURGXFH D SUHVHQW YDOXH RI HDUQLQJV ,Q GHWHUPLQLQJ WKH HFRQRPLF YDOXH RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV WKH FRPSXWHU SURJUDP FRQVLGHUHG WKH IDFWRUV RI LQIODWLRQ DJH DQG HDUQLQJV 5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQ f 'DWD IURP ,WHPV DQG RI WKH HYDOXDWLRQ LQVWUXn PHQW ZHUH DQDO\]HG WR SURYLGH D SURILOH RI WKH VXEMHFWV DQG WR LGHQWLI\ DQ\ SDWWHUQV DQG IDFWRUV ZKLFK PLJKW VXJJHVW WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP 7KH LQIRUPDWLRQ REWDLQHG ZDV UHFRUGHG DQG VXPPDUL]HG WR SURYLGH DQVZHUV WR WKH DSSURSULDWH UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQV 0HDn VXUHV RI FHQWUDO WHQGHQF\ DQG YDULDELOLW\ VLPSOH FRUUHODn WLRQV DQG UHODWLRQVKLSV DQG JUDSKLF UHSUHVHQWDWLRQV RI GDWD ZHUH XVHG WR UHSRUW WKH UHVXOWV

PAGE 72

&+$37(5 ,9 5(68/76 7KLV VWXG\ ZDV GHVLJQHG WR GHWHUPLQH WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD LQ WKH UHWHQWLRQ DQG JUDGXDWLRQ RI LWV SDUWLFLSDQWV 7KH SRSXODWLRQ IRU WKLV VWXG\ FRQVLVWHG RI WKRVH VWXGHQWV ZKR SDUWLFLSDWHG LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP GXULQJ WKH VFKRRO \HDUV $ WRWDO RI UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG VWXGHQW WUDQVFULSWV ZDV XVHG WR DQVZHU WKH UHVHDUFK TXHVn WLRQV SHUWDLQLQJ WR JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV JUDGXDWLRQ DQG UHWHQWLRQ UDWHV 6L[W\ VWXGHQWV ZHUH UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG DQG DGPLQLVWHUHG WKH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH (YDOXDWLQJ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV 4(663f WR DQVZHU WKH UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQV SHUWDLQLQJ WR WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI WKH SURJUDP SHHU FRXQVHOLQJ LQIOXn HQFH DQG HFRQRPLF VWDWXV RI IRUPHU SDUWLFLSDQWV 7KLV FKDSWHU UHSRUWV WKH UHVHDUFKHUnV ILQGLQJV ZKLFK LQFOXGHV LQIRUPDWLRQ UHJDUGLQJ HDFK RI WKH VL[ UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQV 5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQ +RZ HIIHFWLYH DUH WKH DFDGHPLF VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYn LWLHV RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DV SHUFHLYHG E\ %ODFN VWXGHQWV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD"

PAGE 73

,Q RUGHU WR DQVZHU WKH ILUVW UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQ WKH UHVHDUFKHU DQDO\]HG ,WHPV DQG RI WKH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH (YDOXDWLQJ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV 4(663f WKDW VROLFLWHG UHVSRQVHV IURP UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG VWXGHQWV ZKR LQLWLDOO\ HQUROOHG GXULQJ WKH VXPPHU WHUPV EHWZHHQ DQG 7KH VDPSOH RI VWXGHQWV FRQWDLQHG JUDGXDWHV RI WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD DQG QRQJUDGXDWHV 7KH DQDO\VLV RI WKH LWHPV RQ WKH 4(663 DQG WKH ILQGn LQJV RI WKH UHVHDUFKHU DUH SUHVHQWHG LQ WKH VDPH QXPHULFDO RUGHU DV WKH\ DSSHDU RQ WKH 4(663 7KH UHVSRQVHV RI WKH JUDGXDWHV DQG QRQJUDGXDWHV DUH SUHVHQWHG LOOXVWUDWHG DQG GLVFXVVHG VHSDUDWHO\ EHJLQQLQJ ZLWK WKH JUDGXDWHV $Q $QDO\VLV RI 5HVSRQVHV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV *UDGXDWHV WR ,WHPV DQG RQ WKH 4(663 7KH ILUVW LWHP RQ WKH 4(663 LQTXLUHG DERXW WKH VH[ DQG PDULWDO VWDWXV RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV JUDGXDWHV 7KH GDWD VKRZ WKDW RI WKH JUDGXDWHV SHUFHQWf DUH PDUULHG WKH UHPDLQLQJ SHUFHQWf DUH VLQJOH ,WHP DVNHG WKH VWXGHQWV WR GHVFULEH WKHPVHOYHV 7KH UHVHDUFKHU IRXQG WKDW DOO RI WKH VWXGHQWV LQ WKLV VWXG\ ZHUH %ODFN RI 8QLWHG 6WDWHV RULJLQ %ODFNV RI +LVSDQLF DQG &DULEEHDQ RULJLQV KDYH SDUWLFLSDWHG LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP EXW QRQH ZHUH LQFOXGHG LQ WKH UDQGRP VHOHFWLRQ

PAGE 74

,Q ,WHP WKH VWXGHQWV ZHUH DVNHG WR LQGLFDWH WKH KLJKHVW GHJUHH WKDW WKH\ QRZ KROG 7KH UHVHDUFKHU FRQILUPHG WKDW VWXGHQWV KDG UHFHLYHG EDFKHORUnV GHJUHHV VWXGHQWV KDG FRPSOHWHG UHTXLUHPHQWV IRU WKH PDVWHUnV GHJUHH VWXn GHQW ZDV JUDGXDWHG IURP ODZ VFKRRO DQG VWXGHQW LV LQ WKH ODVW \HDU RI PHGLFDO VFKRRO H[SHFWLQJ WR JUDGXDWH LQ -XQH RI ,QIRUPDWLRQ FRQFHUQLQJ LQVWLWXWLRQV WKDW WKH VWXGHQWV KDG DWWHQGHG ZDV VROLFLWHG E\ ,WHP 7KH UHVHDUFKHU IRXQG WKDW WKH VWXGHQWV OLVWHG VHYHQ LQVWLWXWLRQV WKDW WKH\ KDG DWWHQGHG RU SODQQHG WR DWWHQG DIWHU JUDGXDWLQJ IURP WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 7KH RWKHU LQVWLWXWLRQV DUH DV IROn ORZV )ORULGD ,QWHUQDWLRQDO 8QLYHUVLW\ +RZDUG 8QLYHUVLW\ -DFNVRQYLOOH 8QLYHUVLW\ 8QLYHUVLW\ RI $UL]RQD 8QLYHUVLW\ RI &HQWUDO )ORULGD 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 1RUWK )ORULGD DQG WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 2NODKRPD 7KHVH VWXGHQWV LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH\ KDG QRW UHFHLYHG D GHJUHH IURP WKH DERYH LQVWLWXWLRQV ,WHP DVNHG WKH VWXGHQWV LI WKH\ ZHUH FXUUHQWO\ HQn UROOHG LQ DQ\ RI WKH LQVWLWXWLRQV OLVWHG LQ ,WHP DQG LI QRW ZKHWKHU WKH\ SODQQHG WR UHHQUROO 6HYHQ VWXGHQWV LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH\ DUH FXUUHQWO\ HQUROOHG ZLWK ILYH RI WKH VHYHQ EHLQJ HQUROOHG DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD )LYH VWXGHQWV ZKR DUH QRW HQUROOHG SODQ WR UHHQUROO DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD EXW WHQ RWKHUV SODQ WR UHHQUROO DW

PAGE 75

RWKHU LQVWLWXWLRQV $GGLWLRQDOO\ VHYHQ VWXGHQWV LQGLFDWHG WKH\ GR QRW SODQ WR UHHQUROO DW DQ\ LQVWLWXWLRQ ,WHP VROLFLWHG GDWD FRQFHUQLQJ WKH \HDU LQ ZKLFK WKH VWXGHQW HQUROOHG DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD $OO VWXn GHQWV HQWHUHG WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD EHWZHHQ WKH \HDUV DQG ,WHP DVNHG LI WKH\ ZHUH IRUPHU 8SZDUG %RXQG RU 7DOHQW 6HDUFK SDUWLFLSDQWV 7KH UHVSRQGHQWV LQGLn FDWHG WKDW HLJKW RI WKHP ZHUH IRUPHU 8SZDUG %RXQG VWXGHQWV DQG WZR ZHUH IRUPHU 7DOHQW 6HDUFK VWXGHQWV 7KH IHGHUDOO\ IXQGHG 8SZDUG %RXQG DQG 7DOHQW 6HDUFK 3URMHFWV SURYLGHG WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGDnV 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP ZLWK SHUFHQW RI LWV VWXGHQWV GXULQJ WKH \HDUV EHWZHHQ DQG 7KH +LJKHU (GXFDWLRQ $FW RI FUHDWHG WKH 8SZDUG %RXQG DQG 7DOHQW 6HDUFK 3URJUDPV ZKLFK KDG DV WKHLU SXUn SRVHV WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI DFDGHPLF VNLOOV PRWLYDWLRQ IRU DFDGHPLF VXFFHVV DQG WKH LGHQWLILFDWLRQ RI ORZLQFRPH \RXWK ZLWK DFDGHPLF SRWHQWLDO 7KH 7DOHQW 6HDUFK 3URJUDP LGHQWLn ILHV ORZLQFRPH \RXWK ZKR KDYH DFDGHPLF SRWHQWLDO DQG HQn FRXUDJHV WKHP WR FRPSOHWH WKHLU VHFRQGDU\ HGXFDWLRQ DQG WR VXEVHTXHQWO\ HQUROO LQ SRVWVHFRQGDU\ LQVWLWXWLRQV 7KH 8SZDUG %RXQG 3URJUDP LV D SUHFROOHJH SUHSDUDWRU\ DFWLYLW\ WKDW GHYHORSV DFDGHPLF VNLOOV DQG PRWLYDWLRQ IRU VXFFHVV LQ VWXGHQWV DWWHQGLQJ VHFRQGDU\ VFKRRO DQG HYHQWXDOO\ LQ D SRVWVHFRQGDU\ LQVWLWXWLRQ

PAGE 76

7KH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD KDV DQ 8SZDUG %RXQG 3URJUDP EXW QRW D 7DOHQW 6HDUFK 3URJUDP 7KH 8SZDUG %RXQG 3URJUDP LV WR SURYLGH DQ RSSRUWXQLW\ IRU SRWHQWLDOO\ FDSDEOH ORZ LQFRPH VWXGHQWV LQ $ODFKXD &RXQW\ IURP DFDGHPLFDOO\ DQGRU HQYLURQPHQWDOO\ GHSULYHG EDFNJURXQGV WR GHYHORS PRWLYDn WLRQDO SHUVRQDO DQG DFDGHPLF FRPSHWHQFLHV QHFHVVDU\ WR SXUVXH DQG VXFFHHG LQ KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQ :KHQ DVNHG LQ ,WHP WR UDWH WKHLU DFDGHPLF SUHSDUDn WLRQ EHIRUH FRPLQJ WR WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD VWXGHQWV SHUFHQWf UDWHG WKHLU SUHSDUDWLRQ DV EHLQJ H[FHOOHQW VWXGHQWV SHUFHQWf UDWHG WKHLU SUHSDUDWLRQ DV EHLQJ JRRG DQG VWXGHQWV SHUFHQWf UDWHG WKHLU DFDGHPLF SUHSDUDWLRQ DV EHLQJ IDLU :KHQ DVNHG LQ ,WHP WR UDWH WKHLU DFDGHPLF SUHSDUDn WLRQ DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD VWXGHQWV SHUn FHQWf UDWHG WKHLU SUHSDUDWLRQ DV JRRG SHUFHQWf UDWHG WKHLU SUHSDUDWLRQ DV EHLQJ H[FHOOHQW DQG SHUFHQW UDWHG WKHLU SUHSDUDWLRQ DV EHLQJ IDLU 7KH WKUHH PRVW LPSRUWDQW UHDVRQV WKDW WKH UHVSRQGHQWV OLVWHG LQ ,WHP IRU GHFLGLQJ WR HQUROO DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD ZHUH f WKH DFDGHPLF UHSXWDWLRQ RI WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ f LW ZDV FORVH WR KRPH DQG f WKH ILQDQFLDO DLG DZDUGHG 7KHVH WKUHH UHDVRQV DUH OLVWHG LQ WKH RUGHU RI PRVW QXPEHU RQH UHVSRQVHV 7KH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP UDQNHG IRXUWK

PAGE 77

,Q WKH DQDO\VLV RI ,WHP ZKLFK JDWKHUHG GDWD FRQn FHUQLQJ IHHOLQJV WKH UHVHDUFKHU IRXQG WKDW SHUFHQW RI WKH JUDGXDWHV DVVRFLDWHG SRVLWLYH IHHOLQJV ZLWK WKHLU SDUWLn FLSDWLRQ LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP $ PDMRULW\ RI WKH JUDGXDWHV SHUFHQWf DVVRFLDWHG ERWK SRVLWLYH DQG QHJDn WLYH IHHOLQJV ZLWK WKHLU SDUWLFLSDWLRQ LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP 2QH JUDGXDWH GLG QRW UHVSRQG WR WKH TXHVWLRQ 7KH IROORZLQJ FRPPHQWV ZHUH PDGH E\ WKH JUDGXDWHV LQ GHVFULELQJ WKHLU IHHOLQJV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK WKHLU SDUWLFLSDn WLRQ LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP (YHQ WKRXJK ZDV EHQHILWHG IURP WKH FRXQn VHOLQJ DQG HGXFDWLRQDO DVVLVWDQFH RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWDII ,nYH KDG WR GHDO ZLWK IHHOLQJ OLNH DQ DGPLVVLRQ H[FHSWLRQ $OPRVW HYHQKDQGHG DPELYDOHQFH EHLQJ %ODFN LQ DQ DVWURQRPLFDO ZKLWH FOLPDWH IHHOLQJV ZHUH VRPHZKDW QHJDWLYH ZDV LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP YHU\ PXFK P\ ILUVW WZR TXDUWHUV DQG DIWHUZDUGV UDSLGO\ PRYHG IURP WKH 66 FRXUVHV FXUULFXOXPf 'XH WR DGYHUVLYH DQG KRVn WLOH FDWHJRUL]LQJ DV D QGUDWH FODVVf VWXGHQW SULGH DQG VHOIHVWHHP PRUDOH ZDV FXW 3RVLWLYH LQ WKH VHQVH LW JDYH PH D FKDQFH WR JR WR WKH VFKRRO RI P\ FKRLFH $ ELW QHJDWLYH VRPHWLPHV ZKHQ SHRSOH WROG \RX LW ZRXOGQnW EH WKH VDPH ZKHQ \RX HQWHU WKH PDLQVWUHDP RI UHJXODU FODVVHV 6WDII ZDV LQWHUHVWHG LQ WKH VWXGHQW OHDUQn LQJ DQG REWDLQLQJ WKHLU GHJUHH

PAGE 78

3RVLWLYHf§'XH WR WKH VXSSRUW DQG HQFRXUn DJHPHQW EHLQJ JLYHQ 1HJDWLYHf§5HLQn IRUFHG WKH LGHD RI QRW EHLQJ DEOH WR VXFFHHG LQ WKH KLJKO\ FRPSHWLWLYH HQn YLURQPHQW XQGHU QRUPDO FRQGLWLRQV QRW EHLQJ DEOH WR UHWDNH WHVWVf 9HU\ KHOSIXO LQ DGMXVWLQJ 0DQ\ RI WKH :KLWH LQVWUXFWRUV H[KLELWHG UDFLVW DWWLWXGHV WR WKH VWXGHQWV 7KH LQIHULRULW\ FRPSOH[ JLYHQ VWXGHQWV E\ WKRVH SURIHVVRUV KHOS FDXVH WKH ZLWKn GUDZDO RI PDQ\ RI WKHVH VWXGHQWV 1HJDWLYH GHULYHG IURP WKH VWLJPD SODFHG RQ 66 VWXGHQWV 3RVLWLYH IURP WKH GHGLn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n LQJV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK WKH 3URJUDP ZHUH IURP RXWVLGHUV ZKR GLGQnW NQRZ ZKDW WKH 3URJUDP ZDV DOO DERXW 7KHUH ZHUH VRPH SHRSOH ZKRVH LQIOXHQFH DQG FRQFHUQ EURXJKW DERXW JRRG UHVXOWV DQG \HW VRPH SHRSOHnV DWWLWXGH WRZDUG PH ZDV FROG DQG LQVHQVLWLYH 6RPH PDGH PH IHHO GXPE DQG LQFRPSHWHQW 7KH RQHV WKDW GLG PRUH WR KHOS PH ZHUH WKH LQVWUXFWRUV DQG WXWRUV DW WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV %XLOGLQJ /HDUQLQJ &HQWHUf 7KH\ GHVHUYH JROG ULEERQV

PAGE 79

6HYHUDO HGXFDWLRQDO H[SHULHQFHV ZHUH SRVn LWLYH EHFDXVH RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP IHOW OLNH ZDV FRQVLGHUHG DV D SHUVRQ ZKR FRXOG QRW FRPSHWH ZLWK WKH PDMRULW\ 3URJUDP SURYLGHG H[FHOOHQW DVVLVWDQFH LQ DFDGHPLF FRXQVHOLQJ QRWLFHG SRVLWLYH IHHOLQJV IURP PDQ\ RI P\ SHHUV FRQFHUQLQJ WKH SURJUDP 2QO\ RQFH GLG H[SHULHQFH DQ\ QHJDWLYH IHHOn LQJVf§IURP P\ VW TXDUWHU (QJOLVK SURIHVVRU $FDGHPLF DQG SHUVRQDO DGYLVLQJ ZHUH UHDGn LO\ DYDLODEOH 7KH SURJUDP ZDV H[WUHPHO\ LQIRUPDWLYH RI WKH DFDGHPLF DQG EXVLQHVV V\VWHPV RI WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD &DUHG DERXW &RQFHUQHG ZLWK \RX DV D SHUn VRQ DQG DFKLHYLQJ WKH EHVW SRVVLEOH JRDOV 3RVLWLYHf§\RX JRW WR NQRZ SHRSOH 1HJDn WLYHf§SURIHVVRUV VWHUHRW\SHG FODVVHV 3RVLWLYH LQ WKDW WKH 3URJUDP UHDOO\ GRHV D ORW IRU LQFRPLQJ IUHVKPHQ 1HJDWLYH LQ WKH VHQVH WKDW WKH SURJUDP FDQ EHFRPH D FUXWFK DW WLPHV $FDGHPLFV PXVW EH VWUHVVHG PRUH 0DNH LW FOHDU WKDW KDYLQJ D JRRG WLPH LV SDUW RI FROOHJH EXW DFDn GHPLFV DUH 3RVLWLYHf§JDYH PH DQ RSSRUWXQLW\ WR REn WDLQ P\ HGXFDWLRQ 1HJDWLYHf§VRPH WHDFKn HUV WUHDWHG PH DV LI ZHUH GXPE 7KH\ DOVR WDONHG WR PH DV LI WKH\ ZHUH DSRORn JL]LQJ WKDW ZDV %ODFN WKLQN WKH EHQHILWV RI WKH SURJUDP ZHUH SRVLWLYH EXW EHLQJ DW DQ DOO :KLWH XQLn YHUVLW\ DQG EHLQJ LQ DQ DOO %ODFN FODVV LQLWLDOO\ GLG QRW PL[ ZLWK PH WKLQN WKH DFDGHPLF SUHSDUDWLRQ UHFHLYHG WKURXJK 8SZDUG %RXQG JUHDWO\ HQKDQFHG P\ DFDGHPLF VXFFHVV

PAGE 80

, ZDV JLYHQ PRWLYDWLRQ WKURXJK WKH PHPn EHUV RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 7KH IHHOLQJV ZHUH SRVLWLYH EHFDXVH WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP HQDEOHV PH WR JUDGXDOO\ EH EURNHQ LQWR WKH DFDGHPLF V\VWHP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD ,Q VXPPDU\ WKH JUDGXDWHV DSSHDU WR KDYH EHHQ DSSUHFLn DWLYH RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP EXW QRW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ DV D ZKROH 7KH\ H[SUHVVHG VRPH QHJDWLYH HIIHFWV RI EHLQJ %ODFN LQ D :KLWH HQYLURQPHQW +DOI RI WKH JUDGXn DWHV VDLG WKDW WKH\ H[SHULHQFHG QHJDWLYH IHHOLQJV DV D UHn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f RI WKH JUDGXDWHV VDLG WKDW WKH SURJUDP VKRXOG EH FRQWLQXHG WZR JUDGXDWHV SHUFHQWf ZHUH QRW VXUH $Q DQDO\VLV RI ,WHP ZKLFK DVNHG WKH VWXGHQWV WR GHVFULEH WKHLU H[SHULHQFHV IURP SDUWLFLSDWLRQ LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP UHYHDOHG WKDW WKH VWXGHQWV H[SHULHQFHG PRUH SRVLn WLYH WKDQ QHJDWLYH IHHOLQJV WRZDUG WKHPVHOYHV DQG WKHLU HGXFDWLRQ 7KH VWXGHQWV RYHUZKHOPLQJO\ IHOW WKDW WKH

PAGE 81

6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP LQFUHDVHG WKHLU PRWLYDWLRQ WR VWXG\ DQG PDGH WKHP PRUH GHWHUPLQHG WR JUDGXDWH 7KH IROORZLQJ FRPPHQWV JHQHUDOO\ UHYHDO SRVLWLYH H[SHULHQFHV 0DGH PH PRUH FRJQL]DQW RI WKH QHHG RI %ODFNV WR EH EHWWHU SUHSDUHG IRU FROOHJH DGPLVVLRQ UHTXLUHPHQWV $OORZHG PH WR HQWHU FROOHJH HYHQ WKRXJK GLGQnW DFKLHYH WKH UHTXLUHG VFRUH RQ WKH 6$7 IRU FROOHJH HQWUDQFH *DYH PH WKH VWDUW QHHGHG WR UHDOL]H FRXOG ODWHU PDNH LW ZLWKRXW WKH 3URJUDP ZDVDP YHU\ JUDWHIXO WR WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV DGPLQLVWUDWLYH VWDII EHFDXVH LW ZDV WKLV VWDII ZKLFK JDYH PH WKH RSSRUn WXQLW\ WR SURYH P\VHOI DW D PDMRU XQLn YHUVLW\f§DIWHU ERPELQJ RXW RQ WKH 6$7 QRW LQ WKH ULJKW IUDPH RI PLQG WKH GD\ WRRN LWf 7KH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWDII VDZ WKH SRWHQWLDO LQ PH ZDQWHG WR SURYH WR WKHP DQG P\VHOI WKDW FRXOG VXUYLYH DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD +HOSHG PH DGMXVW WR WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD DW D JRRG SDFH 7KH VWXGHQWV ZHUH DVNHG WR GHVFULEH WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP LQ ,WHP 7KHLU RYHUDOO UHDFWLRQ WR WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP ZDV SRVLWLYH 7HQ VWXGHQWV SHUFHQWf GHVFULEHG LW DV H[WUHPHO\ HIIHFWLYH VWXGHQWV SHUFHQWf DV YHU\ HIIHFWLYH DQG WKH UHPDLQn LQJ SHUFHQWf DV HIIHFWLYH

PAGE 82

6XPPDU\ RI 5HVSRQVHV E\ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV *UDGXDWHV )URP WKH DQDO\VLV RI ,WHPV DQG WKH UHn VHDUFKHU IRXQG WKDW WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV JUDGXDWHV H[SUHVVHG VWURQJ SRVLWLYH VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK WKH 3URJUDP 2QH RI WKHLU WKUHH PDMRU UHDVRQV IRU HQUROOLQJ DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD ZDV WKDW WKH\ ZHUH LQIRUPHG E\ IULHQGV RI WKH KHOS SURYLGHG E\ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP ,W VKRXOG EH QRWHG WKDW WKH VWXGHQWV ZHUH QRW FRPn SOHWHO\ VDWLVILHG ZLWK HYHU\WKLQJ DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK WKH 3URJUDP 7KH VWXGHQWV UHSRUWHG ERWK SRVLWLYH DQG QHJDWLYH IHHOLQJV FRQFHUQLQJ WKHLU SDUWLFLSDWLRQ LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP +RZHYHU ZKHQ DVNHG LI WKH\ WKRXJKW WKDW WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP VKRXOG EH FRQWLQXHG SHUFHQW LQGLFDWHG \HV DQG SHUFHQW ZHUH QRW VXUH )ROORZLQJ LQ 7DEOH LV D VXPPDU\ RI VWXGHQW UHn VSRQVHV UHJDUGLQJ VHUYLFHV DFWLYLWLHV RU VWDII DFWLRQV UHQGHUHG RU DUUDQJHG IRU E\ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP 7KH VWXGHQWV ZHUH DVNHG WR LQGLFDWH ZKHWKHU RU QRW WKH\ UHFHLYHG WKH VHUYLFH SDUWLFLSDWHG LQ WKH DFWLYLW\ RU H[n SHULHQFHG WKH VWDII DFWLRQ E\ PDUNLQJ \HV RU QR LQ WKH FROXPQV ,I WKH\ PDUNHG \HV WKH\ ZHUH WR LQGLFDWH WKHLU SHUFHSWLRQV RI WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI WKH VHUYLFH DFWLYLW\ RU VWDII DFWLRQ LQ KHOSLQJ WKHP ZKLOH DW WKLV LQVWLWXWLRQ ,I

PAGE 83

WKHLU UHVSRQVH ZDV QR QR IXUWKHU HYDOXDWLRQ ZDV DSSURSULn DWH 7DEOH LQGLFDWHV WKH QXPEHU DQG W\SH RI UHVSRQVHV JLYHQ E\ WKH JUDGXDWHV RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP $QDO\VLV RI *UDGXDWHVn 5HVSRQVHV WR ,WHPV RI WKH 4(663 7KH UHVHDUFKHUnV DQDO\VLV RI WKH SDUWLFLSDWLRQ FROXPQV ,WHPV RI WKH 4(663 UHYHDOHG WKDW SHUFHQW RI WKH JUDGXDWHV LQGLFDWHG XVH RI WKH VHUYLFHV RU SDUWLFLSDWLRQ LQ WKH DFWLYLWLHV RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP 6LQFH LW LV QRW PDQGDWRU\ WKDW VWXGHQWV XWLOL]H SURJUDP VHUYLFHV RU DFWLYLWLHV SHUFHQW FKRVH QRW WR GR VR )XUWKHU DQDO\VLV RI WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV FROXPQV ,WHPV VKRZV WKDW SHUFHQW HYDOXDWHG WKH VHUYLFHV DFWLYLn WLHV DQG VWDII DV H[WUHPHO\ HIIHFWLYH SHUFHQW HYDOXDWHG WKHP DV YHU\ HIIHFWLYH SHUFHQW HYDOXDWHG WKHP DV HIIHFn WLYH SHUFHQW HYDOXDWHG WKHP DV QRW HIIHFWLYH DQG SHUFHQW HYDOXDWHG WKH VHUYLFHV DFWLYLWLHV DQG VWDII DV H[WUHPHO\ LQHIIHFWLYH

PAGE 84

7$%/( *5$'8$7(6n 5(63216(6 72 7+( 48(67,211$,5( (9$/8$7,1* 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 352*5$06 $7 7+( 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$ 1 f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQT \RX" ([WUHPH@\ 9HU\ 1RW ([WUHPHO\
PAGE 85

7$%/( &217,18('f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQJ \RX"
PAGE 86

7$%/( &217,18('f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQJ \RX"
PAGE 87

7$%/( &217,18('f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQT \RX" ([WUHPHO\ 9HU\ 1RW ([WUHPHO\
PAGE 88

7$%/( &217,18('f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQT \RX"
PAGE 89

7$%/( &217,18('f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQJ \RX"
PAGE 90

7$%/( &217,18('f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQJ \RX
PAGE 91

7$%/( &217,18('f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQT \RX"
PAGE 92

7$%/( &217,18('f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQJ \RX"
PAGE 93

7$%/( &217,18('f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQJ \RX"
PAGE 94

7$%/( &217,18('f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQJ \RX"
PAGE 95

$Q $QDO\VLV RI 5HVSRQVHV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 1RQJUDGXDWHV WR ,WHP DQG RQ WKH 4(663 $Q DQDO\VLV RI ,WHP LQGLFDWHG WKDW HLJKW SHUn FHQWf RI WKHVH VWXGHQWV UHSRUWHG WKDW WKH\ DUH PDUULHG SHUFHQWf DUH VLQJOH DQG SHUFHQWf LV GLYRUFHG $OO RI WKH VWXGHQWV UHVSRQGLQJ WR ,WHP GHVFULEHG WKHPn VHOYHV DV EHLQJ %ODFN RI 8QLWHG 6WDWHV RULJLQ ,QGLFDWH WKH KLJKHVW GHJUHH \RX QRZ KROG ZDV DVNHG LQ ,WHP 7KH KLJK VFKRRO GLSORPD LV WKH KLJKHVW GHJUHH KHOG E\ SHUFHQWf RI WKHVH VWXGHQWV )LIWHHQ SHUFHQWf LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKHLU KLJKHVW GHJUHH LV WKH $VVRFLn DWH RI $UWV +RZHYHU VWXGHQWV SHUFHQWf KDYH REn WDLQHG EDFKHORUnV GHJUHHV IURP )ORULGD $ t 0 8QLYHUVLW\ DQG 6DYDQQDK 6WDWH &ROOHJH UHVSHFWLYHO\ 7KH LQVWLWXWLRQV OLVWHG DV UHTXHVWHG LQ ,WHP LQFOXGn LQJ WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD DUH %HWKXQH&RRNPDQ &ROOHJH &DPHURQ 8QLYHUVLW\ 2NODKRPDf 'D\WRQD %HDFK &RPPXQLW\ &ROOHJH )ORULGD $ t 0 8QLYHUVLW\ +LOOVERURXJK &RPPXQLW\ &ROOHJH 6DQWD )H &RPPXQLW\ &ROOHJH 6DYDQQDK 6WDWH &ROOHJH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 0DU\ODQG 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 1RUWK )ORULGD 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 6RXWK )ORULGD 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 7H[DV DW (O 3DVR

PAGE 96

:KHQ DVNHG LQ ,WHP LI WKH\ ZHUH FXUUHQWO\ HQUROOHG RXW RI WKH UHVSRQGHQWV SHUFHQWf LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH\ ZHUH VWLOO HQUROOHG DW DQ LQVWLWXWLRQ RWKHU WKDQ WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD +RZHYHU RWKHUV SHUFHQWf LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH\ ZHUH QRW HQUROOHG (LJKW RI WKH VWXGHQWV SODQ WR UHHQUROO DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD ZKLOH RWKHUV SODQ WR HQUROO DW DQRWKHU LQVWLWXWLRQ 7KUHH VWXGHQWV LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH\ GR QRW SODQ WR HQUROO DW DQ\ LQVWLWXWLRQ 6HYHQ VWXGHQWV GLG QRW LQGLFDWH WKHLU SODQV IRU HQUROOPHQW ,Q ,WHP WKH VWXGHQWV LQGLFDWHG WKH \HDU WKDW WKH\ HQUROOHG DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD $OO VWXn GHQWV HQWHUHG WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD EHWZHHQ DQG $UH \RX D IRUPHU 8SZDUG %RXQG RU 7DOHQW 6HDUFK VWXn GHQW" ZDV WKH TXHVWLRQ DVNHG LQ ,WHP 7KH DQDO\VLV VKRZV WKDW IRUPHU 8SZDUG %RXQG VWXGHQWV DQG RQH 7DOHQW 6HDUFK VWXGHQW ZHUH QRQJUDGXDWHV 6SHFLILFDOO\ SHUFHQW RI WKH VWXGHQWV LQ WKH VWXG\ ZKR GLG QRW JUDGXDWH IURP WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD ZHUH IRUPHU 8SZDUG %RXQG DQG 7DOHQW 6HDUFK VWXGHQWV 7KH WZR VWXGHQWV ZKR UHFHLYHG WKHLU EDFKHn ORUnV GHJUHHV IURP RWKHU LQVWLWXWLRQV ZHUH IRUPHU 8SZDUG %RXQG VWXGHQWV ,WHP RQ WKH 4(663 FRQFHUQLQJ DFDGHPLF SUHSDUDWLRQ EHIRUH FRPLQJ WR WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD UHYHDOV WKDW

PAGE 97

SHUFHQWf RI WKH QRQJUDGXDWHV UDWHG WKHLU DFDGHPLF SUHSDUDWLRQ EHIRUH FRPLQJ WR WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD DV JRRG ZKLOH VWXGHQWV SHUFHQWf UDWHG WKHLU DFDGHPLF SUHSDUDWLRQ DV IDLU 7KHUH ZHUH VWXGHQWV SHUFHQWf ZKR UHSRUWHG WKHLU DFDGHPLF SUHSDUDWLRQ DV H[FHOOHQW SHUFHQWf UDWHG LW DV SRRU DQG SHUFHQWf GLG QRW UDWH LW ,Q ,WHP ZKHQ DVNHG DERXW WKHLU DFDGHPLF SUHSDUDWLRQ DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD SHUFHQW UDWHG LW DV H[FHOn OHQW SHUFHQW UDWHG LW DV JRRG SHUFHQW UDWHGLW DV IDLU DQG SHUFHQW UDWHG LW DV SRRU 7KH WKUHH PRVW LPSRUWDQW UHDVRQV LQGLFDWHG LQ ,WHP IRU GHFLGLQJ WR HQUROO DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD ZHUH f LW ZDV FORVH WR KRPH f WKH ILQDQFLDO DLG DZDUGHG DQG f WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP 7KH UHVHDUFKHU DUULYHG DW WKLV ILQGLQJ E\ ORFDWLQJ WKH WKUHH UHDVRQV ZLWK WKH PRVW QXPEHU RQH UHVSRQVHV 7KH UHVHDUFKHUnV DQDO\VLV RI ,WHP FRQFHUQLQJ WKH VWXGHQWVn IHHOLQJV UHJDUGLQJ WKHLU DVVRFLDWLRQ ZLWK WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP UHYHDOV WKDW RI WKH VWXGHQWV SHUFHQWf IHOW WKDW WKHUH ZHUH SRVLWLYH IHHOLQJV DVVRFLn DWHG ZLWK WKHLU SDUWLFLSDWLRQ LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP +RZHYHU VWXGHQWV SHUFHQWf UHSRUWHG ERWK SRVLWLYH DQG QHJDWLYH IHHOLQJV

PAGE 98

7KH IROORZLQJ FRPPHQWV ZHUH PDGH E\ RI WKH VWXn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n LQJ ZLWK PH 0\ IHHOLQJV DUH SRVLWLYH WRZDUGV WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP EHFDXVH LW DFn TXDLQWHG PH ZLWK D OLIH VW\OH WKDW PLJKW KDYH SDVVHG PH E\ 7KLV 3URJUDP DOVR PDGH LW HDV\ WR HQWHU RWKHU XQLYHUVLWLHV $OO ZRUNHUV ZHUH YHU\ KHOSIXO DVVLVWHG LQ WXWRULQJ RI FODVVHV VHOHFWLRQ RI FODVVHV HWF ,W ZDV WKHUH ZKHQ QHHGHG KHOS WKLQN WKDW WKH FRXQVHORUV FRXOG KDYH EHHQ PRUH KHOSIXO DQG DYDLODEOH

PAGE 99

, IHHO OLNH WKHUH ZDV KHOS LI QHHGHG KHOS
PAGE 100

7KH FODVVHV JDYH PH D VHQVH RI XQLW\ DPRQJ %ODFNV 3RVLWLYHf§NQRZLQJ WKDW FRXOG DWWHQG WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 1HJDWLYHf§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n XHG +RZHYHU WKHUH ZDV RQH VWXGHQW SHUFHQWf ZKR ZDV QRW VXUH DERXW FRQWLQXLQJ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP $Q DQDO\VLV RI ,WHP UHYHDOHG WKDW WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP FDXVHG WKH VWXGHQWV WR H[SHULHQFH PRUH SRVLWLYH WKDQ QHJDWLYH IHHOLQJV WRZDUG WKHPVHOYHV DQG WKHLU HGXFDWLRQ $FFRUGLQJ WR VWXGHQWVn UHVSRQVHV WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP LQFUHDVHG WKHLU PRWLYDWLRQ WR VWXG\ PDGH WKHP PRUH GHWHUPLQHG WR JUDGXDWH PDGH WKHP IHHO EHWWHU

PAGE 101

DERXW WKHPVHOYHV DQG IDFLOLWDWHG WKHLU GHYHORSLQJ IHHOLQJV RI FRQILGHQFH DQG LQGHSHQGHQFH +RZHYHU WKHUH ZHUH D IHZ VWXGHQWV ZKR IHOW WKDW WKH 3URJUDP PDGH WKHP GHSHQGHQW GHFUHDVHG WKHLU PRWLYDWLRQ WR VWXG\ DQG UHGXFHG WKHLU VHQVH RI FRQILGHQFH LQ WKHPVHOYHV 7KUHH SHUWLQHQW VWXGHQW FRPPHQWV QRWHG DUH ,W GLG LQFUHDVH P\ PRWLYDWLRQ WR VWXG\ KRZHYHU QRW HQRXJK EHFDXVH RI PH DQG WKLQJV DIIHFWLQJ P\ OLIH DW WKDW WLPH $ EHWWHU IHHOLQJ RI ZRUNLQJ ZLWK SHRSOH 7KH 3URJUDP GRHV QRW DOORZ D %ODFN VWXn GHQW WR EH LQ WKH PDLQVWUHDP RI WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ /HVV VWUHVV DQG ZKHQ \RX JHW WKHUH LWnV D UHDO VXUSULVH 7KH VWXGHQWVn UHVSRQVHV WR ,WHP LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKHLU RYHUDOO UHDFWLRQ WR WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP ZDV SRVLn WLYH 6HYHQ VWXGHQWV GHVFULEHG WKH 3URJUDP DV H[WUHPHO\ HIIHFWLYH (LJKW VWXGHQWV VDLG LW ZDV YHU\ HIIHFWLYH )LIWHHQ RI WKH VWXGHQWV KDOI RI WKH JURXS UHDFWHG WR WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DV HIIHFWLYH 7KHVH UHVXOWV DUH WDEXODWHG LQ 7DEOH $QDO\VLV RI 1RQJUDGXDWHV 5HVSRQVHV WR ,WHPV RI WKH 4(663 $QDO\VLV RI ,WHPV RI WKH 4(663 UHYHDOHG WKDW SHUFHQW RI WKH QRQJUDGXDWHV LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH\ XWLOL]HG WKH VHUYLFHV RU SDUWLFLSDWHG LQ WKH DFWLYLWLHV RI WKH 6SHFLDO

PAGE 102

6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP ,W LV QRW PDQGDWRU\ WKDW VWXGHQWV XWLOL]H WKH VHUYLFHV RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLWLHV VR SHUFHQW GHFLGHG QRW WR GR VR )XUWKHU DQDO\VLV RI WKH QRQJUDGXDWHVn UHVSRQVHV VKHZV WKDW SHUFHQW RI WKHP HYDOXDWHG WKH VHUYLFHV DFWLYLWLHV DQG VWDII RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DV H[WUHPHO\ HIIHFWLYH SHUFHQW YHU\ HIIHFWLYH SHUFHQW HIIHFWLYH SHUFHQW QRW HIIHFWLYH DQG SHUFHQW H[n WUHPHO\ LQHIIHFWLYH $IWHU ILQGLQJ WKDW WKH VWXGHQWV ZHUH JHQHUDOO\ DSSUHFLn DWLYH DQG VDWLVILHG ZLWK WKH VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLWLHV RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP WKH UHVHDUFKHUnV QH[W WDVN ZDV WR PHDVXUH WKH DFDGHPLF SURJUHVV RI WKH VWXGHQWV ZKLOH HQUROOHG DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 6WDWLVWLFDO GDWD H[WUDFWHG IURP WKH VWXGHQWVn WUDQVFULSWV ZHUH XVHG WR FRPSXWH JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV DQG PHDVXUH DFDGHPLF SURJUHVV

PAGE 103

7$%/( 121*5$'8$7(6 5(63216(6 72 7+( 48(67,211$,5( (9$/8$7,1* 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 352*5$06 $7 7+( 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$ 1 f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KH@SLQT \RX" ([WUHPHO\ 9HU\ 1RW ([WUHPHO\
PAGE 104

7$%/( &217,18('f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQT \RX"
PAGE 105

7$%/( &217,18('f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQJ \RX"
PAGE 106

7$%/( &217,18('f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQJ \RX ([WUHPHO\ 9HU\ 1RW ([WUHPHO\
PAGE 107

7$%/( &217,18('f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQT \RX" ([WUHPHO\ 9HU\ 1RW ([WUHPHO\
PAGE 108

7c?%/( &217,18('f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\"+RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQJ \RX" ([WUHPHO\ 9HU\ 1RW ([WUHPHO\
PAGE 109

7$%/( &217,18('f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQT \RX
PAGE 110

7$%/( &217,18('f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQJ \RX"
PAGE 111

7$%/( &217,18('f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQT \RX" ([WUHPHO\ 9HU\ 1RW ([WUHPHO\
PAGE 112

7$%/( &217,18('f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQJ \RX"
PAGE 113

7$%/( &217,18('f 'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQJ \RX"
PAGE 114

5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQ :KDW DUH WKH JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD" ,Q REWDLQLQJ WKH DQVZHU WR WKLV TXHVWLRQ WKH UHVHDUFKn HU FRPSXWHG WKH JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV IRU HDFK RI WKH VWXGHQWV LQ WKH VDPSOH 7KLV ZDV DFFRPSOLVKHG E\ H[WUDFWLQJ IURP WKH WUDQVFULSWV WKH JUDGH SRLQWV DQG KRXUV FDUULHG HDFK WHUP E\ HDFK RI WKH VWXGHQWV DQG GLYLGLQJ WKH JUDGH SRLQWV E\ WKH KRXUV FDUULHG WR REWDLQ WKH JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJH $ ZRUN VKHHW ZDV XVHG WR UHFRUG WKH VWXGHQWVn JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV LQ FROXPQV 7KH H[WUHPH ULJKW FROXPQ RI WKH ZRUN VKHHW GHVLJQDWHG WKH WHUP DQG ZDV QXPEHUHG WKURXJK (DFK VWXGHQW ZDV LGHQWLILHG E\ FRGH DW WKH WRS RI HDFK FROXPQ RI WKH ZRUN VKHHW 7KH 6XPPHU % 7HUP ZDV WKH ODVW WHUP IRU ZKLFK WKH WUDQVFULSWV ZHUH REWDLQHG IURP WKH 5HJLVWUDUnV 2IILFH %\ WUDQVFULELQJ DOO GDWD IURP WKH WUDQVFULSWV WR WKH ZRUN VKHHWV WKH UHVHDUFKHU FRXOG UHDGLO\ REVHUYH WKH WHUPV LQ ZKLFK WKH VWXGHQWV ZHUH HQUROOHG QRW HQUROOHG ZLWKGUHZ RU JUDGXDWHG 7KH ZRUN VKHHW ZDV DOVR XVHG WR UHFRUG WKH QXPEHU RI FRXUVHV WKDW WKH VWXGHQWV DWWHPSWHG DQG FRPSOHWHG ZKLOH HQUROOHG $IWHU WKH JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV ZHUH FRPSXWHG DQG UHn FRUGHG RQ WKH ZRUN VKHHWV WKH UHVHDUFKHU FDOFXODWHG WKH

PAGE 115

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n PHDQ JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV ZHUH RU KLJKHU +RZHYHU WKH PHDQ JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJH IRU DOO VHYHQ \HDUV GLG QRW GURS EHORZ JUDGH SRLQWV $QDO\VLV RI 7UDQVFULSWV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 6WXGHQWV WR 2EWDLQ 7KHLU *UDGH 3RLQW $YHUDJHV $Q LQVSHFWLRQ RI WKH JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV LQ 7DEOH UHYHDOV WKDW WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV LQ WKLV JURXS PDLQWDLQHG DERYH DYHUDJH JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV IRU DOO WHUPV H[FHSW WHUPV DQG 7KLV JURXS RI VWXGHQWV H[SHULHQFHG WZR \HDUV RI EHORZ DYHUDJH JUDGH SRLQW

PAGE 116

DYHUDJHV 7KH\ RFFXUUHG GXULQJ WKH WKLUG DQG HLJKWK \HDUV RI WKHLU HQUROOPHQW $QDO\VLV RI 7UDQVFULSWV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 6WXGHQWV WR 2EWDLQ 7KHLU *UDGH 3RLQW $YHUDJHV $Q DQDO\VLV RI WKH JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV LQ 7DEOH LQGLFDWHV WKDW WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV LQ WKLV JURXS ZHUH EHWWHU DFDGHPLFDOO\ WKDQ WKH SUHYLRXV WZR JURXSV 7KLV JURXS SHUIRUPHG SRRUO\ GXULQJ WHUPV DQG ZLWK D SRRU RYHUDOO SHUIRUPDQFH GXULQJ WKH VHYHQWK \HDU 7KH VWXGHQWV LQ WKLV JURXS PDLQWDLQHG D KLJKHU JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJH LQ WKHLU ILUVW WHUP WKDQ DQ\ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV JURXS LQ WKLV VWXG\ 7KH\ DOVR KDG D KLJKHU JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJH GXULQJ WKHLU ILUVW WHUP WKDQ WKDW RI WKH WRWDO VWXGHQW ERG\ ZKLFK ZDV JUDGH SRLQWV WR IRU WKH WRWDO VWXGHQW ERG\ $QDO\VLV RI 7UDQVFULSWV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 6WXGHQWV WR REWDLQ 7KHLU *UDGH 3RLQW $YHUDJHV $Q LQVSHFWLRQ RI 7DEOH WR UHSRUW RQ WKH JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV IRU WKLV JURXS RI VWXGHQWV LQGLFDWHV WKDW WKH\ PDLQWDLQHG JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV RI RU KLJKHU IRU FRQVHFXWLYH WHUPV 'XULQJ WHUPV DQG WKHLU JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV GHFOLQHG WR DQG UHVSHFWLYHO\ 7KHLU PHDQ JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJH IRU WKH ILIWK \HDU ZDV DOVR EHORZ JUDGH SRLQWV 2YHUDOO WKLV JURXS RI VWXGHQWV

PAGE 117

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

PAGE 118

7$%/( 0($1 *5$'( 32,17 $9(5$*(6 3(5 7(50 $1' 3(5 <($5 )25 6(/(&7(' 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 678'(176 :+2 ,1,7,$//< (152//(' '83,1* 7+( 6800(5 2) 7HUP *UDGH 1XPEHU RI 7HUP
PAGE 119

7$%/( &217,18('f UHUP 7HUP
PAGE 120

7$%/( 0($1 *5$'( 32,17 $9(5$*(6 3(5 7(50 $1' 3(5 <($5 )25 6(/(&7(' 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 678'(176 :+2 ,1,7,$//< (152//(' '85,1* 7+( 6800(5 2) 7HUP *UDGH 1XPEHU RI 7HUP
PAGE 121

,OO 7$%/( &217,18('f 7HUP 7HUP
PAGE 122

7$%/( 0($1 *5$'( 32,17 $9(5$*(6 3(5 7(50 $1' 3(5 <($5 )25 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 678'(176 :+2 ,1,7,$//< (152//(' '85,1* 7+( 6800(5 2) 7HUP 7HUP
PAGE 123

7$%/( &217,18('f 7HUP 7HUP
PAGE 124

7$%/( :($1 *5$'( 32,17 $9(5$*(6 3(5 7(50 $1' 3(5 <($5 )25 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 678'(176 :+2 ,1,7,$//< (152//(' '85,1* 7+( 6800(5 2) 7HUP 7HUP
PAGE 125

7$%/( &217,18('f 7HUP 7HUP
PAGE 126

7$%/( 0($1 *5$'( 32,17 $9(5$*(6 3(5 7(50 $1' 3(5 <($5 )25 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 678'(176 :+2 ,1,7,$//< (152//(' '85,1* 7+( 6800(5 2) 7HUP 7HUP *UDGH 1XPEHU RI 7HUP
PAGE 127

7$%/( &217,18('f 7HUP *UDGH 1XPEHU RI 7HUP 7HUP
PAGE 128

7$%/( 0($1 *5$'( 32,17 $9(5$*(6 2) $// 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$ 678'(176 7HUP *UDGH 7HUP
PAGE 129

7$%/( &217,18('f 7HUP *UDGH 7HUP
PAGE 130

7DEOH GHVFULEHV \HDUO\ JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV HDUQHG E\ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV 'XULQJ WKH \HDU RI WKHLU LQLWLDO HQUROOPHQW WKH JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV IRU DOO JURXSV UDQJHG IURP WR 7KH FODVV RI DFKLHYHG WKH KLJKHVW JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJH RI DOO WKH JURXSV LQ WKHLU LQLWLDO \HDU 7KLV VDPH FODVV DOVR DFKLHYHG WKH KLJKHVW JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJH IRU DOO JURXSV GXULQJ DQ\ RI WKH \HDUV RI WKH VWXG\ GXULQJ WKH IRXUWK \HDU 7KH UHVHDUFKHU IRXQG WKDW WKH JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV IRU DOO JURXSV GXULQJ WKHLU ILUVW DQG VHFRQG \HDUV ZHUH LQ WKH UDQJH RI WR 7KLV LV D VLJQLILFDQW ILQGLQJ LQ WKDW WKH VWXGHQWV DUH SURYLGHG WKH VXSSRUWLYH VHUYLFHV RI WKH 3URJUDP SULPDULO\ GXULQJ WKHLU ILUVW DQG VHFRQG \HDUV RI HQUROOPHQW DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 7$%/( *5$'( 32,17 $9(5$*(6 )25 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' 63(&,$/ 678'(176 '85,1* 7+( 3(5,2'
PAGE 131

,Q WKH SURFHVV RI DQDO\]LQJ WKH GDWD IURP WKH WUDQn VFULSWV WR DQVZHU WKH VHFRQG UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQ WKH UHn VHDUFKHU REVHUYHG GLIIHUHQFHV LQ WKH YDULHW\ DQG QXPEHU RI FRXUVHV LQ ZKLFK WKH VWXGHQWV ZHUH HQUROOHG 7DEOH LOOXVWUDWHV WKH NLQG RI FRXUVHV LQ ZKLFK WKH 6SHFLDO f6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV ZHUH HQUROOHG GXULQJ WKHLU ILUVW WHUPV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD (DFK VWXGHQW FDUULHG DQ DYHUDJH RI FUHGLWV IURP WKH FRXUVHV OLVWHG 7KH FODVVHV LQ ZKLFK WKH VWXGHQWV ZHUH HQUROOHG IRU FUHGLW GXULQJ WKHLU ILUVW WHUP LQ GLG QRW VLJQLILFDQWO\ GLIIHU GXULQJ WKH RU VFKRRO \HDUV +RZHYHU WKH QXPEHU RI FRXUVHV WDNHQ LQFUHDVHG DQG LQ UHDGLQJ DQG ZULWLQJ FRXUVHV IRU FUHGLW ZHUH LQFOXGHG LQ WKH FRXUVHV WDNHQ E\ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV GXULQJ WKHLU ILUVW WHUPV RI HQUROOPHQW

PAGE 132

7$%/( &2856(6 7$.(1 %< 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 678'(176 '85,1* 7+(,5 ),567 7(506 2) (152//0(17 $7 7+( 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$ %(7:((1 $1' &RXUVH &UHGLW &RXUVH 3UHIL[ &RXUVH 7LWOH 4XDUWHU +RXUVf 6XPPHU %(6 &UHDWLYH DQG &ULWLFDO 7KLQNLQJ &06 )XQGDPHQWDO 0DWK (+ )UHVKPDQ (QJOLVK &36 7KH 3K\VLFDO 6FLHQFHV 66& $PHULFDQ ,QVWLWXWLRQV 6XPPHU ((6 6SHFLDO 7RSLFV &06 )XQGDPHQWDO 0DWK (+ )UHVKPDQ (QJOLVK &36 7KH 3K\VLFDO 6FLHQFHV 66& $PHULFDQ ,QVWLWXWLRQV 06 $OJHEUD DQG 7ULJRQRPHWU\ 6XPPHU %(6 &UHDWLYH DQG &ULWLFDO 7KLQNLQJ &06 )XQGDPHQWDO 0DWK (+ )UHVKPDQ (QJOLVK &36 7KH 3K\VLFDO 6FLHQFHV 66& $PHULFDQ ,QVWLWXWLRQV 06 $OJHEUD DQG 7ULJRQRPHWU\

PAGE 133

7$%/( &217,18('f &RXUVH 3UHIL[ &RXUVH 7LWOH &RXUVH &UHGLW 4XDUWHU +RXUVf 6XPPHU %(6 6SHFLDO 7RSLFV &36 7KH 3K\VLFDO 6FLHQFHV (+ :ULWLQJ /DERUDWRU\ (+ ([SRVLWRU\ :ULWLQJ VVF $PHULFDQ ,QVWLWXWLRQV 06 3UHFDOFXOXV $OJHEUD 6XPPHU %(6 6SHFLDO 7RSLFV &36 7KH 3K\VLFDO 6FLHQFHV (+ 5HDGLQJ &RQWHQW $UHD (+ :ULWLQJ /DERUDWRU\ (+ ([SRVLWRU\ :ULWLQJ 66& $PHULFDQ ,QVWLWXWLRQV 06 %DVLF $OJHEUD 3/ %DVLF &RQFHSWV

PAGE 134

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n GRPO\ VHOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV RI WKLV VWXG\ VHH

PAGE 135

7DEOHV DQG f 7KHVH WDEOHV LQGLFDWH WKDW QRQH RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV ZDV VXVSHQGHG RU GLG QRW UHJLVWHU EXW WKHUH ZDV RQH ZKR ZLWKGUHZ $QDO\VLV RI &ODVV (QUROOLQJ LQ 7DEOH VKRZV WKDW DIWHU HLJKW WHUPV \HDUVf SHUFHQW RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV ZHUH VWLOO HQn UROOHG $IWHU WHUPV \HDUVf SHUFHQW RI WKH VWXn GHQWV UHPDLQHG HQUROOHG 7KH QXPEHU DQG SHUFHQWDJH RI VWXGHQWV QRW HQUROOHG DIWHU WHUPV ZDV DIIHFWHG E\ WKH IDFW WKDW VRPH RI WKHVH VWXGHQWV JUDGXDWHG 'XULQJ WKH :LQWHU 7HUP RI VWXGHQW SHUFHQWf IURP WKH FODVV RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV ZKR HQUROOHG LQ WKH 6XPPHU 7HUP JUDGXDWHG $OVR GXULQJ WKH :LQWHU 7HUP VWXGHQWV SHUFHQWf ZHUH QRW HQUROOHG IRU SHUVRQDO DFDGHPLF ILQDQFLDO RU RWKHU XQNQRZQ UHDVRQV $QDO\VLV RI &ODVV (QUROOLQJ LQ 7DEOH LQGLFDWHV WKDW DIWHU WHUPV \HDUVf SHUFHQW RI WKH UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV ZKR HQWHUHG WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD GXULQJ WKH 6XPPHU 7HUP ZHUH HQUROOHG $IWHU WHUPV \HDUVf WKH SHUFHQWn DJH RI VWXGHQWV VWLOO HQUROOHG UHPDLQHG DW SHUFHQW 'XULQJ WKH 6XPPHU 7HUP VWXGHQWV SHUFHQWf JUDGXDWHG VWXGHQWV SHUFHQWf ZHUH DOVR QRW HQUROOHG

PAGE 136

IRU SHUVRQDO DFDGHPLF RU ILQDQFLDO UHDVRQV ,W LV DOVR SRVVLEOH WKDW SHUFHQW RI WKH VWXGHQWV ZHUH QRW HQUROOHG EHFDXVH LW ZDV WKH VXPPHU WHUP 7KH WDEOH UHIOHFWV D KLJK SHUFHQWDJH RI VWXGHQWV QRW HQUROOHG GXULQJ WKH VXPPHU WHUPV $QDO\VLV RI &ODVV (QUROOLQJ $Q LQVSHFWLRQ RI 7DEOH VKRZV WKDW LQ WKH HLJKWK WHUP \HDUVf SHUFHQW RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV ZHUH VWLOO HQUROOHG ,Q WKH VL[WHHQWK WHUP \HDUVf SHUFHQW RI WKH VWXGHQWV UHPDLQHG HQUROOHG 7KH ILUVW VWXGHQW WR JUDGXDWH IURP WKLV JURXS GLG VR LQ WHUPV \HDUVf $OVR GXULQJ WKLV WZHOIWK WHUP SHUFHQW RI WKH VWXGHQWV ZKR LQLWLDOO\ HQUROOHG GXULQJ WKH 6XPPHU 7HUP ZHUH QRW HQUROOHG IRU UHDVRQV RWKHU WKDQ JUDGXDWLRQ $QDO\VLV RI &ODVV (QUROOLQJ LQ 7DEOH UHSRUWV WKDW LQ WHUPV \HDUVf SHUFHQW RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV ZHUH VWLOO HQUROOHG DIWHU WKHLU LQLWLDO HQUROOPHQW GXULQJ WKH 6XPPHU 7HUP 'XUn LQJ WKH VL[WHHQWK WHUP \HDUVf SHUFHQW RI WKH VWXGHQWV UHPDLQHG HQUROOHG ZLWK SHUFHQW KDYLQJ JUDGXDWHG DQG SHUFHQW QRW HQUROOHG IRU UHDVRQV RWKHU WKDQ JUDGXDWLRQ

PAGE 137

$QDO\VLV RI &ODVV (QUROOLQJ LQ $Q LQVSHFWLRQ RI 7DEOH VKRZV WKDW LQ WHUPV \HDUVf SHUFHQW RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV ZKR HQUROOHG DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD GXULQJ WKH 6XPPHU 7HUP ZHUH VWLOO HQUROOHG %\ WKH VL[WHHQWK WHUP \HDUVf SHUFHQW RI WKH VWXGHQWV ZHUH HQUROOHG IRU WKH $ WHUP SHUFHQW ZHUH HQUROOHG IRU WKH % WHUP DQG SHUFHQW ZHUH HQUROOHG IRU WKH & WHUP 7KH FRPELQHG HQUROOPHQW IRU WKH VL[WHHQWK WHUP ZDV SHUFHQW 6XPPDUY L ‘‘ r 'XULQJ WKH \HDUV EHWZHHQ DQG WKH UHWHQWLRQ UDWHV IRU WKH UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV UDQJHG IURP SHUFHQW WR SHUFHQW GXULQJ WKH ILUVW WZR \HDUV RI WKHLU LQLWLDO HQUROOPHQW 2YHU WKH ILYH\HDU SHULRG RI WKLV VWXG\ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP UHWDLQHG SHUFHQW RI WKHVH VWXGHQWV GXULQJ WKHLU ILUVW WZR \HDUV 7KH UHWHQWLRQ UDWHV IRU IRXU \HDUV DIWHU WKHVH VWXGHQWVn LQLWLDO HQUROOPHQW UDQJHG IURP SHUFHQW WR SHUFHQW ZLWK DQ DYHUDJH UHWHQWLRQ UDWH RI SHUFHQW IRU WKH ILYH JURXSV RI UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG VWXGHQWV ZKR HQUROOHG GXULQJ WKH DQG 6XPPHU 7HUPV

PAGE 138

7$%/( )5(6+0$1 $775,7,21 2) 727$/ 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$ 678'(176 )$// 7(506 7+528*+ (QUROOPHQW 6WDWXV 1XPn EHU 3HUn FHQW 1XPn EHU 3HUn FHQW 1XPn EHU 3HUn FHQW 1XPn EHU 3HUn FHQW 1XPn EHU 3HUn FHQW (QUROOHG f§ f§ f§ f§ f§ :LWKGUHZ 6XVSHQGHG 'LG QRW UHJLVWHU 6RXUFH 5HJLVWUDU 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD

PAGE 139

f 7$%/( )5(6+0$1 $775,7,21 2) 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 678'(176 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$ )$// 7(506 7+528*+ (QUROOPHQW 6WDWXV 1XP 3HU 1XP 3HU 1XP 3HU 1XP 3HU 1XUD 3HU EHU FHQW EHU FHQW EHU FHQW EHU FHQW EHU FHQW (QUROOHG :LWKGUHZ R 6XVSHQGHG R 'LG QRW UHJLVWHU R R

PAGE 140

7$%/( 5(7(17,21 5(&25'6 678'(176 )520 7+( 2) 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' 63(&,$/ &/$66 :+,&+ (152//(' ,1 6(59,&(6 (QUROOHG 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW 7HUP 5HDVRQ 1XPEHU 1RW 8QNQRZQ 3HUFHQW (QUROOHG *UDGXDWHG 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW ,D f§ f§ f§ D f§ f§ f§ f§ D f§ f§ f§ f§ D f§ f§ f§ ,D

PAGE 141

7$%/( &217,18('f 1RW (QUROOHG (QUROOHG 5HDVRQ 8QNQRZQ *UDGXDWHG 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW 7HUP 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW r D D6XPPHU 7HUP

PAGE 142

7$%/( 5(7(17,21 5(&25'6 678'(176 )520 7+( 2) 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' 63(&,$/ &/$66 :+,&+ (152//(' ,1 6(59,&(6 (QUROOHG 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW 7HUP 5HDVRQ 1XPEHU 1RW 8QNQRZQ 3HUFHQW (QUROOHG *UDGXDWHG 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW ,D f§ f§ f§ D f§ f§ f§ f§ D f§ f§ f§ f§ D f§ f§ f§ f§ D f§ D f§

PAGE 143

7$%/( &217,18('f (QUROOHG 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW 7HUP 5HDVRQ 1XPEHU 1RW 8QNQRZQ 3HUFHQW (QUROOHG *UDGXDWHG 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW f§ f§ D f§ nf§ f§ f§ D f§ D6XLUDQHU 7HUP

PAGE 144

7$%/( 5(7(17,21 5(&25'6 678'(176 )520 7+( 2) 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' 63(&,$/ &/$66 :+,&+ (152//(' ,1 6(59,&(6 1RW (QUROOHG (QUROOHG 5HDVRQ 8QNQRZQ *UDGXDWHG 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW 7HUP 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW ,D f f§ f§ f§ f§ f§ f§ f§ D f§ f§ f§ f§ D f§ f§ D ,D

PAGE 145

7$%/( &217,18('f 1RW (QUROOHG (QUROOHG 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW 7HUP 5HDVRQ 1XPEHU 8QNQRZQ 3HUFHQW *UDGXDWHG 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW f§ f§ D f§ f§ D 6XPPHU 7HUP

PAGE 146

7$%/( 5(7(17,21 5(&25'6 678'(176 )520 7+( 2) 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' 63(&,$/ &/$66 :+,&+ (152//(' ,1 6(59,&(6 1RW (QUROOHG (QUROOHG 5HDVRQ 8QNQRZQ *UDGXDWHG 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW 7HUP 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW ,D f§ f§ f§ D f§ f§ f§ f§ D f§ f§ f§ f§ D f§ f§ f§

PAGE 147

7$%/( &217,18('f 1RW (QUROOHG (QUROOHG 5HDVRQ 8QNQRZQ *UDGXDWHG 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW 7HUP 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW 1XPEHU 3HUFHQ E r r f§ f§ E E G f§ G f§ A6XPPHU 7HUP 6XPPHU 7HUP $ 4 A6XPPHU 7HUP % X6XPPHU 7HUP &

PAGE 148

7$%/( 5(7(17,21 5(&25'6 2) 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 678'(176 )520 7+( &/$66 :+,&+ (152//(' ,1 1RW (QUROOHG (QUROOHG 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW 7HUP 5HDVRQ 8QNQRZQ *UDGXDWHG 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW ,D f§ f§ f§ f§ f§ D f§ f§ f§ f§ D f§ f§ f§ f§ D f§ f§ E E G f§ G f§

PAGE 149

7$%/( &217,18('f 1RW (QUROOHG (QUROOHG 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW 7HUP 5HDVRQ 1XPEHU 8QNQRZQ 3HUFHQW *UDGXDWHG 1XPEHU 3HUFHQW E E G r f§ N6XPPHU 7HUUD 6XPPHU $ A6XPPHU % 6XPPHU &

PAGE 150

7$%/( 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 5(7(17,21 5$7(6 )25 7+( 3(5,2' %(7:((1 $1'
PAGE 151

5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQ :KDW DUH WKH JUDGXDWLRQ UDWHV RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URn JUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD" $QDO\VLV RI WKH UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG WUDQVFULSWV SURYLGHG WKH JUDGXDWLRQ UDWHV RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP ZKR LQLWLDOO\ HQUROOHG DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD GXULQJ WKH \HDUV DQG 7DEOHV WKURXJK LQGLFDWH WKH QXPEHU RI WHUPV HQUROOHG EHIRUH JUDGXDWLRQ WKH QXPEHU RI \HDUV VLQFH WKH VWXGHQWn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

PAGE 152

\HDUV ZLWKRXW D EUHDN LQ HQUROOPHQW 7KH DGGLWLRQDO WLPH ZDV UHTXLUHG E\ DQ LQWHUQVKLS $LO WRJHWKHU SHUn FHQWf RI WKH VWXGHQWV IURP WKLV JURXS JUDGXDWHG 7KH OHQJWK RI WLPH WR JUDGXDWH UDQJHG IURP \HDUV WR A \HDUV IURP WKHLU LQLWLDO HQUROOPHQW GDWH 7DEOH f 'HJUHHV (DUQHG 7KH W\SHV RI GHJUHHV HDUQHG E\ WKLV JURXS RI JUDGXDWHV ZHUH DV IROORZV (LJKW UHFHLYHG %DFKHORU RI 6FLHQFH GHn JUHHV WHQ UHFHLYHG %DFKHORU RI $UWV GHJUHHV DQG RQH UHFHLYHG D %DFKHORU RI 0XVLF (GXFDWLRQ GHJUHH 7KH PDMRUV RI WKHVH JUDGXDWHV ZHUH LQ WKH DUHDV RI 0DUNHWLQJ f &ULPLQDO -XVWLFH f %DQNLQJ DQG )LQDQFH f 3V\FKRORJ\ f 5HFUHDWLRQ f )LQDQFH f 3KDUPDF\ f %URDGFDVWLQJ f 6RFLRORJ\ f 0XVLF (GXFDWLRQ f +LVWRU\ f DQG 3ROLWLFDO 6FLHQFH f 7ZR RI WKHVH JUDGXDWHV FRQWLQXHG WKHLU HGXFDWLRQ DQG ZHUH DZDUGHG 6SHFLDOLVW LQ (GXFDWLRQ GHJUHHV LQ &RXQVHORU (GXFDWLRQ 2QH RI WKH JUDGXDWHV WKH 3KDUPDF\ PDMRU LV SUHVHQWO\ LQ 0HGLFDO 6FKRRO DQG LV H[SHFWHG WR UHFHLYH WKH 'RFWRU RI 0HGLFLQH GHJUHH LQ -XQH RI IURP WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGDnV &ROOHJH RI 0HGLFLQH

PAGE 153

&RXUVHV $WWHPSWHG DQG &RPSOHWHG 7KH JUDGXDWHV RI WKH UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG JURXS RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV ZKR HQUROOHG LQ FRPSOHWHG SHUn FHQW RI WKH FRXUVHV WKH\ DWWHPSWHG ZKLOH SXUVXLQJ WKHLU XQGHUJUDGXDWH GHJUHHV WKH QRQJUDGXDWHV FRPSOHWHG SHUn FHQW RI WKHLU FRXUVHV +RZHYHU RQH JUDGXDWH ZDV IRXQG ZKR FRPSOHWHG RQO\ SHUFHQW RI WKH FRXUVHV DWWHPSWHG 7$%/( &2856(6 &203/(7(' 287 2) 7+( 180%(5 2) &2856(6 $77(037(' %< $ 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' *5283 2) 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 678'(176 :+2 (152//(' ,1 6WXGHQW 6WDWXV $YHUDJH 1XPEHU RI &RXUVHV &RPSOHWHG $YHUDJH 1XPEHU RI &RXUVHV $WWHPSWHG 3HUFHQW RI RI &RXUVHV &RPSOHWHG *UDGXDWHV Q f 1RQJUDGXDWHV Q f

PAGE 154

7UDQVFULSW $QDO\VLV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 6WXGHQWV :KR (QUROOHG LQ WR 'HWHUPLQH 7KHLU *UDGXDWLRQ 5DWHV 7KLV DQDO\VLV UHYHDOHG WKDW VWXGHQWV SHUFHQWf JUDGXDWHG RXW RI WKH VWXGHQWV VWXGLHG ZKR HQUROOHG GXULQJ WKH 6XPPHU 7HUP 7KH WLPH UHTXLUHG IRU WKHVH JUDGXDWHV WR FRPSOHWH WKHLU XQGHUJUDGXDWH GHJUHH UHTXLUHPHQWV UDQJHG IURP WHUPV \HDUVf WR WHUPV \HDUVf 2QH VWXGHQW UHPDLQHG FRQWLQXRXVO\ HQUROOHG XQWLO JUDGXDWLRQ E\ FDUU\LQJ FUHGLW KRXUV SHU WHUP IRU IRXU \HDUV 2QH VWXGHQW IURP WKLV JURXS ODFNV RQH FRXUVH IRU JUDGXn DWLRQ 7KLV VWXGHQW LV D SURIHVVLRQDO DWKOHWH ZKR KDV EHHQ XQDEOH WR HQUROO DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ ZKHQ D SDUWLFXODU UHn TXLUHG FRXUVH LV RIIHUHG 2QH RI WKH HOHYHQ VWXGHQWV KDV EHHQ DGPLWWHG WR WKH *UDGXDWH 6FKRRO DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD D VHFRQG LV FXUUHQWO\ HQUROOHG LQ JUDGXDWH VFKRRO DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI :LVFRQVLQ )LYH RI WKH VWXGHQWV UHFHLYHG %DFKHORU RI $UWV GHJUHHV DQG UHFHLYHG %DFKHORU RI 6FLHQFH GHJUHHV 7KHLU PDMRUV ZHUH LQ WKH IROORZLQJ DUHDV 3ROLWLFDO 6FLHQFH f $GYHUWLVLQJ f (FRQRPLFV f 0DUNHWLQJ f %URDGFDVWLQJ f 6RFLRORJ\ f DQG 3XEOLF 5HODWLRQV f 7DEOH f

PAGE 155

&RXUVHV $WWHPSWHG DQG &RPSOHWHG 7KH JUDGXDWHV RI WKH UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG JURXS RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV ZKR HQUROOHG LQ FRPSOHWHG SHUn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f 1RQJUDGXDWHV Q f

PAGE 156

7UDQVFULSW $QDO\VLV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 6WXGHQWV :KR (QUROOHG LQ WR 'HWHUPLQH 7KHLU *UDGXDWLRQ 5DWHV $Q DQDO\VLV RI WKH WUDQVFULSWV RI WKH VWXGHQWV ZKR HQUROOHG LQ WKH 6XPPHU RI UHYHDOV WKDW RI WKH VWXGHQWV SHUFHQWf JUDGXDWHG IURP WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 7KH SHULRG RI WLPH WDNHQ WR REWDLQ WKHLU XQGHUn JUDGXDWH GHJUHHV UDQJHG IURP WHUPV \HDUVf WR WHUPV \HDUVf $ WRWDO RI VWXGHQWV IURP WKLV JURXS JUDGXDWHG LQ IRXU \HDUV RU OHVV 2QH VWXGHQW ZKR REWDLQHG WKH EDFKHORUnV GHJUHH LQ WKUHH \HDUV HQUROOHG LQ WKH *UDGXDWH 6FKRRO DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD DQG ZDV DZDUGHG D PDVWHUnV GHJUHH \HDUV ODWHU :LWKLQ D SHULRG RI \HDUV WKLV VWXGHQW KDG FRPSOHWHG WKH XQGHUJUDGXDWH UHTXLUHPHQWV ZLWK D FXPXODWLYH JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJH DQG WKH JUDGXDWH GHJUHH UHTXLUHPHQWV ZLWK D FXPXODWLYH JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJH 7ZR RWKHU VWXGHQWV IURP WKLV JURXS FRPSOHWHG WKHLU JUDGXDWH DQG SURIHVVLRQDO GHJUHH UHTXLUHPHQWV ZLWKLQ D VHYHQ\HDU SHULRG IURP WKHLU LQLWLDO HQUROOPHQW DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 2QH RI WKHVH VWXGHQWV ZDV DZDUGHG D PDVWHUnV GHJUHH DQG WKH RWKHU D -XULV 'RFWRU GHJUHH 7DEOH f

PAGE 157

'HJUHHV 5HFHLYHG 2I WKH VWXGHQWV LQ WKLV JURXS UHFHLYHG %DFKHORU RI $UWV GHJUHHV DQG UHFHLYHG %DFKHORU RI 6FLHQFH GHJUHHV 7KH PDMRU ILHOGV RI VWXG\ IRU WKHVH GHJUHH UHFLSLHQWV LQn FOXGHG 6SHFLDO (GXFDWLRQ f (QJOLVK f %UHDGFDVWLQJ f 3ROLWLFDO 6FLHQFH f 6SHHFK f 6RFLRORJ\ f 0DUNHWLQJ f 3V\FKRORJ\ f 0DQDJHPHQW f +LVWRU\ f &ULPLQDO -XVWLFH f 3K\VLFDO (GXFDWLRQ f +HDOWK (GXFDWLRQ f &KHPLFDO (QJLQHHULQJ f DQG ,QGXVWULDO DQG 6\VWHPV (QJLQHHULQJ f 7KH QXPEHU DQG W\SHV RI PDMRUV LQ WKLV JURXS RI VWXn GHQWV YDU\ JUHDWO\ IURP WKH SUHYLRXV WZR JURXSV RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV 0RUH VWXGHQWV IURP WKH JURXS JUDGXn DWHG LQ IRXU \HDUV RU OHVV WKDQ ZDV WKH FDVH IRU WKH WZR HDUOLHU JURXSV LQ WKLV VWXG\ &RXUVHV $WWHPSWHG DQG &RPSOHWHG 7KH JUDGXDWHV RI WKH UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG JURXS RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV ZKR HQUROOHG LQ FRPSOHWHG SHUn FHQW RI WKH FRXUVHV WKDW WKH\ DWWHPSWHG ZKLOH SXUVXLQJ WKHLU GHJUHHV WKH QRQJUDGXDWHV FRPSOHWHG SHUFHQW RI WKHLU FRXUVHV 1LQH RI WKH JUDGXDWHV HDFK FRPSOHWHG SHUFHQW RI WKH FRXUVHV WKDW WKH\ DWWHPSWHG 7ZR RI WKH QRQJUDGXDWHV FRPSOHWHG SHUFHQW DQG SHUFHQW RI WKHLU FRXUVHV UHVSHFWLYHO\

PAGE 158

7$(/( &2856(6 &203/(7(' 287 2) 7+( 180%(5 2) &2856(6 $77(037(' %< $ 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' *5283 2) 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 678'(176 :+2 (152//(' ,1 6WXGHQW 6WDWXV $YHUDJH 1XPEHU RI &RXUVHV &RPSOHWHG $YHUDJH 1XPEHU RI &RXUVHV $WWHPSWHG 3HUFHQW RI &RXUVHV &RPSOHWHG *UDGXDWHV Q f 1RQJUDGXDWHV Q f f 7UDQVFULSW $QDO\VLV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 6WXGHQWV :KR (QUROOHG LQ WR 'HWHUPLQH 7KHLU *UDGXDWLRQ 5DWHV $Q DQDO\VLV RI WKH WUDQVFULSWV RI WKLV UDQGRPO\ VHOHFn WHG JURXS RI VWXGHQWV ZKR EHJDQ WKHLU HQUROOPHQW GXULQJ WKH 6XPPHU RI UHYHDOHG WKDW RXW RI WKH VWXGHQWV SHUFHQWf JUDGXDWHG 7KH QXPEHU RI \HDUV IURP WKHLU LQLWLDO HQUROOPHQW WR JUDGXDWLRQ UDQJHG IURP \HDUV WR \HDUV 7KUHH RI WKH JUDGXDWHV IURP WKLV JURXS SHUFHQWf JUDGXDWHG LQ OHVV WKDQ IRXU \HDUV 7KH ILUVW RI WKHVH JUDGXDWHV FRPSOHWHG DOO UHTXLUHPHQWV IRU WKH EDFKHORUnV GHJUHH LQ \HDUV 7DEOH f 'HJUHHV (DUQHG 7KH W\SHV RI GHJUHHV HDUQHG E\ WKLV JURXS RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV LQFOXGHG %DFKHORU RI $UWV DQG (DFKHORU

PAGE 159

RI 6FLHQFH GHJUHHV 7ZR RI WKH GHJUHH UHFLSLHQWV ZHUH FRPn PLVVLRQHG LQ WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV $UP\ DV 6HFRQG /LHXWHQDQWV RQH RI ZKRP LV D IHPDOH 7KH PDMRU ILHOGV RI VWXG\ RI WKHVH JUDGXDWHV ZHUH 6SHFLDO (GXFDWLRQ f 3XEOLF 5HODWLRQV f +HDOWK (GXFDWLRQ f $GYHUWLVLQJ f 3V\FKRORJ\ f &ULPLQDO -XVWLFH f 1XUVLQJ f 5HFUHDWLRQ f DQG 6SHHFK f &RXUVHV $WWHPSWHG DQG &RPSOHWHG 7KH JUDGXDWHV RI WKH UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG JURXS RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV ZKR HQUROOHG LQ FRPSOHWHG SHUn FHQW RI WKHLU FRXUVHV WKH QRQJUDGXDWHV FRPSOHWHG SHUFHQW RI WKHLU FRXUVHV 7ZR RI WKH JUDGXDWHV HDFK FRPn SOHWHG SHUFHQW RI WKHLU FRXUVHV 7KUHH RI WKH QRQn JUDGXDWHV FRPSOHWHG RYHU SHUFHQW RI WKHLU FRXUVHV

PAGE 160

7$%/( &2856(6 &203/(7(' 287 2) 7+( 180%(5 2) &2856(6 $77(037(' %< $ 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' *5283 2) 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 678'(176 :+2 (152//(' ,1 6WXGHQW 6WDWXV $YHUDJH 1XPEHU RI &RXUVHV &RPSOHWHG $YHUDJH 1XPEHU RI &RXUVHV $WWHPSWHG 3HUFHQW RI &RXUVHV &RPSOHWHG *UDGXDWHV Q f 1RQJUDGXDWHV Q f 7UDQVFULSW $QDO\VLV RI 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 6WXGHQWV :KR (QUROOHG LQ WR 'HWHUPLQH 7KHLU *UDGXDWLRQ 5DWHV )URP WKH WUDQVFULSWV RI WKLV UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG JURXS RI VWXGHQWV ZKR LQLWLDOO\ HQUROOHG GXULQJ WKH 6XPPHU 7HUP WKH UHVHDUFKHU IRXQG WKDW SHUFHQWf RI WKH ZKR JUDGXDWHG FRPSOHWHG WKHLU GHJUHH UHTXLUHPHQWV LQ IRXU \HDUV RU OHVV 7KH RWKHU VWXGHQWV FRPSOHWHG WKHLU GHJUHH UHn TXLUHPHQWV LQ WR \HDUV 7KHVH JUDGXDWHV UHSUHn VHQW SHUFHQW RI WKH WRWDO QXPEHU RI VWXGHQWV LQ WKLV JURXS 7KUHH RI WKHVH VWXGHQWV JUDGXDWHG LQ \HDUV RQH RI ZKRP UHFHLYHG KLJK KRQRUV 7KHVH WKUHH VWXGHQWV GLG QRW WDNH D EUHDN LQ WKHLU HQUROOPHQW DQG ZHUH FRQWLQXRXVO\ HQn UROOHG IRU WHUPV 2QH RI WKH WKUHH HDUO\ JUDGXDWHV LV

PAGE 161

SUHVHQWO\ HQUROOHG LQ WKH *UDGXDWH 6FKRRO DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 7ZR RWKHU JUDGXDWHV DUH DOVR HQUROOHG DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD RQH ZLWK SRVWEDFFDODXUHDWH VWDWXV DQG WKH RWKHU LQ WKH &ROOHJH RI /DZ 7DEOH f 'HJUHHV (DUQHG 7KH %DFKHORU RI 6FLHQFH GHJUHH ZDV DZDUGHG WR RI WKH JUDGXDWHV 7KH UHPDLQLQJ JUDGXDWHV UHFHLYHG WKH %DFKHORU RI $UWV GHJUHH 7KH %DFKHORU RI 6FLHQFH GHJUHH UHFLSLHQWV PDMRUHG LQ 0DQDJHPHQW f 5HFUHDWLRQ f 0DUNHWLQJ f 0LFURELRORJ\ DQG &HOO 6FLHQFH f +HDOWK (GXFDWLRQ f (OHFWULFDO (QJLQHHULQJ f DQG )LQDQFH f 7KH %DFKHORU RI $UWV GHJUHH UHFLSLHQWV PDMRUHG LQ WKH DUHDV RI 6RFLRORJ\ f 3ROLWLFDO 6FLHQFH f &ULPLQDO -XVWLFH f 6SHHFK f 6SHFLDO (GXFDWLRQ f DQG 3V\FKRORJ\ f &RXUVHV $WWHPSWHG DQG &RPSOHWHG 7KH JUDGXDWHV RI WKH UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG JURXS RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV ZKR HQUROOHG LQ FRPSOHWHG SHUn FHQW RI WKH FRXUVHV WKDW WKH\ DWWHPSWHG ZKLOH SXUVXLQJ WKHLU XQGHUJUDGXDWH GHJUHHV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 7KH QRQJUDGXDWHV FRPSOHWHG SHUFHQW RI WKHLU FRXUVHV +RZn HYHU RQH QRQJUDGXDWH ZDV IRXQG WR KDYH FRPSOHWHG SHUn FHQW RI WKH FRXUVHV DWWHPSWHG 7KHUH ZHUH WZR JUDGXDWHV ZKR DOVR FRPSOHWHG SHUFHQW RI WKHLU FRXUVHV

PAGE 162

7$%/( &2856(6 &203/(7(' 287 2) 7+( 180%(5 2) &2856(6 $77(037(' %< $ 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' *5283 2) 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 678'(176 :+2 (152//(' ,1 6WXGHQW 6WDWXV $YHUDJH 1XPEHU RI &RXUVHV &RPSOHWHG $YHUDJH 1XPEHU RI &RXUVHV $WWHPSWHG 3HUFHQW RI &RXUVHV &RPSOHWHG *UDGXDWHV Q f 1RQJUDGXDWHV Q f $QDO\VLV RI 0DMRU )LHOGV RI 6WXG\ 7KH UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV ZKR ILUVW HQUROOHG GXULQJ WKH VXPPHUV EHWZHHQ DQG HDUQHG WKHLU XQGHUJUDGXDWH GHJUHHV IURP RQO\ RI WKH VFKRROV DQG FROOHJHV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 7DEOH VKRZV WKH W\SHV RI GHJUHHV PDMRUV WKH QXPEHU RI GHJUHH UHFLSLHQWV IURP HDFK RI WKH HQWHULQJ JURXSV DQG WKH VFKRRO RU FROOHJH WKDW DZDUGHG WKH GHJUHH 2I WKH WRWDO QXPEHU RI JUDGXDWHV SHUFHQW UHFHLYHG WKHLU GHJUHHV IURP WKH &ROOHJH RI /LEHUDO $UWV DQG 6FLHQFHV SHUFHQW IURP WKH &ROOHJH RI %XVLQHVV $GPLQLVWUDWLRQ SHUFHQW IURP WKH &ROOHJH RI -RXUQDOLVP DQG &RPPXQLFDWLRQV SHUFHQW IURP WKH &ROOHJH RI 3K\VLFDO (GXFDWLRQ +HDOWK DQG 5HFUHDWLRQ SHUFHQW IURP WKH &ROOHJH RI (GXFDWLRQ

PAGE 163

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f JUDGXDWHG IURP WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 1LQH SHUFHQW RI WKH VWXGHQWV LQ WKLV VWXG\ JUDGXDWHG LQ OHVV WKDQ \HDUV 7KH JUHDWHVW QXPEHU RI WKHVH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV SHUFHQW JUDGXDWHG LQ WR \HDUV :LWKLQ D SHULRG RI \HDUV IROORZLQJ WKHLU LQLWLDO HQWU\ LQWR WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD SHUFHQW RI WKH VWXGHQWV LQ WKLV VWXG\ KDG JUDGXDWHG +RZHYHU WKHUH ZHUH SHUFHQW RI WKH VWXGHQWV LQ WKLV VWXG\ ZKR WRRN WR \HDUV WR JUDGXDWH

PAGE 164

7$%/( $1$/<6,6 2) 7+( 180%(5 2) 7(506 )520 ,1,7,$/ (152//0(17 72 *5$'8$7,21 )25 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' %/$&. 678'(176 ,1 7+( 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 352*5$0 $1' 7+( 7<3( 2) '(*5(( %< 7+( &/$66 :+,&+ (152//(' ,1 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV
PAGE 165

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV (QUROOHG 3ULRU WR *UDGXDWLRQ
PAGE 166

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV (QUROOHG 3ULRU WR *UDGXDWLRQ
PAGE 167

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV
PAGE 168

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV (QUROOHG 3ULRU WR *UDGXDWLRQ
PAGE 169

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV (QUROOHG 3ULRU WR *UDGXDWLRQ
PAGE 170

7$%/( $1$/<6,6 2) 7+( 180%(5 2) 7(506 )520 ,1,7,$/ (152//0(17 72 *5$'8$7,21 )25 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' %/$&. 678'(176 ,1 7+( 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 352*5$0 $1' 7+( 7<3( 2) '(*5(( %< 7+( &/$66 :+,&+ (152//(' ,1 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV (QUROOHG 3ULRU WR *UDGXDWLRQ
PAGE 171

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV (QUROOHG 3ULRU WR *UDGXDWLRQ
PAGE 172

7$%/( &217,18('f  1XPEHU RI 7HUPV (QUROOHG 3ULRU WR *UDGXDWLRQ
PAGE 173

7$%/( $1$/<6,6 2) 7+( 180%(5 2) 7(506 )520 ,1,7,$/ (152//0(17 72 *5$'8$7,21 )25 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' %/$&. 678'(176 ,1 7+( 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 352*5$0 $1' 7+( 7<3( 2) '(*5(( %< 7+( &/$66 :+,&+ (152//(' ,1 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV
PAGE 174

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV (QUROOHG 3ULRU WR *UDGXDWLRQ
PAGE 175

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV (QUROOHG 3ULRU WR *UDGXDWLRQ
PAGE 176

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV
PAGE 177

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV
PAGE 178

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV (QUROOHG 3ULRU WR *UDGXDWLRQ
PAGE 179

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV (QUROOHG 3ULRU WR *UDGXDWLRQ
PAGE 180

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV (QUROOHG 3ULRU WR *UDGXDWLRQ
PAGE 181

7$ %/( $1$/<6,6 2) 7+( 180%(5 2) 7(506 )520 ,1,7,$/ (152//0(17 72 *5$'8$7,21 )25 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' %/$&. 678'(176 ,1 7+( 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 352*5$0 $1' 7+( 7<3( 2) '(*5(( %< 7,,( &/$66 :+,&+ (152//(' ,1 1XPEHU RI 7HUPVn (QUROOHG 3ULRU WR *UDGXDWLRQ
PAGE 182

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV (QUROOHG 3ULRU WR *UDGXDWLRQ
PAGE 183

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV (QUROOHG 3ULRU WR *UDGXDWLRQ
PAGE 184

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV (QUROOHG 3ULRU WR *UDGXDWLRQ
PAGE 185

7$%/( $1$/<6,6 2) 7+( 180%(5 2) 7(506 )520 ,1,7,$/ (152//0(17 72 *5$'8$7,21 )25 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' %/$&. 678'(176 ,1 7+( 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 352*5$0 $1' 7+( 7<3( 2) '(*5(( %< 7+( &/$66 :+,&+ (152//(' ,1 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV
PAGE 186

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV (QUROOHG 3ULRU WR *UDGXDWLRQ
PAGE 187

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV
PAGE 188

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV
PAGE 189

7$%/( &217,18('f 4 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV (QUROOHG 3ULRU WR *UDGXDWLRQ
PAGE 190

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV
PAGE 191

7$%/( &217,18('f 1XPEHU RI 7HUPV (QUROOHG 3ULRU WR *UDGXDWLRQ
PAGE 192

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t 6FLHQFHV /LEHUDO $UWV t 6FLHQFHV (QJLQHHULQJ (QJLQHHULQJ (QJLQHHULQJ /LEHUDO $UWV t 6FLHQFHV %XVLQHVV $GPLQLVWUDWLRQ 3K\VLFDO (GXFDWLRQ +HDOWK DQG 5HFUHDWLRQ /LEHUDO $UWV t 6FLHQFHV %XVLQHVV $GPLQLVWUDWLRQ

PAGE 193

7$%/( &217,18('f 'HJUHH0DMRU %DFKHORU RI 6FLHQFH 0DUNHWLQJ %DFKHORU RI 6FLHQFH 0LFURELRORJ\ DQG &HOO 6FLHQFH %DFKHORU RI 0XVLF (GXn FDWLRQ0XVLF (GXFDWLRQ %DFKHORU RI 6FLHQFH 1XUVLQJ %DFKHORU RI 6FLHQFH 3KDUPDF\ %DFKHORU RI 6FLHQFH 3K\VLFDO (GXFDWLRQ %DFKHORU RI $UWV 3ROLWLFDO 6FLHQFH %DFKHORU RI $UWV 3V\FKRORJ\ %DFKHORU RI 6FLHQFH 3XEOLF 5HODWLRQV %DFKHORU RI 6FLHQFH 5HFUHDWLRQ 6FKRRO&ROOHJH %XVLQHVV $GPLQLVWUDWLRQ $JULFXOWXUH )LQH $UWV 1XUVLQJ 3KDUPDF\ 3K\VLFDO (GXFDWLRQ +HDOWK DQG 5HFUHDWLRQ /LEHUDO $UWV t 6FLHQFHV /LEHUDO $UWV t 6FLHQFHV -RXUQDOLVP 3K\VLFDO (GXFDWLRQ +HDOWK DQG 5HFUHDWLRQ

PAGE 194

7$%/( &217,18('f 'HJUHH0DMRU 6FKRRO&ROOHJH %DFKHORU RI $UWV 6RFLRORJ\ /LEHUDO $UWV t 6FLHQFHV %DFKHORU RI $UWV LQ (GXFDWLRQ6SHFLD (GXFDWLRQ (GXFDWLRQ %DFKHORU RI $UWV 6SHHFK /LEHUDO $UWV t 6FLHQFHV 7RWDO 'HJUHHV

PAGE 195

7$%/( 180%(5 2) 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 678'(176 :+2 *5$'8$7(' %< <($5 2) ,1,7,$/ (152//0(17
PAGE 196

7$%/( 180%(5 2) 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 678'(176 %< /(1*7+ 2) 7,0( 5(48,5(' 72 *5$'8$7( /HQJWK RI 7LPH WR *UDGXDWH LQ
PAGE 197

5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQ :KDW LQIOXHQFH GRHV WKH SHHU FRXQVHORU FRPSRQHQW KDYH RQ WKH DFDGHPLF SHUIRUPDQFH RI %ODFN VWXn GHQWV LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD" ,Q WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP SHHU FRXQVHORUV IXQFWLRQ DV H[WHQVLRQV RI WKH IXOOWLPH FRXQVHOLQJ VWDII )RU WKH VWDII WKH\ SURYLGH IHHGEDFN IURP WKH VWXGHQWV ZKR DUH DVVLJQHG WR WKHP 3HHU FRXQVHORUV DUH H[SHFWHG WR PDNH ZHHNO\ FRQWDFWV ZLWK WKHLU DVVLJQHG FDVH ORDG RI WR VWXGHQWV DQG WR UHSRUW WKHLU ILQGLQJV WR WKH VWDII FRXQVHORU ,WHPV DQG D RI WKH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH (YDOXDWLQJ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV 4(663f ZHUH DQDO\]HG IRU GDWD SHUWDLQLQJ WR WKH LQIOXHQFHV RI WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV RQ WKH DFDGHPLF SHUIRUPDQFHV RI UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV $Q DQDO\VLV RI WKH GDWD IURP WKH 4(663 SHUWDLQLQJ WR SHHU FRXQVHORUV LV SUHVHQWHG ERWK IRU WKH JUDGXDWHV DQG QRQJUDGXDWHV RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP 7KH UHVHDUFKHU SUHVHQWV DQ DQDO\VLV RI WKH UHVSRQVHV WR TXHVWLRQV DERXW SHHU FRXQVHORU HIIHFWLYHQHVV IRU WKH JUDGXn DWHV ILUVW IROORZHG E\ WKH DQDO\VLV RI WKH QRQJUDGXDWHVn UHVSRQVHV

PAGE 198

$QDO\VLV RI WKH 3HHU &RXQVHORUVn (IIHFWLYHn QHVV DV 3HUFHLYHG E\ 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG *UDGXDWHV RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP +RZ ZRXOG \RX GHVFULEH WKH HIIHFW RI \RXU SHHU FRXQn VHORU LQ FRQWULEXWLQJ WR \RXU DFDGHPLF SHUIRUPDQFH" ZDV WKH TXHVWLRQ DVNHG LQ ,WHP RQ WKH 4(663 7ZHQW\ILYH SHUFHQWf RI WKH JUDGXDWHV UHVSRQGHG WKDW WKH FRQWULEXWLRQV RI WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORUV WR WKHLU DFDGHPLF SHUIRUPDQFH ZHUH HIIHFWLYH WR H[WUHPHO\ HIIHFWLYH +RZHYHU SHUFHQWf RI WKH JUDGXDWHV UHVSRQGHG QHJDWLYHO\ DQG UDWHG WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORUVn FRQWULEXWLRQV WR WKHLU DFDGHPLF SHUIRUPDQFH DV QRW HIIHFWLYH 2QH JUDGXDWH SHUFHQWf GHVFULEHG WKH SHHU FRXQVHORU DV H[WUHPHO\ LQHIIHFWLYH 2YHUDOO SHUFHQW RI WKH VWXGHQWV GHVFULEHG WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORU DV HIIHFWLYH ZKLOH SHUFHQW UHSRUWHG WKDW WKH\ ZHUH LQHIIHFWLYH LQ FRQWULEXWLQJ WR WKHLU DFDGHPLF SHUIRUPDQFH 7KH IUHTXHQF\ RI WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUVn FRQWDFW ZLWK WKH VWXGHQWV ZDV VROLFLWHG E\ ,WHP 7KH GDWD LQGLFDWHG WKDW SHUFHQW RI WKH JUDGXDWHV ZHUH FRQWDFWHG ZHHNO\ E\ WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORUV SHUFHQW WZLFH D ZHHN SHUFHQW PRQWKO\ DQG SHUFHQW UHSRUWHG WKDW WKH\ ZHUH VHOGRP FRQn WDFWHG E\ WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORUV 2YHUDOO SHUFHQW RI WKH VWXGHQWV ZHUH LQ FRPPXQLFDWLRQ ZLWK WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORUV RQFH RU WZLFH D ZHHN

PAGE 199

+RZ ZRXOG \RX GHVFULEH WKH RYHUDOO HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI WKH SHHU FRXQVHORU" ZDV DVNHG RQ ,WHP 7KH JUDGXDWHV GHVFULEHG WKH RYHUDOO HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORUV LQ SURYLGLQJ WKHP ZLWK KHOSIXO H[SHULHQFHV WR PDNH WKH WUDQn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f UDWHG WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORU DV H[WUHPHO\ HIIHFWLYH LQ WKLV DUHD JUDGXDWHV SHUFHQWf UDWHG WKHP YHU\ HIIHFWLYH JUDGXn DWHV SHUFHQWf WKRXJKW WKDW WKH\ ZHUH HIIHFWLYH DQG JUDGXDWH SHUFHQWf UDWHG WKHP DV QRW HIIHFWLYH $FDGHPLF &RQFHUQV 7ZHQW\VL[ RI JUDGXDWHV LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH\ KDG UHn FHLYHG FRXQVHOLQJ IURP SHHU FRXQVHORUV DERXW DFDGHPLF FRQn FHUQV 2I WKHVH SHUFHQWf UHSRUWHG WKDW WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV ZHUH H[WUHPHO\ HIIHFWLYH LQ WKLV DUHD

PAGE 200

SHUFHQWf YHU\ HIIHFWLYH DQG SHUFHQWf HIIHFWLYH 2QH JUDGXDWH SHUFHQWf IHOW WKDW WKH SHHU FRXQVHORU ZDV QRW HIIHFWLYH LQ FRXQVHOLQJ RQ DFDGHPLF FRQFHUQV 6RFLDO &RQFHUQV 6L[WHHQ RI JUDGXDWHV UHSRUWHG WKDW WKH\ KDG UHFHLYHG KHOS IURP SHHU FRXQVHORUV LQ VRFLDO FRQFHUQV 6SHFLILFDOO\ JUDGXDWHV SHUFHQWf WKRXJKW WKDW WKLV FRXQVHOLQJ ZDV H[WUHPHO\ HIIHFWLYH SHUFHQWf YHU\ HIIHFWLYH SHUFHQWf HIIHFWLYH DQG SHUFHQWf QRW HIIHFWLYH )LQDQFLDO $LG 7ZHQW\IRXU RI JUDGXDWHV UHSRUWHG WKDW WKH\ KDG UHn FHLYHG FRXQVHOLQJ IURP WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV RQ ILQDQFLDO DLG PDWWHUV 2QO\ SRVLWLYH FRPPHQWV ZHUH PDGH $Q H[WUHPHO\ HIIHFWLYH UDWLQJ ZDV JLYHQ E\ SHUFHQWf RI WKH JUDGXn DWHV D YHU\ HIIHFWLYH UDWLQJ ZDV JLYHQ E\ SHUFHQWf RI WKH JUDGXDWHV DQG SHUFHQWf UDWHG WKLV DUHD DV HIIHFWLYH 2QO\ QHJDWLYH UHVSRQVHV ZHUH PDGH DERXW WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUVn HIIHFWLYHQHVV LQ FRXQVHOLQJ FRQFHUQLQJ SHUVRQDO DFDGHPLF VRFLDO DQG ILQDQFLDO DLG PDWWHUV ,WHP RQ WKH 4(663 LQGLFDWHV WKDW LQ JHQHUDO WKH JUDGXDWHV IHOW WKDW WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORUV SHUIRUPHG HIIHFWLYHO\ LQ SURYLGLQJ WKHP SHUVRQDO DFDGHPLF VRFLDO DQG ILQDQFLDO DLG FRXQVHOLQJ

PAGE 201

7XWRULQJ $FFRUGLQJ WR ,WHP D RI JUDGXDWHV UHFHLYHG WXWRULQJ DVVLVWDQFH IURP WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV )RXU RI WKH VWXGHQWV SHUFHQWf UDWHG WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV LQ WKLV DUHD DV H[WUHPHO\ HIIHFWLYH SHUFHQWf YHU\ HIIHFn WLYH DQG SHUFHQWf DV HIIHFWLYH 6XPPDU\ 7KH PDMRULW\ RI WKH JUDGXDWHV LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH\ SHUn FHLYHG WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV DV HIIHFWLYH SURYLGHUV RI FRXQn VHOLQJ VHUYLFHV 3HHU FRXQVHORUV DV WXWRUV ZHUH UDWHG H[WUHPHO\ HIIHFWLYH WR HIIHFWLYH HYHQ WKRXJK WKH\ ZHUH RQO\ XVHG E\ OHVV WKDQ RQHKDOI RI WKH VWXGHQWV $QDO\VLV RI 3HHU &RXQVHORUVn (IIHFWLYHn QHVV DV 3HUFHLYHG E\ 5DQGRPO\ 6HOHFWHG 1RQJUDGXDWHV RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP ,WHP DVNHG WKH VWXGHQWV WR GHVFULEH WKH HIIHFWV RI WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORU RQ WKHLU DFDGHPLF SHUIRUPDQFH ,Q GHVFULELQJ WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUVn FRQWULEXWLRQV WR WKHLU DFDGHPLF SHUIRUPDQFH RI WKH QRQJUDGXDWHV ZHUH SRVLn WLYH LQ WKHLU FRPPHQWV 6SHFLILFDOO\ VWXGHQWV SHUFHQWf VDLG WKDW WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV ZHUH H[WUHPHO\ HIIHFWLYH SHUFHQWf LQGLFDWHG YHU\ HIIHFWLYH DQG SHUFHQWf UHSRUWHG WKHP DV HIIHFWLYH 2Q WKH RWKHU KDQG SHUFHQWf RI WKH QRQJUDGXDWHV ZHUH QHJDWLYH LQ UDWLQJ

PAGE 202

WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORUV LQ WKLV DUHD 7KUHH SHUFHQWf LQn GLFDWHG WKDW WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORUV ZHUH QRW HIIHFWLYH ZKLOH SHUFHQWf UDWHG WKHP DV H[WUHPHO\ LQHIIHFWLYH 2YHUn DOO SHUFHQW RI WKHVH VWXGHQWV VDZ WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORUV DV KDYLQJ FRQWULEXWHG HIIHFWLYHO\ WR WKHLU DFDGHPLF SHUIRUPn DQFH +RZHYHU SHUFHQW KHOG D FRQWUDU\ SRLQW RI YLHZ ,Q WKH DQDO\VLV RI ,WHP ZKLFK VROLFLWHG GDWD RQ SHHU FRXQVHORU FRQWDFWV WKH GDWD VKRZ WKDW PRVW QRQJUDGXn DWHV YLHUH FRQWDFWHG ZHHNO\ E\ WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORUV 2QH VWXGHQW SHUFHQWf LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH SHHU FRXQVHORU PDGH GDLO\ FRQWDFWV SHUFHQWf ZHHNO\ SHUFHQWf WZLFH D ZHHN SHUFHQWf PRQWKO\ DQG SHUFHQWf YHU\ VHOGRP 2YHUDOO SHUFHQW RI WKHVH VWXGHQWV ZHUH FRQn WDFWHG E\ WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORUV RQFH D ZHHN WZLFH D ZHHN RU GDLO\ 7KH VWXGHQWV ZHUH DVNHG LQ ,WHP WR GHVFULEH WKH RYHUDOO HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORUV 7KH GDWD DQDO\]HG IURP ,WHP UHYHDO WKDW WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV ZHUH FRQVLGHUHG HIIHFWLYH E\ WKH ODUJH PDMRULW\ RI WKHVH VWXn GHQWV +RZHYHU VRPH GHVFULEHG WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORUV DV LQHIIHFWLYH 6SHFLILFDOO\ VWXGHQWV SHUFHQWf GHn VFULEHG WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORUV DV H[WUHPHO\ HIIHFWLYH LQ WKLV DUHD SHUFHQWf DV YHU\ HIIHFWLYH DQG SHUFHQWf DV HIIHFWLYH 6L[ QRQJUDGXDWHV SHUFHQWf LQGLFDWHG WKDW

PAGE 203

WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORUV ZHUH QRW HIIHFWLYH DQG SHUFHQWf UDWHG WKH SHHU FRXQVHORU DV H[WUHPHO\ LQHIIHFWLYH :KHQ WKHVH VWXGHQWV ZHUH DVNHG LQ ,WHP WR UDWH WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORUnV HIIHFWLYHQHVV LQ GHDOLQJ ZLWK SHUVRQDO DFDGHPLF DQG VRFLDO FRQFHUQV DORQJ ZLWK ILQDQFLDO DLG FRXQVHOLQJ WKH GDWD UHYHDO WKH IROORZLQJ 3HUVRQDO &RQFHUQV 7KH GDWD LQGLFDWH WKDW RI WKH QRQJUDGXDWLQJ VWXGHQWV UHFHLYHG SHUVRQDO FRXQVHOLQJ IURP WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV DQG GLG QRW 7KRVH VWXGHQWV ZKR UHFHLYHG FRXQVHOLQJ UHODWHG WR XKHLU SHUVRQDO FRQFHUQV SHUFHQW VDLG WKDW LW ZDV H[n WUHPHO\ HIIHFWLYH SHUFHQW VDLG LW ZDV YHU\ HIIHFWLYH DQG SHUFHQW VDLG LW ZDV HIIHFWLYH $FDGHPLF &RQFHUQV 3HHU FRXQVHOLQJ RQ DFDGHPLF FRQFHUQV ZDV UHSRUWHG RQ E\ RI WKH QRQJUDGXDWLQJ VWXGHQWV 7KUHH SHUFHQWf VWDWHG WKDW DVVLVWDQFH LQ WKLV DUHD ZDV H[WUHPHO\ HIIHFWLYH SHUFHQWf YHU\ HIIHFWLYH SHUFHQWf HIIHFWLYH DQG SHUFHQWf QRW HIIHFWLYH 6RFLDO &RQFHUQV $ WRWDO RI VWXGHQWV UHFHLYHG KHOS LQ WKH DUHD RI VRFLDO FRQFHUQV E\ SHHU FRXQVHORUV )RXU SHUFHQWf UHSRUWHG WKDW WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORUV ZHUH H[WUHPHO\ HIIHFn WLYH SHUFHQWf YHU\ HIIHFWLYH SHUFHQWf HIIHFn WLYH SHUFHQWf QRW HIIHFWLYH

PAGE 204

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f UDWHG WKH SHHU FRXQVHORU DV DQ H[WUHPHO\ HIIHFWLYH WXWRU SHUFHQWf UDWHG WKHP DV YHU\ HIIHFWLYH DQG SHUFHQWf VDLG WKDW WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV ZHUH HIIHFWLYH 6XPPDU\ 7KH DQDO\VLV RI ,WHPV DQG D UHYHDOV WKDW WKH QRQJUDGXDWLQJ VWXGHQWV DOVR SHUFHLYHG WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV DV HIIHFWLYH SURYLGHUV RI FRXQVHOLQJ DQG WXWRULQJ VHUYLFHV 7KHLU UDWLQJV RI WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV ZHUH QRW DV

PAGE 205

KLJK DV WKRVH UHSRUWHG E\ WKH JUDGXDWHV DQG WKH\ GLG QRW XWLOL]H WKH VHUYLFHV RI WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV DV RIWHQ DV WKH JUDGXDWHV

PAGE 206

5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQ :KDW LV WKH HFRQRPLF VWDWXV RI %ODFN VWXn GHQWV ZKR SDUWLFLSDWHG LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD" ,Q DQDO\]LQJ WKH WUDQVFULSWV RI UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG %ODFN VWXGHQWV ZKR SDUWLFLSDWHG LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP IURP WR WKH UHVHDUFKHU IRXQG WKDW DSSUR[LPDWHO\ SHUFHQWf JUDGXDWHG HDFK \HDU $ TXHVWLRQ ZKLFK QHHGV WR EH UDLVHG DQG DQVZHUHG LV ZKHWKHU RU QRW WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP LV ZRUWK ZKDW LW LV FRVWLQJ WKH )HGHUDO *RYHUQPHQW DQG WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 7KH DQDO\VLV RI UHVSRQVHV WR ,WHP RQ WKH 4(663 FRQFHUQLQJ WKH W\SH RI ZRUN DQG WLWOH RI WKH MRE KHOG UHYHDOHG WKDW SHUFHQW RI WKH JUDGXDWHV DUH HPSOR\HG IXOOWLPH SHUFHQW DUH HPSOR\HG SDUWWLPH DQG SHUFHQW DUH QRW HPSOR\HG 7KH SHUFHQW VWXGHQWVf ZKR DUH XQHPSOR\HG DUH VWXGHQWV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 7KH W\SH RI ZRUN DQG WLWOH RI WKH MRE LGHQWLILHG E\ WKH JUDGXDWHV ZKR DUH ZRUNLQJ DUH OLVWHG LQ 7DEOH 7KH QRQJUDGXDWHV UHVSRQVHV WR ,WHP LQGLFDWHG WKDW SHUFHQW RI WKH VWXGHQWV DUH HPSOR\HG IXOOWLPH SHUFHQW DUH HPSOR\HG SDUWWLPH DQG SHUFHQW DUH QRW HPSOR\HG 7KH W\SH RI ZRUN DQG WLWOH RI WKH MREV LGHQWLILHG E\ WKH QRQn JUDGXDWHV DUH VKRZQ LQ 7DEOH 7KH GDWD VROLFLWHG E\ ,WHP

PAGE 207

RI WKH 4(663 ZHUH XVHG LQ WKH DQDO\VLV WR GHWHUPLQH WKH SRWHQWLDO HDUQLQJ SRZHU RI WKH VWXGHQWV DQG WKH HFRQRPLF YDOXH RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP 7R DVVHVV WKH HFRQRPLF YDOXH RI WKH 3URJUDP WR WKH )HGHUDO *RYHUQPHQW DQG WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD DQG WR GHWHUPLQH WKH HFRQRPLF VWDWXV RI WKH UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG VWXGHQWV ZKR SDUWLFLSDWHG LQ LW D FRPSXWHU DQDO\VLV ZDV FRQGXFWHG 7KLV DQDO\VLV ZDV DFFRPSOLVKHG E\ XVLQJ D FRPSXWHU SURJUDP FDOOHG WKH 3URJUDP ,PSDFW $VVHVVPHQW 6\VWHP WKDW ZDV GHVLJQHG DQG GHYHORSHG E\ 'U -RKQ 1LFNHQV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 7KH DQDO\VLV VKRZV WKDW WKH SUHVHQW YDOXH RI HDFK JUDGXDWH LQ WKH ILUVW \HDU RI HPSOR\PHQW IROORZLQJ JUDGXDWLRQ LQ WKH ILUVW \HDU RI HPSOR\PHQW IROORZLQJ JUDGXDWLRQ ZDV ZKLOH WKH DYHUDJH QRQJUDGXDWHn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

PAGE 208

7$%/( 7+( 7<3( 2) :25. $1' -2% 7,7/(6 2) 326,7,216 +(/' %< *5$'8$7(6 2) 7+( 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 352n *5$0 $)7(5 *5$'8$7,21 7\SH RI :RUN -RE 7LWOH 3RVWDO &OHUN 86 3RVWDO 6HUYLFH &OHUN &RXQVHOLQJ f %HKDYLRUDO 6SHFLDOLVW 7UHDWPHQW DQG 5HKDELOLWD WLYH 6SHFLDOLVW 8QLW 7UHDWPHQW 6SHFLDOLVW 86 $ULU\ 2IILFHU f /LHXWHQD QW $XGLWLQJ 6WDII $XGLWRU &ROOHJH $GPLVVLRQV $GPLQLVWUDWLYH $VVLVWDQW ,QVXUDQFH f $JHQF\ 0DQDJHU 6DOHVPDQ /D\RXW $UWLVW 3URRIUHDGHU 7KHUDS\ 5HKDELOLWDWLRQ 7KHUDSLVW /DZ /DZ\HU /DZ (QIRUFHPHQW 3ROLFH 2IILFHU 0DUNHWLQJ 6\VWHPV 'HVLJQ &RQVXOWDQW 7HDFKLQJ f )XOOWLPH 7HDFKHU f 3DUWWLPH 7HDFKHU f 5HWDLOLQJ 6DOHV 0DQDJHU +XPDQ 6HUYLFHV 5HVLGHQWLDO 6HUYLFH :RUNHU +HDOWK 6HUYLFHV +HDOWK 6HUYLFH 5HSUHVHQn WDWLYH ,, (QJLQHHULQJ f (QJLQHHU

PAGE 209

7$%/( 7+( 7<3( 2) :25. $1' -2% 7,7/(6 2) 326,7,216 +(/' %< 121*5$'8$7(6 2) 7+( 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 352*5$0 7\SH RI :RUN -RE 7LWOH (OHFWULFDO 'UDIWLQJ f 'UDIWHU )DVW )RRG 5HVWDXUDQW f 0DQDJHU $VVLVWDQW 0DQDJHU 3DUFHO 'HOLYHU\ 836f 'ULYHU 6DOHV 5HWDLO 6DOHV &OHUN $UHD 6XSHUYLVRU &OHUN (QJLQHHULQJ (QJLQHHU $VVLVWDQW 3RVWPDQ 86 3RVW 2IILFH &DUULHU 86 $UP\ +HOLFRSWHU 3LORW2+ ,QWHUQDO 5HYHQXH ,QWHUQDO 5HYHQXH 2IILFHU &RUUHFWLRQV f &RUUHFWLRQDO 2IILFHU 5HKDELOLWDWLRQ DQG 7UHDWn PHQW 6XSHUYLVRU 7HDFKLQJ 6XEVWLWXWH 7HDFKHU &KLOG &DUH &KLOG &DUH :RUNHU -DQLWRULDO -DQLWRU 'DWD 3URFHVVLQJ f &RPSXWHU 3URJUDPPHU &OHUN )RRG DQG %HYHUDJHV 6XSHUYLVRU %XVLQHVV )LQDQFLDO %XVLQHVV &RQVXOWDQW 5HVWDXUDQW :DLWUHVV

PAGE 210

7KH DQDO\VLV DOVR VKRZV WKDW WKH JUDGXDWHV DQG QRQn JUDGXDWHV KDYH WKH SRWHQWLDO RI VSHQGLQJ DQG UHVSHFWLYHO\ GXULQJ WKH ILUVW \HDU RI WKHLU HPSOR\PHQW 7KH SRWHQWLDO VSHQGLQJ SRZHU RI WKHVH WZR JURXSV ZDV GHWHUPLQHG E\ DQ LPSDFW PXOWLSOLHU LQ WKH FRPn SXWHU SURJUDP DQG RWKHU FRQVLGHUDWLRQV VXFK DV LQIODWLRQ DJH HDUQLQJV DQG LQWHUHVW UDWHV 7KH UHVHDUFKHU IRXQG WKDW WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPnV LPSDFW RQ VRFLHW\ LV YDOXHG DW GXULQJ WKH ILUVW \HDU RI WKH JUDGXDWHG VWXGHQWVn HPSOR\PHQW 7KH 3URJUDP LV YDOXHG DW IRU WKH QRQJUDGXDWHG VWXn GHQWV GXULQJ WKH ILUVW \HDU RI WKHLU HPSOR\PHQW 7KH 3URJUDPnV LPSDFW ZDV GHWHUPLQHG E\ PXOWLSO\LQJ WKH SRWHQWLDO VSHQGLQJ SRZHU RI WKH JURXSV E\ WKH QXPEHU LQ HDFK JURXS 3URFHGXUH IRU 0DNLQJ $QDO\VLV RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPnV 9DOXH 7KH SUHVHQW YDOXH RI WKH UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV JUDGXDWHV DQG QRQJUDGXDWHV ZDV FRPSXWHG E\ DGMXVWn LQJ HDFK \HDUnV HDUQLQJV WR WKH SUHVHQW YDOXH )RU H[DPSOH WKH DYHUDJH \HDUO\ VDODU\ IRU WKH JUDGXDWHV ZDV LQ 8VLQJ D GLVFRXQW UDWH RI WKH SUHVHQW YDOXH RI WKH ZDV GHWHUPLQHG WR EH 7KH GLVn FRXQW UDWH ZDV PXOWLSOLHG E\ WKH FXUUHQW YDOXH DQG WKH SURn GXFW ZDV WKHQ VXEWUDFWHG IURP WKH FXUUHQW YDOXH WR DUULYH DW

PAGE 211

WKH SUHVHQW YDOXH RI WKH VDODU\ 7KH SUHVHQW YDOXH IRU WKH QRQJUDGXDWHVn VDODU\ ZDV FRPSXWHG LQ WKH VDPH PDQQHU XVLQJ WKH VDPH GLVFRXQW UDWH 3UHVHQW YDOXH LQGLFDWHV SRWHQWLDO HDUQLQJV DQG FXUUHQW YDOXHV LQGLFDWHV DFWXDO HDUQLQJV 7KH \HDUO\ LQFRPHV UHSRUWHG E\ WKH JUDGXDWHV UHYHDOV WKDW SHUFHQWf ZHUH HDUQLQJ OHVV WKDQ SHUFHQWf SHUFHQWf SHUFHQWf SHUFHQWf SHUFHQWf HDUQLQJ SHUFHQWf DQG SHUFHQWf HDUQLQJ PRUH WKDQ SHU \HDU 7$%/( 7+( <($5/< ,1&20(6 5(3257(' %< 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' *5$'8$7(6 ,QFRPH 5DQJH 1XPEHU RI *UDGXDWHV LQ 5DQJH /HVV WKDQ 0RUH WKDQ 727$/

PAGE 212

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f§ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; 727$/6 D D)RXU VWXGHQWV ZKR ZHUH HQUROOHG DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD GLG QRW UHSRUW WKHLU \HDUO\ LQFRPHV

PAGE 213

7KH IROORZLQJ IRUPXOD ZDV XVHG WR REWDLQ WKH DYHUDJH \HDUO\ VDODU\ RI WKH UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG JUDGXDWHV RU 7RWDO :HLJKWHG 6DODULHV 1 $YHUDJH
PAGE 214

7$%/( 7+( <($5/< ,1&20(6 5(3257(' %< 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' 121*5$'8$7(6 ,QFRPH 5DQJH 1XPEHU RI *UDGXDWHV LQ 5DQJH /HVV WKDQ 0RUH WKDQ 727$/ 7$%/( 7+( :(,*+7(' $9(5$*( <($5/< 6$/$5,(6 )25 5$1'20/< 6(/(&7(' 121*5$'8$7(6 6DODU\ 0LG5DQJH 0XOWLSOLHG E\ 1XPEHU LQ 5DQJH :HLJKWHG 6DODU\ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; 727$/6

PAGE 215

7KH IROORZLQJ IRUPXOD ZDV XVHG WR REWDLQ WKH DYHUDJH \HDUO\ VDODU\ RI WKH UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG QRQJUDGXDWHV 7RWDO :HLJKWHG 6DODULHV 1 $YHUDJH
PAGE 216

& 7$%/( 678'(17 '$7$ )25 &20387(5 $1$/<6,6 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV *UDGXDWHV 1RQJUDGXDWHV &RPSOHWHUV SHU \HDU $YHUDJH EHJLQQLQJ \HDUO\ VDODU\ LQ GROODUVf $YHUDJH VDODU\ EHIRUH WUDLQLQJ LQ GROODUVf HVWLPDWHG EDVHG RQ PLQLPXP ZDJHVf $YHUDJH PD[LPXP VDODU\ IRU RFFXSDWLRQ LQ GROODUVf $YHUDJH DJH RI FRPSOHWHUV $YHUDJH DJH RI UHWLUHPHQW IRU RFFXSDWLRQ ,PSDFW PXOWLSOLHU ,QIODWLRQ UDWH 6XUYLYRU UDWH WR UHWLUH PHQW DJH $JH SURGXFWLYLW\ IDFWRU 5DWH RI SUHVHQW YDOXH GLVFRXQW 6XPPDU\ 7KH DQDO\VLV RI WKH GDWD VKRZV WKDW WKH UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG JUDGXDWHV HDUQHG PRUH WKDQ WKH UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG QRQJUDGXDWHV +RZHYHU WKHUH ZHUH SHUFHQWf RI WKH QRQJUDGXDWHV ZKR UHSRUWHG VDODULHV UDQJLQJ IURP WR PRUH WKDQ \HDUO\ SHUFHQWf RI WKH JUDGXn DWHV DOVR UHSRUWHG VDODULHV LQ WKDW UDQJH 2I WKH QRQJUDGXn DWHV SHUFHQWf UHSRUWHG WKHLU HDUQLQJV DV OHVV WKDQ \HDUO\ ZKLOH RQO\ SHUFHQWf RI WKH JUDGXDWHV SODFHG WKHPVHOYHV LQ WKDW UDQJH

PAGE 217

7KH HFRQRPLF YDOXH RI WKH 3URJUDP ZDV GHWHUPLQHG WR EH 7KLV ILJXUH UHSUHVHQWV WKH SRWHQWLDO VSHQGLQJ SRZHU RI WKH WZR JURXSV GXULQJ WKHLU ILUVW \HDU RI HPSOR\n PHQW PLQXV SHU \HDU WKH DYHUDJH FRVW RI RSHUDWLQJ WKH 3URJUDP 7KH 3URJUDPnV VWXGHQWV UHSUHVHQW D SRVLWLYH HIIHFW WR WKH HFRQRP\ ZKHUHE\ WKHVH VWXGHQWV DUH FRQWULEXWLQJ WR LW E\ EHLQJ HPSOR\HG DQG SD\LQJ WD[HV UDWKHU WKDQ WDNLQJ IURP LW DV UHFLSLHQWV RI 6WDWH DQG )HGHUDO DLG

PAGE 218

&+$37(5 9 ',6&866,21 &21&/86,216 ,03/,&$7,216 $1' 5(&200(1'$7,216 7KH SXUSRVH RI WKLV VWXG\ ZDV WR GHWHUPLQH WKH UHODn WLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ D 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DQG %ODFN VWXn GHQWVn UHWHQWLRQ JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV JUDGXDWLRQ DQG HFRQRPLF VXFFHVV 5HOHYDQW GDWD ZHUH REWDLQHG E\ WZR PHWKRGV ILUVW D GHWDLOHG UHYLHZ RI WKH DFDGHPLF UHFRUGV RI RI WKH VWXGHQWV VHOHFWHG RQ D UDQGRP EDVLV ZKR ZHUH HQn UROOHG LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD GXULQJ WKH ILYH\HDU SHULRG EHWZHHQ DQG 7KH VHFRQG PHWKRG ZDV D VWXG\ RI VWXGHQW UHDFWLRQV WR PDMRU HOHPHQWV RI WKH 3URJUDP JDWKHUHG E\ PHDQV RI WKH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH (YDOXDWLQJ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV 4(663f GHYHORSHG E\ WKH UHVHDUFKHU 6L[W\ VWXGHQWV ZHUH VHOHFWHG RQ D UDQGRP EDVLV IURP VWXGHQWV ZKR ZHUH HQUROOHG GXULQJ WKH ILYH \HDUV EHWZHHQ WKH 6XPPHU RI DQG WKH 6XPPHU RI DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 7KXV VXEMHFWV RI WKLV VWXG\ LQFOXGHG D WRWDO RI VWXGHQWV 'DWD ZHUH DQDO\]HG RQ D PDQXDO EDVLV E\ WKH UHVHDUFKHU 7KLV FKDSWHU FRQVLVWV RI IRXU VHFWLRQV 7KH ILUVW VHFWLRQ LQFOXGHV D GLVFXVVLRQ RI WKH GDWD XVHG WR REWDLQ

PAGE 219

DQVZHUV WR WKH UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQV OLVWHG LQ &KDSWHU 7KH VHFRQG VHFWLRQ SUHVHQWV WKH FRQFOXVLRQV UHDFKHG RQ WKH EDVLV RI WKH GDWD UHSRUWHG LQ &KDSWHU ,9 7KH WKLUG UHn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f ZKR DOVR VWXGLHG 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV +RZHYHU WKLV UHVHDUFKHU IRXQG WKDW D ODUJH QXPEHU RI VWXGHQWV GLG QRW XWLOL]H WKH VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLWLHV RI WKH 3URJUDP IXUWKHU WKDW 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV JUDGXDWHV XVHG WKHVH VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLWLHV DW D KLJKHU UDWH WKDQ GLG WKH QRQn JUDGXDWHV %RWK JUDGXDWHV DQG QRQJUDGXDWHV SHUFHLYHG WKHVH

PAGE 220

VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLWLHV DV HIIHFWLYH $W WKH VDPH WLPH JUDGXDWHV WHQGHG WR EH PRUH SRVLWLYH LQ WKHLU HYDOXDWLRQV 6HYHUDO SRLQWV RI VSHFLDO LQWHUHVW PD\ EH GUDZQ IURP WKH JUDGXDWHVn UHDFWLRQV WR WKH VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLWLHV DYDLODEOH WR WKHP 1LQHW\ SHUFHQW DWWHQGHG WKH FDPSXV RULHQWDWLRQ VHVVLRQV DQG WKHLU UDWLQJV ZHUH SRVLWLYH 7KHVH VWXGHQWV ZHUH PRUH OLNHO\ WR GLVFXVV SHUn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n DFDGHPLF FRQFHUQV 7KH DFDGHPLF DGYLVRUV ZHUH QRW VHHQ DV HIIHFWLYH DV WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV 7KH VSHFLDO WHDFKLQJ SURFHGXUHV RI SUHn VHQWLQJ VSHFLDO FRXUVHV LQ VPDOO XQLWV RI LQVWUXFWLRQ ZHUH KHOSIXO DQG UDWHG DV HIIHFWLYH E\ WKH VWXGHQWV 5HWDNLQJ WHVWV WR LPSURYH WKHLU JUDGHV ZDV UDWHG H[WUHPHO\ HIIHFWLYH E\ PRVW RI WKH VWXGHQWV &RXUVHV WDXJKW E\ IXOOWLPH SURIHVVRUV ZHUH SUHIHUUHG E\ WKH VWXn GHQWV DQG ZHUH UDWHG KLJKHU WKDQ WKRVH FRXUVHV WDXJKW E\ JUDGXDWH VWXGHQWV 7KH EDVLF VNLOOV UHDGLQJ FODVV ZDV WKH OHDVW DWWHQGHG RI WKH QLQH VSHFLDO FODVVHV GHVLJQHG IRU 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV ,W ZDV DOVR QRW UDWHG DV KLJK DV WKH RWKHUV

PAGE 221

0RVW RI WKH WXWRULQJ UHFHLYHG E\ WKH VWXGHQWV ZDV REWDLQHG WKURXJK WKH /HDUQLQJ &HQWHU 7HDFKLQJ &HQn WHUf 7KH SHHU FRXQVHORUV ZHUH DFWLYH DQG HIIHFn WLYH SURYLGHUV RI WXWRULDO VHUYLFHV DERXW RQHKDOI RI WKH VWXGHQWV XWLOL]HG WKHP LQ WKLV UROH 6SHFLDO DFWLYLWLHV VXFK DV WKH )LQDQFLDO $LG ZRUNVKRS FRQGXFWHG E\ )LQDQFLDO $LG SHUVRQQHO WKH DZDUGV FHUHPRQ\ DQG DFDGHPLF UHFRJQLWLRQ DVVHPn EOLHV ZHUH DWWHQGHG E\ ODUJHU QXPEHUV RI VWXGHQWV WKDQ ZDV WKH FDVH IRU VHVVLRQV GHDOLQJ ZLWK UHGXFn WLRQ RI WHVW DQ[LHW\ RU FRSLQJ ZLWK RU DGMXVWLQJ WR WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD :KHQ WKH VWXGHQWV ZHUH UHIHUUHG WR RWKHU VXSSRUW VHUYLFHV RU KHOSLQJ DJHQFLHV IRU KHOS LQ GHDOLQJ ZLWK SUREOHPV WKH\ ZHUH PRUH OLNHO\ WR JR WR WKH )LQDQFLDO $LG 2IILFH RU 6WXGHQW 6HUYLFHV WKDQ WR WKH &RXQVHOLQJ &HQWHU 7KHUH ZDV D QRWLFHDEOH ODFN RI SDUWLFLSDWLRQ LQ WKH DFWLYLWLHV RI WKH &RXQVHOn LQJ &HQWHU 7KH VWXGHQWV H[SUHVVHG D IDYRUDEOH UHDFWLRQ WR WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWDII IRU WKHLU FRQFHUQHG FRXUWHn RXV FDULQJ JHQXLQH ZDUP DQG IULHQGO\ DWWLWXGHV 7KH VWDII ZHUH UHJDUGHG DV SRVLWLYH UROH PRGHOV KHOSIXO WR WKH VWXGHQWV 7KH QRQJUDGXDWHVn UHDFWLRQV WR WKH VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLn WLHV RI WKH 3URJUDP SURGXFHG WKHVH VSHFLDO SRLQWV (LJKW\VHYHQ SHUFHQW RI WKH QRQJUDGXDWHV DWWHQGHG WKH FDPSXV RULHQWDWLRQ 7KH\ GLG QRW UDWH LW DV KLJK DV GLG WKH JUDGXDWHV $ERXW KDOI RI WKHVH VWXGHQWV XWLOL]HG WKH VHUn YLFHV RI WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV DQG WKH SURIHVn VLRQDO FRXQVHORU IRU KHOS ZLWK SHUVRQDO DQG VRFLDO FRQFHUQV 7KHVH VWXGHQWV XWLOL]HG FRXQVHOLQJ VHUYLFHV PRUH IRU KHOS ZLWK DFDn GHPLF DQG ILQDQFLDO DLG FRQFHUQV

PAGE 222

$FDGHPLF DGYLVRUV ZHUH VHHQ E\ PRVW RI WKHVH VWXGHQWV ZKR UDWHG DGYLVRU HIIHFWLYHQHVV DERXW WKH VDPH DV WKDW RI WKH SHHU DQG SURn IHVVLRQDO FRXQVHORUV 6SHFLDO WHDFKLQJ SURFHGXUHV ZKHUHLQ LQVWUXFn WLRQ ZDV SUHVHQWHG LQ VPDOO XQLWV DSSHDUHG WR EH KHOSIXO 5HWDNLQJ RI WHVWV WR LPSURYH JUDGHV ZDV YLHZHG DV HIIHFWLYH E\ PRVW RI WKHVH VWXGHQWV +RZHYHU WKH\ SUHIHUUHG WR EH WDXJKW E\ IXOOWLPH SURIHVVRUV UDWKHU WKDQ JUDGXDWH DVVLVWDQWV 0RUH VWXGHQWV DWWHQGHG WKH (QJOLVK DQG 6RFLDO 6FLHQFHV FODVVHV WKDQ DQ\ RI WKH RWKHU VHYHQ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV FODVVHV 0RVW RI WKHVH VWXGHQWV UHFHLYHG WKHLU WXWRUn LQJ WKURXJK WKH /HDUQLQJ &HQWHU 7HDFKLQJ &HQWHUf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n DEOH ODFN RI SDUWLFLSDWLRQ DW WKH 3ODFHPHQW &HQWHU &DUHHU 5HVRXUFHVf DQG WKH &RXQVHOLQJ &HQWHU

PAGE 223

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n GHQWVn DYHUDJHV 7KH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV FODVV ZKLFK HQUROOHG LQ DFKLHYHG WKH KLJKHVW JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJH RI DOO WKH 6SHFLDO

PAGE 224

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n KLJK VFKRRO WUDQVFULSWV E\ WKH 6SHFLDO $GPLVVLRQV 6XEFRPPLWWHH LQ DWWHPSWLQJ WR VHOHFW WKRVH VSHFLDO DGPLVVLRQ VWXGHQWV ZLWK WKH KLJKHVW SRWHQWLDO DQG WKH VXSSRUWLQJ VHUYLFHV DQG PRWLYDWLRQDO DFWLYLWLHV SURYLGHG E\ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP 5HWHQWLRQ 5DWHV 7KH KLJK UHWHQWLRQ UDWHV RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV HQUROOHG LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP FRXSOHG ZLWK WKHLU JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV SURYLGH DGGLWLRQDO HYLGHQFH RI WKHLU DELOLW\ WR VXFFHHG LQ FROOHJH 5HVXOWV RI WKLV UHVHDUFK UHIXWH DUJXn PHQWV RI (YDQV DQG 'XERLV f DQG RWKHU HGXFDWRUV ZKR KDYH VXJJHVWHG WKDW %ODFN VWXGHQWV ODFN WKH FDSDFLW\ IRU

PAGE 225

OHDUQLQJ DQG WKHUHIRUH VKRXOG QRW EH HQUROOHG LQ KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQ LQVWLWXWLRQV 7KH UHVHDUFKHU DJUHHV ZLWK +XQW D Ef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n LQJ IDFLOLWDWLYH WHDFKLQJ

PAGE 226

2YHU WKH ILYH\HDU SHULRG RI WKLV UHVHDUFK SHUFHQWf RI WKH %ODFN 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV JUDGXDWHG IURP DPRQJ WKH UDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG IRU WKLV VWXG\ 7KH OHQJWK RI WLPH WDNHQ E\ WKH VWXGHQWV WR JUDGXDWH YDULHG IURP WKUHH WR HLJKW \HDUV 7KHVH JUDGXDWHV FRPSOHWHG DSSUR[Ln PDWHO\ SHUFHQW RI WKH FRXUVHV WKDW WKH\ DWWHPSWHG ZKLOH SXUVXLQJ WKHLU XQGHUJUDGXDWH GHJUHHV 7KH GHJUHHV RI WKHVH JUDGXDWHV ZHUH REWDLQHG IURP WKH &ROOHJH RI /LEHUDO $UWV DQG 6FLHQFHV LQ D JUHDWHU FRQFHQn WUDWLRQ WKDQ IURP DQ\ RI WKH RWKHU VFKRROV DQG FROOHJHV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 1RQH RI WKH VWXGHQWV IRU H[DPSOH ZDV DZDUGHG D GHJUHH LQ $FFRXQWLQJ $UFKLWHFWXUH %XLOGLQJ &RQVWUXFWLRQ RU )RUHVWU\ 6HYHUDO RI WKHVH VWXn GHQWV FRQWLQXHG WKHLU HGXFDWLRQ E\ HQUROOLQJ LQ JUDGXDWH DQG SURIHVVLRQDO VFKRROV VRPH KDYH UHFHLYHG DGYDQFHG GHJUHHV )RU H[DPSOH RQH VWXGHQW ZDV DZDUGHG D PDVWHUnV GHJUHH LQ 6SHFLDO (GXFDWLRQ WZR KDYH REWDLQHG 6SHFLDOLVW LQ (GXFDWLRQ GHJUHHV LQ &RXQVHORU (GXFDWLRQ RQH ZLOO UHFHLYH WKH 'RFWRU RI 0HGLFLQH GHJUHH LQ -XQH RI RQH QRZ KDV D -XULV 'RFWRU GHJUHH ZLWK RQH RWKHU VWXGHQW SUHVHQWO\ HQUROOHG LQ /DZ 6FKRRO 7KH GDWD DOVR VKRZ WKDW IRXU PRUH VWXGHQWV DUH SUHVHQWO\ SXUVXLQJ JUDGXDWH GHJUHHV

PAGE 227

3HHU &RXQVHORUV 'DWD IURP WKLV UHVHDUFK VXSSRUW SRLQWV RI YLHY WKDW SHHU FRXQVHORUV DUH HIIHFWLYH LQ LQIOXHQFLQJ IDYRUDEO\ WKH DFDGHPLF SHUIRUPDQFH RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV 7KHVH GDWD DUH HVSHFLDOO\ XVHIXO EHFDXVH OLWWOH LQIRUPDWLRQ LV DYDLODEOH LQ WKH OLWHUDWXUH UHJDUGLQJ WKH LPSDFW RI SHHU FRXQVHORUV RQ WKH DFDGHPLF SHUIRUPDQFH RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV )DYRUDEOH UHSRUWV UHJDUGLQJ SHHU FRXQVHORUV LQ JHQHUDO KDYH EHHQ PDGH E\ =XQNHU DQG %URZQ f &DUNKXII f DQG 'XUODN f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f RI WKH QRQJUDGXDWHV ZHUH HDUQLQJ OHVV WKDQ \HDUO\ ZKLOH RQO\ SHUFHQWf RI WKH JUDGXDWHV UHSRUWHG \HDUO\ VDODULHV LQ WKDW ORZ UDQJH

PAGE 228

7KH VDODU\ GLIIHUHQWLDO GXULQJ WKH ILUVW \HDU DIWHU FROOHJH EHWZHHQ %ODFN VWXGHQWV ZKR JUDGXDWHG DQG WKRVH ZKR GLG QRW VXSSRUWV WKH DVVHUWLRQ WKDW D FROOHJH GHJUHH LQn FUHDVHV WKH SRWHQWLDO IRU JUHDWHU LQFRPH IRU JUDGXDWHV 7KLV GLIIHUHQWLDO DOVR XQGHUVFRUHV WKH EHOLHI WKDW HGXFDWLRQ UHSUHVHQWV WKH EHVW KRSH IRU %ODFN \RXWK WR EUHDN WKURXJK WKH ERQGV RI SRYHUW\ DQG PDNH SURJUHVV HFRQRPLFDOO\ VRFLn DOO\ DQG FXOWXUDOO\ 'DWD IURP WKLV VWXG\ LQGLFDWH WKDW VXFK D 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP FDQ LQIOXHQFH LQ SRVLWLYH ZD\V WKH HFRQRPLF SURJUHVV RI %ODFN SDUWLFLSDQWV 6LQFH VXEVWDQWLDO QXPEHUV RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV DUH VWLOO JUDGXDWLQJ IURP KLJK VFKRROV ZLWK LQDGHTXDWH UHFRUGV DQG VNLOOV WR VDWLVI\ WKH HQWUDQFH UHTXLUHPHQWV RI PDQ\ FROOHJHV DQG XQLYHUVLWLHV WKLV UHVHDUFKHU VHHV D FRQWLQXHG QHHG IRU RUJDQL]HG DFDGHPLF VXSSRUW VXFK DV SURYLGHG E\ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV 7KH SKLORVRSKLFDO DQG PRUDO MXVWLILFDn WLRQ IRU WKH LQLWLDWLRQ RI VXFK SURJUDPV LQ WKH nV LV HTXDOO\ UHOHYDQW IRU WKH nV DQG SRVVLEO\ EH\RQG 7KH HFRQRPLF YDOXH RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP YDV GHWHUPLQHG WR EH SHU \HDU 7KLV GROODU ILJXUH UHSUHVHQWV WKH SRWHQWLDO VSHQGLQJ SRZHU RI WKH IRUPHU 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV LQFOXGHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ GXULQJ WKHLU ILUVW \HDU RI HPSOR\PHQW 2Q WKLV EDVLV WKH HFRQRPLF YDOXH RI WKH 3URJUDP LV PXFK JUHDWHU WKDQ WKH DQQXDO

PAGE 229

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f DQG WKRVH VSHFLDO FRXUVHV RU ZRUNVKRSV FRQFHUQHG ZLWK UHDGLQJ VNLOOV WHVW DQ[LHW\ DQG DGDSWDWLRQ WR 8QLYHUVLW\ OLIH 7KH PHDQ JUDGH SRLQW DYHUDJHV HDUQHG E\ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV LQ WKLV VWXG\ GXULQJ WKHLU ILUVW DQG VHFRQG \HDUV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ GHPRQVWUDWHG WKDW WKHVH

PAGE 230

VWXGHQWV DUH FDSDEOH RI VXFFHHGLQJ LQ WKHLU DFDGHPLF ZRUN DQG FRPSHWLQJ ZLWK UHJXODUO\ DGPLWWHG VWXGHQWV 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWVn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n PHQW SHUFHQW WKURXJK WKHLU IRXUWK \HDU RI HQUROOPHQW 7KH JUDGXDWLRQ UDWHV RI WKH %ODFN VWXGHQWV LQ WKLV VWXG\ IXUWKHU GHPRQVWUDWHG WKDW WKH\ DUH FDSDEOH RI VXFFHHGn LQJ DQG VXUYLYLQJ LQ KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQ LQVWLWXWLRQV 2YHUn DOO SHUFHQW RI WKH VWXGHQWV LQ WKLV VWXG\ JUDGXDWHG DQG VRPH FRQWLQXHG WKHLU HGXFDWLRQ LQ JUDGXDWH DQG SURIHVn VLRQDO VFKRROV 3HHU FRXQVHORUV KDG SRVLWLYH LQIOXHQFHV RQ WKH DFDGHPLF SHUIRUPDQFH RI WKHVH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV $V WXWRUV SHHU FRXQVHORUV ZHUH HIIHFWLYH DQG WKH GDWD VXJJHVW WKDW WKH\ FRXOG IXQFWLRQ LQ D GXDO UROH DV SHHU WXWRU FRXQVHORUV

PAGE 231

7KH HYLGHQFH ZDV WKDW WKH 3URJUDP LV FRVW HIIHFn WLYH %DVHG RQ WKH SRWHQWLDO HDUQLQJ SRZHU RI WKH VWXGHQWV SHU \HDU WKH HFRQRPLF YDOXH RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP LV JUHDWHU WKDQ WKH DPRXQW RI PRQH\ SURn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nV HQWUDQFH UHTXLUHPHQWV ZHUH HQDEOHG E\ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP WR JUDGXDWH 6RPH RI WKH VWXGHQWV JUDGXDWHG DW DQ DFFHOHUDWHG UDWH 7KLV SURJUDP

PAGE 232

DSSHDUV WR KDYH VSHFLILF YDOXH LQ KHOSLQJ %ODFN VWXGHQWV WR DWWHQG WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD DQG WR JUDGXDWH $V HYLGHQFHG E\ WKH DFFHOHUDWHG JUDGXDWLRQ RI VRPH RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV LW DSSHDUV WKH\ PLJKW QRW QHHG DV PDQ\ RI WKH VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLWLHV FXUUHQWO\ SURn YLGHG E\ WKH 3URJUDP 6XFK VWXGHQWV FRXOG EH PRQLWRUHG PXFK OHVV WKDQ RWKHUV ZKR DUH QRW SURJUHVVLQJ DFDGHPLFDOO\ DV IDVW DQG DV VXFFHVVIXOO\ :LWK DQ LPSURYHG WUDLQLQJ SURJUDP IRU WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV WKH\ FDQ EHFRPH EHWWHU DQG PRUH SURILFLHQW SURn YLGHUV RI FRXQVHOLQJ VHUYLFHV 3HHU FRXQVHORUV DSSHDU WR EH SHUFHLYHG DV PRUH HIIHFWLYH WXWRUV WKDQ SDUWWLPH FRXQn VHORUV 7KHUHIRUH WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP VKRXOG FRQVLGHU XWLOL]LQJ WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV DV ERWK WXWRUV DQG FRXQVHORUV 7KH IDFW WKDW SHUFHQW RI WKH JUDGXDWHV DQG DOVR SHUFHQW RI WKH QRQJUDGXDWHV ZHUH VHOGRP FRQWDFWHG E\ WKHLU SHHU FRXQVHORUV VXJJHVWV f PRGLILFDWLRQV RI WKHLU UROHV f PRUH VXSHUYLVLRQ RI WKHLU DFWLYLWLHV E\ WKH SURIHVVLRQDO FRXQVHORU f D EHWWHU V\VWHP RI PDNLQJ WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV PRUH DFFRXQWDEOH IRU FRQWDFWLQJ WKHLU VWXGHQWV f WKH QHHG IRU WKH SURIHVVLRQDO FRXQVHORU WR DFWLYHO\ YHULI\ WKH FRQWDFWV UHSRUWHG E\ WKH SHHU FRXQn VHORUV DQG f WKH DVVLJQPHQW RI D JUDGXDWH VWXGHQW WR

PAGE 233

DVVLVW WKH SURIHVVLRQDO FRXQVHORU LQ IROORZLQJ XS RQ UHn SRUWHG VWXGHQW FRQWDFWV PDGH E\ WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV 7KH VSHFLDO DFWLYLWLHV VHUYLFHV DQG FRXUVHV RIIHUHG RU DUUDQJHG IRU E\ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DSSHDUHG WR KDYH D SRVLWLYH HIIHFW RQ WKH UHWHQWLRQ RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV 6SHFLILFDOO\ WKH ILYHGD\ RULHQWDWLRQ WKH DFDGHPLF DGYLVHPHQW DQG FRXQVHOLQJ GXULQJ WKH 6XPPHU WHUPV DSSHDUHG WR SURYLGH WKH HQFRXUDJHPHQW DQG PRWLYDWLRQ IRU WKH VWXGHQWVn LQLWLDO VXFFHVV LQ WKHLU FRXUVHV 7KHVH DFWLYLWLHV DQG VHUYLFHV DOVR FRQWULEXWHG WR WKH SHUFHQW UHWHQWLRQ UDWH DIWHU WZR \HDUV RI HQUROOn PHQW 7KHVH IHDWXUHV RI WKH SURJUDP VKRXOG EH FRQWLQXHG 7KH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH (YDOXDWLQJ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV 4(663f FDQ EH RI VLJQLILFDQW YDOXH WR SURYLGHUV RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV 7KH 4(663 KDV JHQHUDO DSSOLFn DELOLW\ DQG LV FDSDEOH RI HYDOXDWLQJ DQ\ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP ZKHQ PRGLILHG WR GHVFULEH WKH VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLn WLHV RI WKH 3URJUDP DGPLQLVWHULQJ WKH LQVWUXPHQW 7KH JHQHUDOL]DELOLW\ RI WKH 4(663 QRZ SURYLGHV 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 'LUHFWRUV ZLWK DQ HYDOXDWLRQ LQVWUXPHQW WKDW LV HDV\ WR DGPLQLVWHU 7KLV VWXG\ PD\ VXJJHVW WR 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV GLUHFn WRUV DQG WKHLU VWDII DGGLWLRQDO PHDQV WR VWLPXODWH LQFUHDVHG UHWHQWLRQ DQG JUDGXDWLRQ UDWHV RI WKHLU 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWXGHQWV

PAGE 234

,Q YLHZ RI WKH VWXGHQW VWDWHPHQWV PDGH UHJDUGLQJ FODVVURRP LQVWUXFWRUV DQG LQVWUXFWLRQV WKLV VWXG\ VXJJHVWV WKDW IDFXOW\ SURYLGH FODVVURRP SURFHGXUHV WKDW ZLOO HQn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n YHUVHO\ DIIHFW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\nV DELOLW\ WR HQFRXUDJH IRUPHU %ODFN VWXGHQWV WR SDUWLFLSDWH LQ DOXPQL DFWLYLWLHV LQFOXGn LQJ PLQRULW\ UHFUXLWPHQW $FFRUGLQJO\ HIIRUWV VKRXOG EH PDGH WR ILQG ZD\V WR DOWHU WKLV VLWXDWLRQ

PAGE 235

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nV VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLWLHV 7KRVH VWXGHQWV QRW XWLOL]LQJ WKH VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLWLHV VKRXOG EH FRXQVHOHG LPPHGLDWHO\ 7KH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV VWDII VKRXOG PDLQWDLQ UHVSRQVn LELOLW\ IRU SODQQLQJ DQG LPSOHPHQWLQJ WKH GHOLYHU\ V\VWHP WKDW ZLOO SURYLGH VXSSRUWLYH VHUYLFHV WR WKH VWXGHQWV ,QFOXGHG LQ SODQQLQJ VKRXOG EH RWKHU FDPSXV VXSSRUW DJHQFLHV VLQFH WKHVH VWXGHQWV DUH WKH UHVSRQVLELOLW\ RI WKH LQVWLWXn WLRQ DQG QRW H[FOXVLYHO\ WKDW RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP 3HHU FRXQVHORUV VKRXOG EH WUDLQHG DQG VXSHUYLVHG E\ WKH SURIHVVLRQDO VWDII WR LQVXUH WKDW WKH\ KDYH WKH VNLOOV QHHGHG IRU HIIHFWLYHO\ VHUYLQJ WKH VWXGHQWV 7KH WUDLQLQJ RI SHHU FRXQVHORUV VKRXOG RFFXU DW OHDVW WKUHH ZHHNV EHIRUH

PAGE 236

WKH\ DUH DVVLJQHG WKHLU FDVH ORDG RI VWXGHQWV 7KHLU WUDLQLQJ VKRXOG DOVR EH FRQWLQXRXV WKURXJKRXW HDFK DFDGHPLF WHUP :HHNO\ VWDII PHHWLQJV FDQ EH XVHG DV LQVHUYLFH WUDLQLQJ VHVVLRQV IRU WKH SHHU FRXQVHORUV 1R SHHU FRXQn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

PAGE 237

7KH VWXGHQWV LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP VKRXOG EH KHOSHG WR IHHO D SDUW RI WKH WRWDO LQVWLWXWLRQ DQG HQn FRXUDJHG WR SDUWLFLSDWH LQ LWV DFWLYLWLHV ,Q WKLV LPSRUn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n WLRQV IRU IXUWKHU UHVHDUFK DUH RIIHUHG 7KLV VWXG\ VKRXOG EH UHSOLFDWHG E\ 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV DW RWKHU LQVWLWXWLRQV WR GHWHUPLQH ZKHWKHU RU QRW

PAGE 238

VLPLODU FRQFOXVLRQV DUH UHDFKHG DERXW WKH 3URJUDPnV HIIHFn WLYHQHVV DQG ZKHWKHU ORFDWLRQ W\SH RI LQVWLWXWLRQ VHUn YLFHV DFWLYLWLHV IDFLOLWLHV VWDII DQG RWKHU IDFWRUV FRQWULEXWH WR WKH 3URJUDPnV HIIHFWLYHQHVV 7KLV VWXG\ VKRXOG DOVR EH UHSOLFDWHG E\ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD IRU WKH SHULRG FRYHULQJ WKH VFKRRO \HDUV WR REWDLQ PRUH H[WHQVLYH GDWD DERXW WKH VWXGHQWVn SURJUHVV DQG WKH 3URJUDPnV HIIHFWLYHQHVV 7KLV UHVHDUFK KDV SURYLGHG DQ DEXQGDQFH RI VWDWLVWLFDO GDWD GLUHFWLRQV DQG LGHDV IRU LPSURYLQJ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 7KLV VWXG\ ZLOO DOVR GHPRQVWUDWH WR RWKHU 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 'LUHFWRUV WKH QHHG IRU UHVHDUFK GDWD IURP WKHLU 3URJUDPV 7KH UHn VHDUFK PHWKRGV DQG SURFHGXUHV SURYLGHG E\ WKLV VWXG\ FDQ EH HDVLO\ UHSOLFDWHG 7KH WLPHOLQHVV RI WKLV VWXG\ VKRXOG PDNH DQ LPSDFW RQ WKH YLHZV DQG DWWLWXGHV RI HGXFDWRUV DQG SROLWLFLDQV FRQn FHUQLQJ WKH YDOXH RI VXFK SURJUDPV IRU %ODFN VWXGHQWV DWWHQGLQJ KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQ LQVWLWXWLRQV 7KH HFRQRPLF DQG LPSOLHG VRFLDO LPSDFW RI 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDPV VKRXOG HQFRXUDJH JUHDWHU DWWHQWLRQ WR IXUWKHU LPSURYLQJ DQG VWUHQJWKHQLQJ WKHP

PAGE 239

$33(1',; $ /(77(5 72 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 ',5(&7256

PAGE 240

* : 0LQJR 3 %R[ 8QLYHUVLW\ 6WDWLRQ *DLQHVYLOOH )/ 'HDU &ROOHDJXH DQQ SUHVHQWO\ LQ WKH SURFHVV RI FRPSOHWLQJ P\ UHTXLUHPHQWV IRU WKH GRFWRUDO GHJUHH DQG QHHG \RXU DVVLVWDQFH LQ KHOSn LQJ PH WR GHVLJQ D TXHVWLRQQDLUH WR JDWKHU VWDWLVWLFDO GDWD IRU WKH SXUSRVH RI HYDOXDWLQJ RXU 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DQG LWV HIIHFW RQ VWXGHQWV 2XU 3URJUDP KDV EHHQ LQ H[LVWHQFH VLQFH DQG WKHUH KDV QRW EHHQ D ORQJLWXGLQDO RU FRPSUHKHQVLYH VWXG\ RI LW RU LWV HIIHFW RQ VWXGHQWV 6SHFLILFDOO\ ZRXOG OLNH WR UHTXHVW WKDW \RX SURYLGH PH ZLWK D FRS\ RI \RXU HYDOXDWLRQ LQVWUXPHQW RU D OLVW RI TXHVn WLRQV WKDW FDQ XVH WR FRQVWUXFW DQ HYDOXDWLRQ TXHVWLRQn QDLUH IRU WKLV SURJUDP 6LQFH RXU REMHFWLYHV DUH WKH VDPH HYHQ WKRXJK ZH PD\ DFFRPn SOLVK WKHP LQ D VOLJKWO\ GLIIHUHQW PDQQHU IHHO WKDW \RXU HYDOXDWLRQ TXHVWLRQV ZLOO EH UHOHYDQW WR RXU 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP ZRXOG DSSUHFLDWHD UHVSRQVH DV VRRQ DV SRVVLEOH
PAGE 241

$33(1',; % /(77(5 72 68%-(&76 $1' ,1)250(' &216(17 )250

PAGE 242

* : 0LQJR %R[ 8QLYHUVLW\ 6WDWLRQ *DLQHVYLOOH )/ 'HDU DP FRQGXFWLQJ DQ HYDOXDWLRQ RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD DQG WKH VHUYLFHV WKDW LW KDV SURYLGHG WR VWXGHQWV
PAGE 243

$33(1',; & 48(67,211$,5( (9$/8$7,1* 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 352*5$06 4(663f

PAGE 244

48(67,211$,5( (9$/8$7,1* 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 352*5$06 3OHDVH FRPSOHWH WKLV HYDOXDWLRQ E\ DQVZHULQJ DOO LWHPV 7KHUH DUH QR ULJKW RU ZURQJ DQVZHUV :H DUH LQWHUHVWHG LQ \RXU SHUFHSWLRQV RI WKH TXDQWLW\ DQG TXDOLW\ RI WKH VHUYLFHV DQG DFWLYLWLHV UHQGHUHG E\ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP ZKLOH \RX ZHUH D SDUWLFLSDQW
PAGE 245

48(67,211$,5( (9$/8$7,1* 63(&,$/ 6(59,&(6 352*5$06 3/($6( &203/(7( 7+,6 48(67,211$,5( $UH \RX" 0DOH ( PDUULHG &A VLQJOH &DGLYRUFHG & )HPDOH 6 PDUULHG &' VLQJOH&GLYRUFHG 4 +RZ GR \RX GHVFULEH \RXUVHOI" &KHFN RQO\ RQH ER[f %ODFN RI 8QLWHG 6WDWHV RULJLQ %ODFN RI +LVSDQLF RULJLQ %ODFN RI &DULEEHDQ RULJLQ 2WKHU 6SHFLI\f ,QGLFDWH WKH KLJKHVW GHJUHH \RX QRZ KROG +6 $662&,$7( %$&+(/25n6 352)(66,21$/ ',A20$ M;M _;_ $ UAL /LVW LQVWLWXWLRQV DWWHQGHG LQFOXGLQJ WKLV RQH 63(&,$/,67 RU 0$67(56 '2&725f6 GQ 1$0( 2) ,167,787,21 '$7(6 2) $77(1'$1&( f '(*5(( ($51(' $1' <($5 ) $UH \RX FXUUHQWO\ HQUROOHG LQ DQ\ RI WKH DERYH LQVWLWXWLRQV" BB@ 3OHDVH LGHQWLI\ WKH W\SH RI ZRUN DQG WKH WLWOH RI WKH MRE LQ ZKLFK \RX DUH QRZ ZRUNLQJ f7\SH RI ZRUN 7LW H

PAGE 246

:KDW LV \RXU SUHVHQW \HDUO\ LQFRPH" &KHFN 2QHf /HVV WKDQ 0RUH WKDQ +RZ ZRXOG \RX UDWH \RXU DFDGHPLF SUHSDUDWLRQ EHIRUH FRPLQJ WR WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD D ([FHOOHQW f§L E *RRG ,f§W F )DLU f§L G 3RRU Lf§, +RZ ZRXOG \RX UDWH \RXU DFDGHPLF SUHSDUDWLRQ DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD D E F G ([FHO HQW *RRG )DLU 3RRU ,Q RUGHU RI LPSRUWDQFH QXPEHU WKH UHDVRQV f IRU GHFLGLQJ WR HQUROO DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q &ORVH WR KRPH 6FKRODUVKLS )LQDQFLDO $LG $FDGHPLF UHSXWDWLRQ /RZ FRVW 6L]H RI WKH VFKRRO ,QIRUPHG E\ IULHQGV RI WKH KHOS SURYLGHG E\ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP 6SHFLILF $FDGHPLF 3URJUDPV .QHZ VRPHRQH DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD )DPLO\ LQIOXHQFH n 6RFLDO /LIH $WKOHWLF WHDPV $OXPQL LQIOXHQFH 2WKHU 'R \RX IHHO WKDW WKHUH ZHUH SRVLWLYH RU QHJDWLYH IHHO L QJM DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK \RXU SDUWLFLSDWLRQ LQ WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP" 3RVLWLYH & %RWK &+ 1HJDWLYH W O 'HVFULEH WKH IHHOLQJBeL

PAGE 247

'R \RX WKLQN WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP VKRXOG EH FRQWLQXHG"
PAGE 248

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
PAGE 249

'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQJ \RX"
PAGE 250

'LG \RX UHFHLYH WKH VHUYLFH RU SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\" +RZ HIIHFWLYH ZDV LW LQ KHOSLQJ \RX"
PAGE 251

$33(1',; )2//2:83 /(77(5

PAGE 252

* : 0LQJR 3 %R[ *DLQHVYLOOH )/ 'HDU DP ZULWLQJ WR DVN LI \RX KDYH UHFHLYHG P\ OHWWHU UHJDUGLQJ \RXU SDUWLFLSDWLRQ LQ WKH HYDOXDWLRQ RI RXU 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV 3URJUDP
PAGE 253

%,%/,2*5$3+<

PAGE 254

%,%/,2*5$3+< $EHUW -DPHV (Gf f 3URJUDP HYDOXDWLRQ DW +(: 1HZ
PAGE 255

&RXOVRQ ( %UDGIRUG & t .D\H f (YDOXDn WLRQ RI WKH 6SHFLDO 6HUYLFHV IRU GLVDGYDQWDJHG VWXn GHQWV 66'6f SURJUDP DFDGHPLF \HDU V7 'HSDUWPHQW RI (GXFDWLRQ &RQWUDFW 1XPEHU f 6DQWD 0RQLFD &DOLIRUQLD 6\VWHP 'HYHORSPHQW &RUSRUDWLRQ &UDQQH\ $ t /DUVHQ f &RPSHQVDWRU\ SURJUDPV IRU VSHFLDOO\ DGPLWWHG IUHVKPHQ WR WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD ,Q WKH 7ZHQW\ILYH \HDUERRN RI WKH 1DWLRQDO 5HDGLQJ &RQIHUHQFH FROOHJH UHDGLQJ SUREOHPV DQG SURJUDPV RI MXQLRU DQG VHQLRU FROOHJHV %RRQH 1RUWK &DUROLQD 7KH 1DWLRQDO 5HDGLQJ &RQIHUHQFH ,QF &URVV 3 f $FFHQW RQ OHDUQLQJ 6DQ )UDQFLVFR &DOLIRUQLD -RVVH\%DVV ,QF 'DYLV t %RUGHUV3DWWHUVRQ $ f %ODFN VWXn GHQWV LQ SUHGRPLQDQWO\ ZKLWH 1RUWK &DUROLQD FROOHJHV DQG XQLYHUVLWLHV 1HZ
PAGE 256

)UDQNOLQ 3DXO f %H\RQG VWXGHQW ILQDQFLDO DLG LVVXHV DQG RSWLRQV 7RU VWUHQJWKHQLQJ VXSSRUW VHUYLFHV SURJUDPV XQGHU 7LWOH ,9 RI WKH +LJKHU (GXFDWLRQ $FWa 1HZ
PAGE 257

1DWLRQDO $GYLVRU\ &RPPLWWHH RQ %ODFN +LJKHU (GXFDWLRQ DQG %ODFN &ROOHJHV DQG 8QLYHUVLWLHV 'HFHPEHUf $GPLVVLRQ DQG UHWHQWLRQ SUREOHPV RI %ODFN VWXGHQWV DW VHYHQ SUHGRPLQDQWO\ ZKLWH XQLYHUVLWLHV :DVKLQJWRQ & 8 6 *RYHUQPHQW 3ULQWLQJ 2IILFH 3HUNLQV +XHO 2FWREHU f 7KH HGXFDWLRQ RI \RXQJ %ODFNV 4XDOLW\ FDQQRW EH FRPSURPLVHG 7KH &KURQLFOH RI +LJKHU (GXFDWLRQ S 3HWWLJUHZ 7 ) f 1HJUR $PHULFDQ LQWHOOLJHQFH $ QHZ ORRN DW DQ ROG FRQWURYHUV\ 7KH -RXUQDO RI 1HJUR (GXFDWLRQ 5RWKQH\ -RKQ : 0 f /RQJLWXGLQDO VWXGLHV 7KH 3HUVRQQHO DQG *XLGDQFH -RXUQDO f S 6KXH\ $XGUH\ 0 f 7KH WHVWLQJ RI 1HJUR LQWHOOLJHQFH /\QFKEXUJ 9LUJLQLD %HOO &RPSDQ\ ,QF 6RZHOO 7KRPDV f %ODFN HGXFDWLRQ 0\WKV DQG WUDG JHGLHV 1HZ
PAGE 258

:HVW & -RQHV & t 6LPSVRQ f 0LQRULW\ UHn WHQWLRQ LQ D FRPPXQLW\ FROOHJH SURJUDP IRU WKH GLVn DGYDQWDJHG (5,& 'RFXPHQW 5HSURGXFWLRQ 6HUYLFH 1XPEHU ('f :LOOLDPV : f $Q DSSUDLVDO RI VSHFLDO DQG GHn YHORSPHQWDO HGXFDWLRQ SURJUDPV LQ 2KLR LQVWLWXWLRQV RI KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQ -RXUQDO RI &ROOHJH 6WXGHQW 3HUVRQQHO B f :LOOLDPV 5 / f :KDW DUH ZH OHDUQLQJ IURP FXUUHQW SURJUDPV IRU GLVDGYDQWDJHG VWXGHQWV" -RXUQDO RI +LJKHU (GXFDWLRQ f :LWWPHU t 0\ULFN 5 f )DFLOLWDWLYH WHDFKn LQJ 7KHRU\ DQG SUDFWLFH 3DFLILF 3DOLVDGHV &DOLIRUQLD *RRG\HDU 3XEOLVKLQJ &R ,QF =XQNHU 9 t %URZQ : ) f &RPSDUDWLYH HIIHFn WLYHQHVV RI VWXGHQW DQG SURIHVVLRQDO FRXQVHORUV 3HUVRQQHO DQG *XLGDQFH -RXUQDO

PAGE 259

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

PAGE 260

VFLHQFH LQVWUXFWRU DW /LQFROQ 8QLYHUVLW\ LQ 0LVVRXUL DQG ZKLOH DW WKDW LQVWLWXWLRQ KH ZDV DZDUGHG WKH 0DVWHU RI (GXFDWLRQ GHJUHH LQ FRXQVHORU HGXFDWLRQ $IWHU VHYHQ \HDUV RI PLOLWDU\ VHUYLFH WKH DXWKRU UHVLJQHG KLV FRPPLVVLRQ DQG OHIW WKH $UP\ ZLWK WKH UDQN RI &DSWDLQ +LV WUDYHO H[SHULHQFH LQFOXGHV YLVLWV WR $XVWULD 6ZLW]HUODQG ,WDO\ 0RQDFR )UDQFH 6SDLQ 0RURFFR /X[HPn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

PAGE 261

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n -RKQ n$ 0 1LFNHQV 3URIHVVRU RI (GXFDWLRQDO $GPLQLVWUDWLRQ DQG 6XSHUYLVLRQ 7KLV GLVVHUWDWLRQ ZDV VXEPLWWHG WR WKH *UDGXDWH )DFXOW\ RI WKH 'HSDUWPHQW RI &RXQVHORU (GXFDWLRQ LQ WKH &ROOHJH RI (GXFDWLRQ DQG WR WKH *UDGXDWH 6FKRRO DQG ZDV DFFHSWHG DV SDUWLDO IXOILOOPHQW RI WKH UHTXLUHPHQWV IRU WKH GHJUHH RI 'RFWRU RI 3KLORVRSK\ $SULO 'HDQ IRU *UDGXDWH 6WXGLHV DQG 5HVHDUFK


A LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN A
SPECIAL SERVICES PROGRAM AND BLACK STUDENTS' ACADEMIC
PERFORMANCE AND ECONOMIC ENHANCEMENT
BY
GWENUEL WILFRED MINGO
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
1984

Copyright 1984
By
Gwenuel W. Mingo

This dissertation is dedicated to my wonderful family,
Cynthia, Anne Marie and Gerald, who supported and encouraged
me to finish this requirement for my doctorate. It is also
dedicated to some special people in my life, namely, Zerlina
Reckley, Willie Summers, Samuel Summers and Willie Mae
Summers, who supported and guided me through my childhood.

PC KNOWLEDGMENTS
It would not have been possible to complete this re¬
search without God and the assistance of my wife, the stu¬
dents in the Special Services Program, and many other
individuals. I would like to express my deep appreciation
to Dr. Harold Riker, the chairman of my doctoral committee,
for his time, advice, quality control procedures, encourage¬
ment and support while conducting this research. The other
doctoral committee members, Dr. Roderick McDavis and Dr.
John Nickens, are also to be commended for the support,
expert advice and guidance that they provided to help me
complete this requirement.
Dr. Jerrie Scott, Dr. Rosie Bingham, Dr. Ronald
Foreman, Dr. Janet Larsen and Dr. Harry Shaw have been an
inspiration, strong pillars of support and encouragement for
me to complete this research. Finally, I would like to
express my sincere appreciation and thanks to all individu¬
als who assisted and supported me while attempting to meet
the requirements for this degree.
IV

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iv
ABSTRACT ix
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1
Statement of the Problem 1
Purpose of the Study 4
Rationale for the Study 6
Definition of Terms 12
Organization of the Study 13
II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 14
Philosophical Assumption and Theories.. 15
Heredity Theories 16
Environmental Theories 17
Theories of Learning 19
Research Concerning Special Programs... 21
Special and Compensatory Programs.... 21
Retention 2 4
National Studies 30
Ford Foundation Study 3 5
Special Programs at the University of
Florida 3 9
Program Elements 41
Peer Counseling 4 2
Summary 44
III METHODOLOGY 4 8
Research Design 48
Research Questions 5 0
Population 50
Selection of Subjects 51
Instrumentation 52
Pilot Study 5 4
Reliability 55
Validity 5 6
Procedures 57
Data Analysis 5 9
v

PAGE
IV RESULTS 62
Research Question #1 6 2
An Analysis of Responses of
Randomly Selected Special
Services Graduates to Items 1-7
and 10-16 on the QESSP 63
Summary of Responses by Special
Services Graduates 7 2
Analysis of Graduates' Responses
to Items 20-41 of the QESSP 73
An Analysis of Responses of
Randomly Selected Special
Services Nongraduates to Items
1-7 and 10-16 on the QESSP 85
An Analysis of Nongraduates'
Responses to Items 20-41 of
the QESSP 91
Research Question #2 10 4
Analysis of 1974 Transcripts of
Randomly Selected Special
Services Students to Obtain
Their Grade Point Averages 10 5
Analysis of 1975 Transcripts of
Randomly Selected Special
Services Students to Obtain
Their Grade Point Averages 10 5
Analysis of 1976 Transcripts of
Randomly Selected Special
Services Students to Obtain
Their Grade Point Averages 10 6
Analysis of 1977 Transcripts of
Randomly Selected Special
Services Students to Obtain
Their Grade Point Averages 10 6
Analysis of 1978 Transcripts of
Randomly Selected Special
Services Students to Obtain
Their Grade Point Averages 10 7
Research Question #3 124
Analysis of Class Enrolling in 1974.. 125
Analysis of Class Enrolling in 1975.. 125
Analysis of Class Enrolling in 1976.. 126
Analysis of Class Enrolling in 1977.. 126
Analysis of Class Enrolling in 1978.. 127
Summary 127
Research Question #4 141
vi

PAGE
Transcript Analysis of Randomly
Selected Special Services Stu¬
dents Who Enrolled in 1974 to
Determine Their Graduation Rates... 141
Degrees Earned 142
Courses Attempted and Completed 14 3
Transcript Analysis of Randomly
Selected Special Services Stu¬
dents Who Enrolled in 1975 to
Determine Their Graduation Rates... 144
Transcript Analysis of Randomly
Selected Special Services Stu¬
dents Who Enrolled in 1976 to
Determine Their Graduation Rates... 146
Degrees Earned 147
Courses Attempted and Completed.... 147
Transcript Analysis of Randomly
Selected Special Services Stu¬
dents Who Enrolled in 1977 to
Determine Their Graduation Rates... 148
Degrees Earned 148
Courses Attempted and Completed 14 9
Transcript Analysis of Randomly
Selected Special Services Stu¬
dents Who Enrolled in 1978 to
Determine Their Graduation Rates... 150
Degrees Earned 151
Courses Attempted and Completed.... 151
Analysis of Major Fields of Study.... 152
Summary 15 3
Research Question #5 187
Analysis of the Peer Counselors'
Effectiveness as Perceived by
Randomly Selected Graduates of
the Special Services Program 188
Personal Concerns 18 9
Academic Concerns 189
Social Concerns 19 0
Financial Aid 190
Tutoring 191
Summary 191
Analysis of Peer Counselors'
Effectiveness as Perceived by
Randomly Selected Nongraduates
of the Special Services Program.... 191
Personal Concerns 193
Academic Concerns 193
Social Concerns 19 3
Vll

PAGE
Financial Aid 194
Tutoring 19 4
Summary 194
Research Question #6 19 6
Procedure for Making Analysis of
Special Services Program's Value... 200
Summary 2 07
V DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS 2 08
Discussion 209
Academic Services and Activities 2 09
Grade Point Averages 213
Retention Rates 214
Graduation Rates 215
Peer Counselors 217
Economic Status 217
Conclusions 219
Implications 221
Recommendations for Improving the
Special Services Program at the
University of Florida 2 25
Recommendations for Further Research... 227
APPENDICES
A LETTER TO SPECIAL SERVICES DIRECTORS 23 0
B LETTER TO SUBJECTS AND INFORMED CONSENT
FORM 23 2
C QUESTIONNAIRE EVALUATING SPECIAL SERVICES
PROGRAMS (QESSP) 23 4
D FOLLOW-UP LETTER 2 42
BIBLIOGRAPHY 244
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 2 49
viii

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
A LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN A
SPECIAL SERVICES PROGRAM AND BLACK STUDENTS' ACADEMIC
PERFORMANCE AND ECONOMIC ENHANCEMENT
BY
GWENUEL WILFRED MINGO
April 1984
Chairman: Harold C. Riker
Major Department: Counselor Education
The purpose of this study was to determine the rela¬
tionship between the Special Services Program at the Uni¬
versity of Florida and Black student retention, grade point
averages, graduation and economic success. The areas
investigated in this study to determine this relationship
included: 1) academic services and activities in which the
students participated, 2) grade point averages received
during each term, 3) retention rates, 4) graduation rates,
5) influence of peer counselors; and 6) economic status of
participants. A total of 210 students, consisting of two
randomly selected groups of 150 students and 60 students,
respectively, was included in the sample of this study.
IX

I
The Questionnaire Evaluating Special Services Programs
(QESSP) was the instrument used in this study. The QESSP
consists of a cover page with administrative directions and
41 items designed to solicit demographic information, re¬
sponses about satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the
Special Services Program, and evaluative comments regarding
the Program's services and activities.
Some key findings of this study were: 1) the Special
Services Program is effective in providing services and
activities to its participants, 2) the activities and ser¬
vices provided by the Program are not being used by all of
its participants, 3) the retention efforts of the Special
Services Program have significantly increased the Univer¬
sity's retention of Black students, 4) the attrition rate of
Black freshmen in the Special Services Program is signifi¬
cantly lower than the rate for all freshmen from the total
student body, 5) the graduation rate of Special Services
students is not as high or equal to the graduation rate of
the total student body, 6) overall, peer counselors are
effective providers of counseling services, 7) the Special
Services Program improves the potential spending power of
the Special Services students.
The data suggest that the Program is effective and that
it has been a major factor contributing to increases in the
retention and graduation rates of Black students at the
University of Florida.
x

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Statement of the Problem
The education of Blacks or the lack of it has affected
the social, cultural, and economic progress of Blacks in
Florida and throughout the United States (Perkins 1981).
Recognizing the need to extend higher education opportuni¬
ties to Black students, an Affirmative Action Order, number
11246, was issued in 1965 by President Lyndon B. Johnson to
eliminate discrimination and provide equal educational
opportunities for Blacks.
Institutions of higher education responded in various
ways to eliminate the barriers to higher education for
Blacks and other minority students. Harvard University, in
1966, took several positive steps to increase opportunities
for Blacks on its campus, including the recruitment of large
numbers of Black students. Because of Harvard's teaching
and research reputation and its elitist position, the insti¬
tution did not experience a substantial yearly increase in
the number of enrolled Black students (Flemming, Gill, and
Swinton 1978).
1

2
Oberlin College, a predominantly White private Liberal
Arts College located in Ohio, made a conscious effort to
diversify its student body by actively seeking and recruit¬
ing Black students. The Black Oberlin student retention
rate is as high as the college average because of the sup¬
port systems put into operation. Standards at Oberlin were
not lowered, but special tutoring programs were made avail¬
able for students who needed them. Although 50 percent of
the students who used these special services were Black in
1978, the program was designed to aid all students with
deficiencies in reading, writing, mathematics, and other
courses in which they were having difficulty. The philoso¬
phy behind Oberlin's Special Services Program is not to
lower standards but to bring deficient students at least up
to the average (Flemming, Gill, and Swinton 1978).
At Florida State University, a program called "Horizon
Unlimited" was created in 1966 to increase the Black student
representation on that campus. By utilizing a Florida Board
of Regents' policy, which states that 10 percent of the
freshman class need not meet admission requirements, the
University was authorized to enroll Blacks who did not meet
minimum standards for admission. Consequently, the Univers¬
ity, through the Horizon Unlimited Program and the Board of
Regents' policy, substantially increased the number of Black
students on its campus (Flemming, Gill, and Swinton 1978).

3
The University of Florida responded to the call to edu¬
cate Black youths by creating the "Critical Freshman Year
Program" in 1970. This program was designed to assist Black
students academically by rendering to them services such as
tutoring and counseling. The Florida Board of Regents' 10
percent policy for students who did not meet the minimum
standards for admission was also used to increase the Black
student population on the University of Florida campus.
Black students enrolled in many institutions often
found it difficult to complete their courses of study. The
revolving door situation was too often the pattern of Black
student participation. Recognizing the need to assist these
Black students and the institutions of higher education, the
United States Congress amended the Higher Education Act of
1965 to create the Special Services Program in 1970. Ser¬
vices under this program were designed to assist students
from low-income families. These students had academic
potential but lacked adequate secondary school preparation
to enter, continue or resume programs of postsecondary
education.
The main goal of the Special Services Program is to
increase the retention and graduation rates of low-income
students. The Special Services authorized by the Higher
Education Act of 1965 included the following:

4
a) Counseling, tutoring, summer and remedial programs.
b) Career guidance, placement and other services to
encourage or facilitate the students' continuance
in higher education.
c) Identification, encouragement or counseling of stu¬
dents for graduate or professional schools.
Instead of acknowledging inadequacies of their pro¬
grams, some administrators of the special programs have
prepared reports which have been more of a defense of the
program and of the students than evaluation (Cross 1976).
The Special Services Program at the University of Florida
has been administered primarily on the basis of such re¬
ports. The Special Services Program has been operating for
more than a decade without an objective analysis of its
effectiveness. The program has been planned and modified
primarily on the basis of administrative experiences and not
evaluative data. This study focuses on the federally funded
program, Special Services, that is designed to provide sup¬
port services such as counseling, tutoring and academic
advisement.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to determine the rela¬
tionship between the Special Services Program at the
University of Florida and Black student retention, grade

5
success. The questions examined in this study were as
follows:
1. How effective are the academic services and activi¬
ties of the Special Services Program as perceived
by Black students at the University of Florida?
2. What are the grade point averages of Black students
in the Special Services Program at the University
of Florida?
3. What are the retention rates of the Black students
in the Special Services Program at the University
of Florida.
4. What are the graduation rates of the Black students
in the Special Services Program at the University
of Florida?
5. What influence does the peer counselor component
have on the academic performance of Black students
in the Special Services Program at the University
of Florida?
6. What is the economic status after graduation of
Black students who participated in the Special Ser¬
vices Program at the University of Florida?
Specifically, this study investigated and reported on
the types of academic services and activities in the Special
Services Program that are most effective for its students.

6
Rationale of the Study
Institutions of higher education similar to the Univer¬
sity of Florida are expected to continue responding to the
needs of their Black students and to increase their Black
student enrollment. Like most predominantly White institu¬
tions of higher education, the University of Florida has
shown a growing sensitivity to the problems of equal educa¬
tional opportunities for Black students. This growing
commitment to the solution of their problems is readily
apparent in the number of programs available to Black
students at the University of Florida and similar institu¬
tions nationwide.
In spite of this growing commitment and desire of the
University of Florida as administrators to provide academic
support programs for its Black students, it is easy to see
that the implementation of these programs is not a result of
evaluative data. Government grants, court orders, human¬
istic feelings and politics appear to influence most of the
decisions to design and implement the academic supports pro¬
grams for Blacks at many of this nation's institutions of
higher education.
The University of Florida, like other universities in
the United States, needs to re-examine its efforts and the
effect of those efforts to provide academic support for its

7
Black students. A cursory examination of the Special Ser¬
vices Programs in the southeastern United States reveals a
need for the improvement and augmentation of their efforts
to retain Black students at many of the institutions like
the University of Florida.
Retention of Black students and their graduation from
these institutions are major goals of the Special Services
Program. Significant improvements in the Special Services
Program could directly affect the recruitment, retention,
and graduation of Black students. Increases in Black
student retention rates also could help the institution
comply with its state commitment to equal access and equal
opportunity in public higher education.
In spite of this commitment, the University of Florida
is tightening its admission policies by raising its entrance
requirements. The high cost of education and the current
reductions in state and federal aid will cause many institu¬
tions like the University of Florida to reconsider their
present equal access admissions policies and consider ways
to become more cost effective.
The effectiveness of the Special Services Program in
terms of retaining and facilitating the graduation of Black
students is a focus of this study and is of significance in

8
these times of limited funding for education. McGrath
(1982) has reported that few detailed studies exist about
the actual cost of Special Programs in higher education and
their effectiveness. This situation is true at the Univer¬
sity of Florida, which has had a Special Services Program
for over 10 years, but for which no longitudinal evaluation
has been conducted.
In order to provide adequate support systems for Black
students, staff involved in the Special Services Program
should have more specific information about the factors that
influence successful completion of academic programs by
Black students. The absence of evaluative data regarding
this program makes it almost impossible to determine if the
University of Florida has been meeting the needs and solving
the problems of its Black students.
Evaluative data obtained through this study should
enable other institutions of higher education to evaluate
the current support systems on their campuses that operate
in conjunction with Special Services Programs. These data
could be used to modify or delete services that are not
effective. Evaluative data from local and national studies
could be the basis for making program changes or designing
and implementing present and future supportive services
programs.

9
A data base upon which to build a more responsive
Special Services Program will help to insure the best
possible development of Black students, who represent
important human resources for Florida and the nation.
Studies such as this one can be used to develop a delivery
system or model that will improve the quality of the ser¬
vices and activities rendered to present and future Special
Services students at institutions of higher education. The
development and design of such a model have general applica¬
bility both statewide and nationally because of the simi¬
larity of Special Services Programs in scope and objectives.
There have been only two national studies conducted to
evaluate Special Services Programs and their effectiveness
or impact. One study was conducted by Educational Testing
Service and Research Triangle in 1971 and the other study
was conducted by System Development Corporation in 1979
(Coulson, Bradford, and Kaye 1981). The investigators of
the 1971 study of Special Services Programs did not find any
clear and consistent evidence that the program related to
the success of the students involved (Davis, Burkheimer, and
Borders-Patterson 1975). The investigators of the second
study in 1979 found some evidence of beneficial program
impact on the students (Coulson, Bradford, and Kaye 1981).

10
To what extent do such programs affect the academic
success of students? What is the cost effectiveness of such
programs? What benefits do students derive from such pro¬
grams? Are such programs still needed at the University of
Florida? Questions such as these require answers based on
carefully evaluated data. The support for Special Services
Programs is uncertain in many of the institutions in which
they exist. All too often universities and colleges make
little effort to accommodate these programs within their
operating procedures. The status of these programs also is
uncertain because the nation seems to be turning away from
expanding educational opportunities to all parts of its
population (Gordon 1977).
Longitudinal studies of counseling programs rarely
appear in the literature. This situation seems to be due to
the difficulties in planning and carrying out long-term
studies. The rarity of research papers on longitudinal
evaluation studies at American Personnel and Guidance
Association (APGA) conventions suggests that most counselors
are not conducting such evaluation studies. At the 1982
APGA convention in Detroit, there were five and seven indi¬
viduals, respectively, in attendance at the sessions dealing
with longitudinal studies and evaluations (Earclay 1982).
Rothney (1982) reports that the titles of research con¬
ducted by most counselors do not include words such as

11
evaluation, longitudinal evaluation, accountability, assess¬
ment, effect or effectiveness and results. He found that
less than two percent of the listed programs at the 19 82
APGA Convention included such words in the titles of their
presentations.
Research studies identified exclusively as studies of
Special Services Programs are rarely found in the litera¬
ture. Using as a guide the key word "Special" in a search
of the Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) for
research studies of federally funded Special Services Pro¬
grams, this researcher found a total of 13 studies with the
word "Special" in their titles from the period 1971 to 1981.
Only three out of 13 could be identified as research studies
of federally funded Special Services Programs.
The scarcity of national and local studies of Special
Services Programs indicates a definite need for this study.
Such a study could benefit the University of Florida greatly
as a basis for making decisions about supportive services
for specially admitted students.

12
Definition of Terms
Compensatory Program—A program designed to make up for the
debilitating consequences of discrimination and poverty
(Frost and Rowland 1971).
Developmental Program—A program designed to achieve skills
or attitudes and is not necessarily a prerequisite for
another program (Cross 1976).
Expanded Educational Opportunities Programs (EEOP)—A state
funded program designed to assist Black students at the
University of Florida.
Regular Admit Student—A Student who has met the admission
standards for enrolling at the University of Florida.
Remedial Program—A program designed to correct educational
deficiencies before a student may enter a course or program
(Cross 1976).
Special Admit Student—A student who does not meet the
admission standards for enrolling at the University of
Florida.
Special Services Program—A federally funded program de¬
signed to provide academic supportive services to low-income
students and increase their retention and graduation rates
in postsecondary institutions (Federal Register, Vol. 41,
No. 95, Fri., May 14, 1976).

13
Special Academic Services and Activities—Those services and
activities provided to Special Services students such as
instruction in reading, writing, study skills, mathematics
and other subjects; personal counseling; academic advice and
assistance in course selection; tutorial services; and
activities designed to acquaint students with career options
available to them (Federal Register, Vol. 47, No. 42, Wed.,
March 3, 1982).
Organization of the Study
Chapter II of this study contains a review of pertinent
literature. The research method, research questions, sub¬
jects, population, instrument, data collection, and data
analysis are described in Chapter III. The findings re¬
sulting from the analysis and evaluation of the data are
presented in Chapter IV. A brief summary of the study,
discussion of the findings, conclusions, implications and
recommendations for further research are presented in
Chapter V.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Philosophical assumptions underlying Special Services
Programs and theories that are related to the education of
Blacks and other minorities are first discussed in this
chapter. Research studies pertaining to Black students,
along with implications of these studies, follow. Finally,
there is an overview of the Special Services Program at the
University of Florida, together with the program's peer
counseling component.
Research studies identified exclusively as studies of
the Special Services Programs in the State of Florida are
few. Those which have been made are difficult to identify
since investigators often do not name the specific programs
but use such terms as compensatory programs, educational
opportunities programs, or special educational program. For
example, one study which was conducted by a director of a
Special Services Program was described as a disadvantaged
student program.
The various labels used to refer to Special Services
Programs pose a problem for persons seeking to find research
14

15
reports on such programs. As explained by Sowell 1972), any
attempt to produce quality education for Blacks must begin
by finding out what has been done and with what results.
According to Sowell, therein lies another problem for
Special Services researchers. On most campuses this ques¬
tion of what has been done for Blacks has scarcely been
asked, much less answered (Sowell 1972) . Despite these
problems, it is still important to consider the studies
which have been made so far and their results.
Philosophical Assumptions and Theories
The drive for civil rights in the 1960's, President
Johnson's War on Poverty, and the Higher Education Act of
1965 were major factors responsible for an emphasis on equal
access for minorities to educational opportunities and
Special Services Programs (Cross 1976 and Franklin 1980).
The main philosophical assumption of these programs was that
Black students with educational deficiencies can profit from
special assistance through traditional educational mechan¬
isms such as counseling, tutoring, and remedial instruction,
rendered in a facilitative manner (Davis, Burkheimer, and
Borders-Patterson 1975) . Franklin (1980) also reports that
programmatic initiatives for equal access to education pro¬
vides the best hope for breaking the cycle of poverty and
isolation for the nation's minorities.

16
One of the motivating factors in the initiation of
these and similar programs resulted from the involvement of
the relationships between college students and faculty in
the civil rights movements. Students and faculty who parti¬
cipated in these movements in the South were amazed by the
plight of the poor and underprivileged and urged their in¬
stitutions to offer their educational expertise to aid these
groups with special needs (Abert 1979).
In the literature, conflicting views may be found on
the benefit of special educational programs for Black stu¬
dents. Similarly, conflicting views have been offered to
explain why minority groups have difficulty with traditional
educational programs. At least two groups have debated
these issues.
Heredity Theories
In one camp of the controversy is Shuey (1958) , who
argued that Blacks do not possess as much capacity for
learning as do Whites. Shuey, a psychologist, espoused
genetics as the basis for learning difficulties of Blacks
and not their impoverished environment. In the same camp a
decade later, Jensen (1969) argued that federally funded
compensatory education efforts were unsuccessful because
they were aimed at changing what cannot be changed appre¬
ciably. Jensen also felt that the reported deficiencies of

17
disadvantaged students were due to genetic factors rather
than environmental factors.
Elkind (1969) agreed with Jensen and others, noting
further that the intellectual development of children cannot
be accelerated by compensatory schoolings. Evans and Dubois
(1972) took the position that such students should not be in
college. They also agreed with the prior researchers and
stated that underachievers are individuals with limited in¬
tellectual capacity. The arguments presented by this group
of researchers place the blame for educational deficiencies
on individual capabilities and the genetically inferior
ethnic group, but not on the environment.
Environment Theories
However, there are other researchers who believe that
the environment can produce educational deficiencies in a
person. Hunt (1969) contends that the environment affects a
person's behavior and that a child who is subjected to an
enriched environment with reinforcements can develop ade¬
quate intellectual skills. The overwhelming opinion of many
psychologists is that the educational differences observed
between Black and White children are largely the result of
environmental factors and not genetic factors (Pettigrew
1966).

18
Baratz and Baratz (1970) criticize both the genetic and
environmental explanations for race difference in intelli¬
gence and academic achievement. They suggest that the main
reason for the differences is the inappropriateness of most
school programs for Black children.
Valentine (1972) rejects both genetic and environmental
theories on intelligence and academic achievement. He
argues that the genetics theory cannot be proven but that
the environmental theory, which may be sound, needs to be
extended. Valentine subscribed to the theory that all in¬
dividuals are uniquely creative and continually developing.
Gordon and Green (1976) state that even if genetic
factors influence mental functions, schooling and other
environmental factors cannot be ignored. These writers
further state that no matter what factors are responsible
for the development of the intellect, human development
requires diversity of facilitative treatments and adequate
resources.
Although the heredity versus environment controversy
has not been completely resolved, most authorities agree
that environment influences learning in important ways.
Consequently, there has been a shift from discussions of
whether or not Blacks can make it in college to how they can
be helped in college (Cross 1976).

19
Theories of Learning
Prior to the arrival of large numbers of Black students
at the University of Florida, some thought was given to the
question of how Black students could be helped with their
academic courses. Administrative and counseling personnel
sensitive to the needs of Black students were hired and
academic programs were implemented to help the Black stu¬
dents who lacked adequate skills for successful matricula¬
tion at the University of Florida.
From 1971 to the present, most Black students who were
admitted to the Special Services Program at the University
of Florida were from deprived educational backgrounds.
Ausubel (1964) provides some relevant evidence for counter¬
acting the effects of cultural deprivation on the learning
patterns of Blacks. He hypothesizes that an optional
learning environment could stimulate intellectual develop¬
ment. However, he notes that some students' learning pat¬
terns may be irreversible as a result of a consistently
deprived environment during their early formative years.
Ausubel (1965),further states that adequate attention to the
cognitive readiness for learning and the use of appropriate
instructional materials create an optional learning environ¬
ment for Black students.
Bloom (1971) theorizes that more than 90 percent of the
students in schools can learn what the schools have to teach

20
them if given the proper instruction and adequate time for
studying. Bloom's theory of learning is one of learning for
mastery. The basis for Bloom's theory lies in allowing stu¬
dents sufficient time to master a subject or a course. This
condition might mean extending the time for the course,
subject, or term. Bloom's theory provides a basis for
establishing programs and courses to meet the special needs
of the individual. Individual differences, even within
subcultures, must be taken into consideration when learning
theories are applied to any group.
Wittmer and Myrick (1974) reported on the theory and
practices of facilitative teaching and recommended at least
100 facilitative procedures for enhancing students' learn¬
ing. These researchers state that individuals learn best
when: (1) the learning is meaningful to the learner; (2) it
is voluntary and not forced upon the learner; (3) the
learning is the result of self-initiation; (4) the learning
is self-evaluated and it is the learner who is deciding if
what is being taught is of any value; and (5) the materials
and techniques have an affective base.
Wittmer and Myrick (1974) also reported that teachers
are key individuals in the process of facilitating learning.
Teachers need to be aware of their own feelings in order to
provide the psychological openness for understanding their
students. These researchers go on to say that teachers

21
cannot facilitate learning by prescribing similar goals for
all students or adhering to inflexible classroom plans.
Klausmeier (1980) reported that learning theories, with
few exceptions, ignore both individual differences and rates
of learning among students. Klausmeier further stated that
some learning theories have not taken into consideration the
developmental differences in either the internal or external
conditions of learning.
Research Concerning Special Programs
The research discussed in this section includes studies
of Special Services Programs and Compensatory Education
Programs in Higher Education. The focus of these studies
was on the purposes of the Special Services Programs and
their effectiveness.
Special and Compensatory Programs
In a study of Special and Compensatory Education
Programs in Ohio, Williams (1978) found that private and
public institutions of higher education differed consider¬
ably in their concepts of providing assistance to disadvant¬
aged students. The study involved 22 institutions: 11 were
public and 11 were private. Programs directors at each of
the institutions were asked to complete an inventory that
included the following subject areas: (1) Program rationale
and objectives; (2) recruitment and selection of students;

22
(3) program implementation to include academic adjustment,
special assistance with studies, financial assistance,
counseling services and physical facilities; (4) faculty;
and (5) evaluation of the program. The main purpose of this
study was to examine the growth and development of special
and compensatory education programs in a select group of
public and private four-year institutions in Ohio during the
time period of 1969-1970 to 1973-1974.
Williams found that directors from both private and
public institutions felt that the most important purpose of
their programs was to provide educational support for per¬
sons who were socially, economically, and academically
deficient. The private institutions identified two other
purposes that were important to their programs: (1) to
assist culturally or ethnically different students in becom¬
ing acclimated to the college or university community; and
(2) to foster positive attitudes within disadvantaged stu¬
dents about education, self, and their potential for
success.
Williams' study also showed that public institutions
were more inclined to make changes or modifications in
established procedures to facilitate the success of the
students than were private institutions. For example,
private institutions did not support the overall use of
academic adjustment services; they did not see the need for

23
special faculty or special facilities for compensatory pro¬
grams. Finally, the private colleges did not support the
use of an evaluation process for special or compensatory
programs.
After reviewing the data from the private and public
institutions, making site visits and conducting interviews,
Williams recommended the following:
1. That institutions insure the continuous development
of sound and effective special or compensatory
programs.
2. That institutions serve both the disadvantaged stu¬
dent as well as the traditional student.
3. That institutions devise a general model for a com¬
prehensive curriculum.
4. That credit for all remedial or compensatory educa¬
tion courses count toward graduation.
5. That instruction accommodate individual differences
and permit students to learn and proceed at their
own paces.
6. That more effective use of instructional resources
for special programs, such as faculty, media
centers and facilities, be made.
7. That grading policies and practices be nor.punitive.

24
8. That only competent instructors who actively seek
to teach disadvantaged students be involved in spe¬
cial or compensatory programs.
9. That efforts be made to alleviate the abrupt tran¬
sition from special compensatory education to regu¬
lar or traditional college curricula.
Williams did not indicate how these recommendations should
be undertaken.
Retention
During the 1979-1980 school year at the University of
Florida, a report prepared by the Affirmative Action Officer
revealed, that the Black students' drop-out rate was twice
that of White students. In the Fall of 1980, the drop-out
rate for White students was 10 percent and the drop-out rate
for Black students was 20.83 percent.
In a report prepared by the United States Bureau of
Census in 1974 on school enrollment, it was found that
Blacks and other minorities had attrition rates much higher
than White students, particularly in traditionally White
institutions (Franklin 1980). The College Board, in a re¬
port on financing low-income and minority students in higher
education, found that a student from the bottom income guar-
tile has less than one-third the chance of completing a col¬
lege program than a student in the top income quartile
(Franklin 1980).

25
In a 1978 study that was originally planned for eight
predominantly White universities, located in each of the
four geographical regions of the United States, the statis¬
tics on attrition of Black students was disturbing (The
National Advisory Committee on Black Higher Education and
Black Colleges and Universities 1980). The institutions
participating in this study were identified only by geo¬
graphical region and whether they were public or private to
protect their identity. As a result of a Southern public
institution declining to participate in the study, only
seven institutions were studied. The refusal came too late
to select another Southern public institution.
The National Advisory Committee on Black Higher Educa¬
tion and Black Colleges and Universities which conducted
this study found that, at the Midwestern private and Mid-
v/estern public institution, the Black attrition rate was
about 43 percent. Considering the fact that Midwestern
private institutions are very selective in their admissions
policies, this failure rate for Black students is high. The
Western public institution had a reported Black freshman
failure rate of 31 percent. No data were available for the
Western private institution.
A 28 percent attrition rate for Black students enrolled
in the Eastern public institution of this study was obtained
from the Equal Opportunity Program at that institution. The

26
researchers reported that the university could not provide
attrition data on its Black students. Students at that
institution believed that the attrition rate was at least
twice the reported figure. The attrition rate for Blacks at
the Eastern public and private institutions was reported as
negligible. At the private institution, 50 percent of the
Black student population was doing honors work, compared
with 80 percent of the White population. The Southern pri¬
vate institution participating in this 1978 study reported a
20 percent attrition rate of Black students.
Statistical information on the attrition and retention
of Black students enrolled in higher educational institu¬
tions must be made readily available so that educators can
identify problems and seek strategies for retention of Black
students. The researchers of this study found that the ex¬
istence of special programs on the campuses of the White
institutions seemed to have little impact on Black retention
at the seven universities. It was reported that attrition
was a major problem at the Eastern public, Midwestern public
and Western public colleges despite the special academic and
financial assistance offered to the Blacks at those institu¬
tions. The Midwestern private institution, which provides
financial assistance, also had a major attrition problem
with its Black students. The Southern private institution

27
which makes available both academic and financial assistance
was reported to have a modest Black student attrition
problem. The Eastern private institution, which admits the
best of the Black students, had no attrition problem.
Financial assistance and special seminars were provided by
the Eastern private institution for its Black students.
The researchers reported that many of the university
policy makers who participated in this study seemed to
believe that raising admission standards and favoring Black
students from private schools are the best ways to reduce
the higher attrition rates.
The data obtained from this study showed that attrition
statistics for Black students varied significantly among the
seven universities. However the researchers reported that
the underlying causes of Black attrition appeared to be
found in the poor quality of life on campus for the Black
students. For example, Black students perceived themselves
as being in a hostile environment. The data also showed
that the universities offered too few support systems to
help Black students cope with racial, cultural and academic
problems. There was a scarcity of Black role models, inade¬
quate financial aid and an almost total absence of trained
Black counselors on all of the campuses investigated.
The researchers of this study concluded that university
policies and programs need substantial changes if Black

28
students are to gain increased access to predominantly White
institutions and enjoy opportunities for academic success.
These researchers recommended that special financial aid and
academic assistance programs should be expanded along with
efforts to provide orientation and counseling facilities and
more Black role models for students. The researchers of
this Committee on Black Higher Education concluded that only
when these changes are made will there be a realistic pros¬
pect of increased admission, retention and graduation iron
college for America's Black youth.
Centra (1970), in a study of Black students at predomi¬
nantly White colleges, compared the background character¬
istics, activities, goals, and perceptions of Black students
with those of their White counterparts. A questionnaire on
student and college characteristics was administered to 249
Black students at 83 predominantly White institutions. A
comparison group of 249 White students was selected from the
same 83 institutions. The White students were matched with
the Black students on the basis of sex and major field of
study.
The results revealed that there were large differences
in the socioeconomic backgrounds of the Black and White
students. The White students were found to be heavily in¬
volved in organized campus-based activities while the Black
students selected activities aimed at improving society in

29
general and those aimed at improving the status of Blacks in
particular. Centra (1970) also found that more Black stu¬
dents than White students planned to attend graduate or
professional school.
Boyd (1977), in a study to refute the myth that Black
students are only able to attend highly selective colleges
because of special admission policies, found that Black stu¬
dents not only are successful at these schools, but have a
strong interest in graduate education.
Turner (1980) has reported that the greatest factor
affecting retention of Black students is the degree of in¬
stitutional commitment to retention efforts. Previous
studies and reports (Williams, 1969; Etzioni, 1971; and
Davis, 1974) have stated that institutional commitment was a
necessary component for Special Services and similar pro¬
grams to be effective in their operations and in the reten¬
tion of students.
West (1975) studied the retention of minority students
in a program for the disadvantaged at Central Florida
Community College and found that there was a 38 percent
retention and graduation rate for Black students at that
community college. West reported that the study was con¬
ducted over a three-year period and that the students were
taught by an open-ended, nonpunitive, humanistic, instruc¬
tional technique. The program also provided individualized

30
counseling and tutoring, as well as group tutoring. The
documented educational outcomes, as reported by West, a
Special Services Director, are rarely found in the
literature.
National Studies
Since 1971, the first year of the Special Services
Programs, only two national studies designed to evaluate the
effectiveness of Special Services Programs have been con¬
tracted for and financed by the United States Office, of
Education. The first national study of Special Services
Programs was conducted jointly by the Educational Testing
Services and the Research Triangle under a contract from the
Office of Education. Davis, Burkheimer and Borders-
Patterson (1975) reported that 190 programs were studied to
determine their effectiveness as reflected by the progress,
satisfaction, goals, and perceptions of the programs'
participants.
The findings of the first national study of Special
Services Programs failed to show either negative or positive
effects of Special Services Programs for disadvantaged
students. Davis, Burkheimer, and Borders-Patterson (1975)
explained that their findings were inconclusive because
individual programs differed in a variety of ways. Differ¬
ences in ethnic groups, variations within the groups,
prevailing climates of morale at institutions, programs

31
offered, standards, retention and attrition rates were some
of the areas in which the programs were unique. The fact
that these programs were in existence for a short period of
time might have contributed to the inconclusive findings of
the researchers. These programs were studied in 1971, the
second year of operation for most of them. A study of other
well established special educational opportunity programs
might have yielded more definite findings.
Even with the inconclusiveness of this study, the
researchers did make some recommendations for future action.
The first recommendation, directed to institutions of higher
education, was to establish effective programs. The second
recommendation, directed to the federal government, was to
improve guidelines for the awarding of Special Services
grants, and the management and monitoring of these programs.
The third recommendation was directed to all concerned, to
conduct more research to determine the effects of Special
Services Programs.
Vernetson (1981), a University of Florida researcher
who developed guidelines for disadvantaged programs, also
suggests that more research is needed to investigate the
effects of programs for disadvantaged college students.
The second national study of Special Services Programs
was conducted by the System Development Corporation, under a

32
contract with the U. S. Department of Education, during the
1979-80 academic school year.
Coulson, Bradford and Kaye (1980) reported some of the
most notable findings:
1. There is some evidence of beneficial program impact
on participating students. This evidence is mani¬
fested in the form of increased retention rates and
the students' successful academic progress.
2. Students receiving a full range of program ser¬
vices, such as counseling, academic advisement and
special courses, are more likely to persist through
their freshman year than are students receiving few
or no services from the Special Services Program.
3. Students receiving more counseling, academic ad¬
visement, and other support services are likely to
attempt and to complete more course units.
4. Students receiving a full range of academic support
services have lower grade point averages than stu¬
dents receiving fewer services. This situation
might be due to a selection effect rather than a
negative effect of services. For example, projects
tend to concentrate academic support services on
students with poorer entry skills and more obvious
learning deficiencies.
5. In institutions where personnel expressed greater
acceptance and regard for the students, it was more
likely that students would attempt and complete
more courses. The researchers were not sure whe¬
ther the institutional personnel were an effect or
a cause of the increased number of courses
attempted and completed by the Special Services
students.
6. Students receiving more financial aid were more
likely to persist through their freshman year, and
tended to attempt and complete more course units.
They also obtained higher grades. (Pp. 8-18 to
8-19 )

33
This study focused on a nationally representative
sample of 58 Special Services Projects at colleges and uni¬
versities within the contiguous 48 states. Vocational and
technical schools with Special Services Programs or Projects
designed exclusively for the physically handicapped were ex¬
cluded from the study. Two hundred students from each of
the 58 projects comprised the sample, yielding a total of
11,600 student participants.
Two sets of student outcome measures were examined to
determine the effects of student participation on Special
Services. One set was taken from transcripts, including the
students' persistence (whether the students were still en¬
rolled at the end of the 1979-80 school years) ; the stu¬
dents' intensity of effort (how many courses the students
attempted); the students' progress (how many courses the
students completed); and the students' performance (grade
point average).
The second set of outcome measures was taken from stu¬
dent surveys, which included measures of changes in the
students' educational aspirations and expectations, changes
in the students' job expectations, changes in the students'
self-perceived skill levels and changes in the students'
self-perceived education-related problems.

34
The outcome measures in the second set did not reveal
any consistent or interpretive relationships with participa¬
tion data or program characteristics, so only transcript-
derived outcome measures were presented. The relationship
among persistence, intensity, progress and the various sup¬
portive services provided to students was positive. No
particular service was observed as being more significant
than another in contributing to this positive relationship.
An analysis of the data showed that students receiving the
full range of services had predictable odds of persisting
2.26 times mere than students who received no services.
The grade point averages of the students participating
and receiving full services were lower than the averages of
students who received fewer services. The researchers indi¬
cated that this was not a negative finding, but it might
suggest that the students receiving full services might have
had a greater need for those services.
Research of the programs and strategies that facilitate
the success of Black students in higher educational institu¬
tions continues today just as it did in the sixties and
seventies. Verification of the effectiveness of Special
Services Programs may not rest with a single study but with
a combination of studies. National studies, such as those
presented here, in conjunction with local studies, might

35
provide more evidence and clues for implementation of effec¬
tive programs and strategies for facilitating the successful
learning of Black students.
Ford Foundation Study
Boyd (1974) conducted a national study to answer ques¬
tions on such topics as the recruitment and admission of
Black students, relationships between Black and White stu¬
dents and the responsiveness of institutions to the needs of
Blacks. This nationwide survey involving 785 Black students
and 94 faculty ana administrators was conducted at 40 insti¬
tutions during the 1972-73 school year. It showed that,
while institutions provided for lower entrance requirements
and lower performance standards for Black students, few
offered programs that could help Black students adjust
socially and academically to the institution.
As a result of this national survey of Black students
enrolled in predominantly White institutions, Boyd (1974)
reported that Black students considered some of the academic
policies for facilitating access of Blacks to institutions
of higher education to have serious negative effects.
Boyd (1974) found that significant but insufficient
progress had been made toward equal opportunities in the
institutions studied. Although there were colleges where
race relations were extremely strained, Bcyd (1974) found
that segregation did not persist as an official sanction of

36
the institution. He found that students and staff reflected
the social conditions in the country and divided along
racial lines because they were more comfortable with this
division. However, Boyd (1974) did report that many of the
predominantly White institutions were unprepared and in many
cases unwilling to meet the needs of their Black students.
Boyd's data indicated that some colleges had not made it
clear that they were willing to work to overcome gaps in
their preparation for helping Blacks.
Boyd reported that Black students were still able to
obtain their education and degree even though experiencing
discrimination, being stereotyped as special admit students,
being advised by institutional officials not to try certain
academic disciplines and sometimes being neglected by fac¬
ulty and staff. He stated that most of the Black students
wanted to go on to graduate school even though it was likely
that they would have the same kind of obstacle course to run
there.
Most of the students who participated in Boyd's (1974)
study were within the accepted admissions criteria for the
colleges where they were enrolled. The overall pattern of
success was attributed to being qualified and the fact that
most of the Black students took education seriously enough
to overcome the barriers to their educational pursuits.
Boyd's (1974) data dismissed the demeaning and damaging

37
rhetoric that Black students are getting a free ride through
college. His data about loans and jobs showed that, if
Black students were getting a free ride, it was provided by
their own families.
Information from this study concerning students' satis¬
faction with their overall college experiences suggests that
colleges should emphasize matching the preparation, ability,
interests, and style of each prospective Black student with
the academic reputation, requirements and style of the
college.
Boyd's presentation of his data was simple and direct.
He avoided using complex statistical techniques, which he
feels tend to be understood only by those with statistical
backgrounds. However, he did present much of the raw data
in the appendix of his study for those who wanted to draw
their own conclusions. Analysis of these data reveals some
insights and recommendations for use as reference points ir
removing barriers which Black students face in predominantly
White institutions. The recommendations offered by Eoyd are
as follows:
1. Colleges should attempt to be more responsive to
the needs of Blacks.
2. Financial aid should be maintained at current
levels or increased.
3. Continued financial aid should be assured.

38
4. The emphasis on loans in the aid packages should
be decreased for those whose family income is less
than $5,000.
5. The number of Black students in predominantly
White institutions should continue to increase.
6. The number of Black staff members in predominantly
White institutions should increase dramatically.
7. Colleges should guard against increased hostility
toward Blacks as their numbers increase.
8. Colleges should recruit Black students of diverse
backgrounds and interests rather than concentrat¬
ing their attention on those with multiple educa¬
tional deficiencies.
9. Colleges should include the study of Blacks in
their curricula, either through specific courses
on the topic or through revision of existing
courses.
10. Colleges should provide academic support to Black
students who need it.
11. Colleges should be sure that any special help is
designed to help Black students meet existing
standards rather than to foster tolerance for a
kind of second-class academic citizenship.
12. Colleges should encourage Black students to pursue
a variety of majors.
13. Colleges should provide realistic advice about a
broad range of career options and the educational
experiences which lead to them.
14. Colleges should involve Whites as well as Blacks
in advising and counseling Black students.
15. Colleges should maintain channels of communication
with mere than a few spokesmen among their Black
students.
16. Colleges should plan ahead in dealing with Blacks
rather than drift from crisis to crisis.
17. Young Elacks should shop around carefully before
enrolling in a college.

39
18. Black students should struggle primarily for
changes which will be most meaningful to their
educational experience, even if colleges resist
these changes strongly while making other less
important changes. (Pp. 67-73)
Boyd was careful to point out that not all of the above
recommendations apply to all colleges or provide "how to do
it" instructions. Effective implementation of changes on
any campus must be based on information about that campus
and its students and comparative information about groups of
similar colleges and students.
Special Programs at the University of Florida
It was not until the late sixties that Blacks began to
enroll at the University of Florida in large numbers. In
the summer of 1970, an experimental program designed to
provide supportive services such as tutoring, counseling,
academic advisement and social programs was implemented to
determine if the program would contribute to the academic
and personal success of the students.
Apparently, the experiment was a success. Cranney and
Larsen (1972) reported that out of the 191 Black students
admitted during the summer of 1970, all but 13 were still
enrolled in 1971 and that seven of the dropouts had trans¬
ferred to other colleges. Van Gelder (1973) also reported
on this group of students and found that 62 percent of them

40
were progressing satisfactorily after three terms at the
University of Florida.
This experimental program, that was state funded and
called the "Critical Freshman Year Program," had its name
changed to the "Expanded Educational Opportunities Program"
during the 1970-71 school year. In July 1971, the
University of Florida, with a $50,000 grant from the
Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW), esta¬
blished the present Special Services Program for low-income
students from all ethnic groups.
The Expanded Educational Opportunities Program was
phased out in 1973, leaving the Special Services Program
with the responsibility for serving the academic and social
needs of the Black and White students assigned to the
Program.
Over the past ten years (1971-1981) , the Special
Services Program has gone through four changes in organiza¬
tional structure and has changed leadership four times.
With the change in leadership came the change in leadership
style that occurred four times during the period 1971-1974.
Since 1971, the Special Services Program has operated as a
consolidated unit with the Upward Bound Program, a prepara¬
tory program for high school youth. The staffs from these
two distinct federal programs were consolidated, but the
goals, funds and supplies remained separated. The overall

41
objective of the Special Services Program during this 10-
year span has been to provide the students with supportive
services to facilitate their retention and subsequent gradu¬
ation from this institution.
Program Elements
The Special Services project at the University of
Florida has been providing services consistent with the
goals and objectives of the U. S. Department of Education.
Specifically, the services and activities provided are
1. Selecting eligible participants from a pool con¬
sisting of students admitted to the University
under the Board of Regents 10 percent special ad¬
mission policy, who have participated in other fed¬
eral programs, such as Upward Bound or Talent
Search or who may lack adequate secondary school
preparation;
2. Providing a needs assessment of each selected par¬
ticipant to determine the academic or other educa¬
tional deficiencies which need particular attention
to enable the participant to graduate from the
University;
3. Providing personal, career and academic guidance
and counseling in those areas affecting student
performance;
4. Arranging for remedial and other services such as
special classes, tutoring and educational and cul¬
tural activities which enable the participant to
complete with sufficient academic and personal
skills at the University, yet without creating a
long-range dependency on the project;
5. Developing and encouraging the use of special cur¬
ricular and instructional methods which enable par¬
ticipants to complete required course work in a
reasonable period of time;

42
6. Documenting participant performance and progress
while enrolled in the project; and
7. Acting as a referral agent for the participants, to
enable them to deal correctly and efficiently with
situations involving financial aid, housing, aca¬
demic matters, and educational and career planning.
Peer Counseling
A review of the objectives of the Special Services
Program at the University of Florida shows that the program
is heavily oriented toward providing counseling services.
This situation may result from the fact that the University
does not provide a structured and coordinated approach to
teaching remedial courses. However, remedial education is
becoming a topic of major concern as more and more students
are leaving high school without adequate reading, writing,
and mathematics skills requisite for successful academic
survival in college.
Through the use of peer counselors, the program has
provided substantial counseling and referral services for
its students. These students have been an essential compon¬
ent of the Special Services counseling program since its
beginning. These peer counselors have been predominantly
undergraduate students who have had no formal training prior
to being hired. The professional staff provides formal and
ongoing training for them. Weekly meetings in the form of
staff development sessions are conducted by the counseling
coordinator or the director for peer counselor training.

43
The following topics are covered in training and devel¬
opment sessions: 1) counseling theories; 2) communication
skills and training; 3) human relations training; 4) values
clarification; 5) problem-solving and feedback exchange; and
6) writing skills for the maintenance of weekly counseling
logs.
Peer counselors function as extensions of the Special
Services counseling component. They provide the full-time
staff feedback from the students who are located all over
the campus and the Gainesville community. Peer counselors
are required to make weekly contact with their assigned case
load of students and to report their findings to the full¬
time staff counselor. With peer counselors seeking out
their clients to ascertain their needs, the full-time
counselor can determine priorities for intervening in situ¬
ations too complex for peer counselors.
Research by Zunker and Brown (1966) found that peer
counselors can be as effective as professional counselors.
Carkhuff (1969) and Durlak (1970) have demonstrated in their
research that peer counselors can successfully function as
providers of counseling services. Sussman (1977) found in
his research of peer counselors that they are effective at
improving grades of students.
As effective and successful providers of counseling
services, peer counselors might be an intervening variable

44
that is contributing to the success of Black students in
higher educational institutions. The lack of information
about the effectiveness of peer counselors with the Black
student population suggests the need for research in this
area.
Summary
The Civil Rights movement of the 1960's called atten¬
tion to the need for improvement of educational opportuni¬
ties for Blacks and other minorities. Several questions
have been raised about how such improvements are to be
accomplished. The value of Special Services Programs, the
key mechanism for improving the quality of education for
Blacks, has been questioned by some educators. In terms of
the academic potential of Black students, there is a theory
that heredity determines intelligence, a theory which leads
to the conclusion that Special Services Programs do not have
a useful purpose. In contrast to this view, there is a
theory that attributes intelligence primarily to environ¬
mental influences. This latter view has been used repeat¬
edly to support the implementation of Special Services
Programs in higher education.
The controversy over heredity versus environment as a
significant factor which contributes to the intelligence and
academic achievement of Black students has been shifted in

45
recent years from whether or not they can make it to how can
they be helped (Cross 1976). How an individual can be
helped is dependent upon how that individual learns. Appli¬
cation of the learning theories presented in this chapter
might facilitate Black students in their learning and also
help to improve their academic performance, retention and
graduation rates. As reported by most researchers, indi¬
vidual differences and developmental differences must be
taken into account in assisting with the learning process of
Black students.
Research concerning special programs has provided some
useful guidelines for program administrators. For example,
Williams' (1978) recommendations have value as both general
institutional guidelines and more specific academic program
guidelines. West's (1975) report on retention rates of
Special Services students is also useful to administrators,
but more for documenting problems than for resolving them.
Some directions for program changes are found in the nation¬
al studies which have been conducted to evaluate the Special
Services Programs.
Both the national and local evaluation studies reviewed
in this chapter gave some general recommendations for im¬
proving Special Services Programs, such as
1. Institutions should insure the continuous develop¬
ment of sound and effective special or compensatory
programs.

46
2. Institutions should accommodate individual differ¬
ences and permit students to learn and proceed at
their own pace.
3. Institutions should conduct more research to deter¬
mine the effects of the programs.
The national study by Coulson, Bradford, and Kaye
(1980) reported specific examples of increased retention
rates and successful academic progress as evidence of
beneficial program impact on Special Services students.
This impact on students participating in the Special
Services Program was attributed to supportive services, such
as academic advisement, tutoring and counseling.
At the University of Florida, the Special Services
Program emphasizes a peer counseling component which has
provided substantial counseling and referral services for
its students. Researchers, such as Zunker and Brown (1966),
Carkhuff (1969) , and Durlak (1979) , have found that peer
counselors are effective and successful providers of coun¬
seling services.
The literature suggests that there is a relationship
between the effectiveness of the Special Services Program
and the support rendered to it by the host institution.
Even though controversy exists about the benefits of these
programs and their affect on Black students, it does appear

47
that the programs are helping the students experience aca
demic success. However, more research is needed to deter
mine the effectiveness of Special Services Programs.

CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this study was to determine the effec¬
tiveness of the Special Services Program at the University
of Florida in the retention and graduation of its partici¬
pants. The flexibility of this study's research design
provided the researcher with an economical and efficient
method of collecting and analyzing the data for this study.
Chapter III includes a discussion of the research design,
the research questions, the characteristics of the popula¬
tion studied, the method used to select the subjects, the
instrument used in this study, the pilot testing of the
instrument and the determination of the reliability and
validity of the instrument. Finally, this chapter contains
the procedures used in collecting and analyzing the data of
this study.
Research Design
The correlational research design, a category of
descriptive research, was utilized for this study. Using
the correlational design, the researcher examined the
following five dependent variables:
48

49
1. Program participation (academic services and activ¬
ities in which the students participated;
2. Performance (grade point average);
3. Persistence (retention rates);
4. Progress (graduation rates); and
5. Prominence (economic status of participants).
Van Dalen (1973), in explaining the characteristics of
correlational research, states that, because of the complex¬
ity and nature of social phenomena, an educator cannot
always select, control, and manipulate the factors as in an
experimental research design. Therefore, Van Dalen suggests
the utilization of the correlational research design when
variables do not lend themselves to the experimental method
and controlled manipulation.
In studies of causation, many researchers prefer to use
the experimental research design to select and control the
factors necessary to study cause-effect relations. However,
researchers cannot manipulate socioeconomic status, home
environments or personalities, all of which would influence
the subjects of a study. Utilization of the experimental
research design in these instances would be impractical (Van
Dalen 1973). Best (1970) also expressed similar views re¬
garding correlational research.

50
Research Questions
The six research questions for this study were
1. How effective are the academic services and activi¬
ties of the Special Services Program as perceived
by Black students at the University of Florida?
2. What are the grade point averages of Black students
in the Special Services Program at the University
of Florida?
3. What are the retention rates of the Black students
in the Special Services Program at the University
of Florida?
4. What are the graduation rates of the Black students
in the Special Services Program at the University
of Florida?
5. What influence does the peer counselor component
have on the academic performance of Black students
in the Special Services Program at the University
of Florida?
6. What is the economic status of Black students who
participated in the Special Services Program at the
University of Florida?
Population
The population for this study was comprised of indi¬
viduals from a variety of backgrounds, with the majority
coming from deprived economic and educational backgrounds.
Some of the individuals comprising the population of inter¬
est are from limited-English-speaking families, such as
Vietnamese, Chinese, Haitians and Latin Americans. However,

51
these individuals were not included in the study; only
Blacks were studied. The ethnic breakdown of the population
is 90 percent Black, with a 10 percent representation from
other ethnic groups. Females outnumber the males in the
population by a ratio of three females for each male. The
average age of the population is 18 years at the time of
initial enrollment and 23 years at time of graduation.
All members of the population were admitted to the
University of Florida under special admission guidelines
because they did not meet the standards for regular admis¬
sion. They were all first-time-in-college students who were
required to enter the University of Florida during the
summer session and to participate in the Special Services
Program. All members of the population were admitted into
the University of Florida with at least a "C" average in
core high school courses.
Selection of Subjects
Subjects for the sample were chosen from among approxi¬
mately 750 students who were enrolled in the University of
Florida's Special Services Program during the years 1974-75,
1975-76, 1976-77, 1977-78, and 1978-79. The names and ad¬
dresses of the subjects were obtained from the files in the

52
Special Services Office. Using the stratified random sam¬
pling technique in conjunction with a table of random num¬
bers, the researcher selected two groups of students (150
students and 60 students, respectively), totalling 210
subjects for the sample.
The stratified random selection process was used to
select the 60 students who represented each of the five-year
periods of this study. Thirty graduates and 30 nongradu¬
ates, totalling 60 subjects, were administered the evalu¬
ation instrument and had their transcripts analyzed. The
other group of 150 subjects only had their transcripts
analyzed.
Instrumentation
The instrument used in this study was designed and
developed by the researcher after reviewing several of the
instruments used by Special Services directors to evaluate
their programs. The instruments used by Boyd (1974), Davis,
Burkheimer and Borders-Patterson (1975), and Coulson,
Bradford, and Kaye (1981) were influential in helping the
researcher to design and develop the instrument for this
study.
A panel of experts, consisting of Special Services
directors from Central Florida Community College, Edward

53
Waters College, Florida A & M University, Florida State
University, Hillsborough Community College, and Jacksonville
University, was initially consulted for advice on the
construction of this instrument (Appendix A) . Since all
Special Services Programs are operating under the same set
of federal guidelines and are attempting to accomplish the
same goals, the help of these experts was invaluable in
constructing this instrument.
The items in the instrument were formulated based on
those conditions, services and activities which, if opti¬
mally rendered, would produce successful experiences fcr the
students of Special Services Programs. The specific condi¬
tions, services and activities to be evaluated were obtained
from the federal guidelines for operating the Special
Services Programs and from the stated objectives of each
program.
The instrument, called the Questionnaire Evaluating
Special Services Programs (QESSP), consists of a cover page
with administrative directions and 41 items. The 41 items
in the questionnaire were designed to
1. Solicit demographic information (Items 1-9);
2. Solicit responses about satisfactions or dissatis¬
factions with the Special Services Program (Items
10-19) ; and
3. Solicit the respondent's evaluation of the follow¬
ing services or activities: Orientation, peer

54
counseling, professional counseling, academic ad¬
visement, instruction, special classes, tutoring,
special activities, referrals and the staff charac¬
teristics (Items 20-41).
Pilot Study
Based on the recommendations of the panel of experts,
the evaluation instrument was developed and tested. A pilot
study of the instrument was conducted at the University of
North Carolina at Greensboro by the Director of Special
Services at that institution. The instrument was admini¬
stered to 71 Special Services students and the Director
reported that all items on the instrument were answered by
the students. The findings from this pilot study indicated
that the items were clearly understood, relevant to Special
Services Programs, and easy to answer. The overall reaction
to the instrument, as reported by the Director at the
University of North Carolina at Greensboro, was favorable.
After the pilot study was completed, the researcher
made several modifications of the instrument after consulta¬
tion with three of the original panel experts and the direc¬
tor who conducted the pilot study. These modifications
included rewording portions of the administrative instruc¬
tions, specifying the special courses and grouping related
items.

55
Reliability
The test-retest procedure was used to determine the
reliability of this instrument. During the first admini¬
stration of the instrument, the researcher administered the
instrument to 20 Special Services students at the University
of Florida who were enrolled during the 1982 summer term.
After a two-week interval, it was administered again to the
same group of students but only 15 out of the original 20
were available for the second administration of the
instrument.
The researcher compared each item response recorded by
the 15 subjects on the second administration, of the instru¬
ment with each item response that they recorded during the
first administration of the instrument. The researcher
compared each item to determine a percent of agreement be¬
tween the first administration and the second administration
of the instrument.
The reliability was determined by dividing the items
agreed upon by the total number of agreements and disagree¬
ments. Using this common method for computing reliability
(Huck, Cormier and Bounds, 19 74 , p. 3 35) , the researcher
found the instrument to have a reliability of .87.

56
Validity
The content validity of the Questionnaire Evaluating
Special Services Programs (QESSP) was determined by a second
panel of experts from the following institutions:
Institution
Location
1.
Abraham Baldwin Agri¬
cultural College
Georgia
¿ •
Alcorn State University
Mississippi
3.
Bayamon Central University
Puerto Rico
4.
Greenville Technical
College
South Carolina
5.
Howard University
Washington, D.i
6.
Kent State University
Ohio
7.
Miami University
Ohio
8.
State University of
New York at Buffalo
New York
9.
University of Florida
Florida
10.
University of North
Carolina-Charlotte
North Carolina
11.
University of Tennessee
at Chattanooga
Tennessee
These experts were provided with a copy of the initial
instrument and were asked to assess its capability for eval¬
uating a Special Services Program. Specifically, they were
asked to check each item to determine if it would produce

57
responses that could be used to evaluate any Special
Services Program. This panel of experts, consisting of
11 Special Services directors and four immediate supervisors
of the directors, had two days to review the instrument and
present written or verbal comments to the researcher.
The content validity of the instrument was determined,
with 100 percent of the experts in agreement that the in¬
strument was capable of effectively evaluating a Special
Services Program. However, two of the 15 experts suggested
that the location of counseling items and other related
items be grouped in closer proximity to each other. One of
the experts also suggested that the items related to stigma¬
tization be reworded to insure clarity and understanding.
The changes recommended by these three experts were incorpo¬
rated into the instrument.
Procedure s
Having randomly selected the names of the subjects for
this study from the files located in the Special Services
office, the researcher contacted the Alumni Affairs Office
to ascertain and update the addresses of some of the sub¬
jects. The researcher also contacted currently enrolled
students, faculty and any other persons who could provide
the researcher with a current and accurate address for the

58
subjects. After obtaining the correct addresses, the re¬
searcher prepared a letter requesting the participation of
the randomly selected subjects in the study (Appendix B).
These letters were either hand-delivered by the researcher
or mailed. The letter also included an informed consent
form (Appendix B) and the evaluation instrument (Appendix
C) .
A follow-up letter was mailed if the consent form and
evaluation instrument were not received within two weeks
from the mail-out date (Appendix D) . However, the re¬
searcher found that it was more convenient and faster to
follow-up by telephone. The primary subjects were given two
weeks from the mail-out date to return the consent form and
the instrument. After that period of time passed, the
researcher selected an alternate subject.
After obtaining the consent forms, the researcher re¬
quested copies of the subject's transcripts from the
University of Florida Registrar's Office and began collect¬
ing data from their transcripts. The researcher reviewed
each subject's transcript for each term that the subject was
enrolled until graduation, suspension or voluntary with¬
drawal from the University of Florida.
Specifically, the subjects' transcripts were visually
and manually checked to determine if they remained enrolled
until graduation, the number of years required to graduate

59
from the University of Florida, the number of courses
attempted, the number of courses completed and the grade
point average at graduation. For the nongraduates, the
researcher also collected data on the number of courses
attempted and completed and the grade point averages at the
time of withdrawal from this institution or as of August 9,
1983.
In summary, the data gathered from the transcripts were
used to determine the subjects' retention and graduation
rates and grade point averages. The evaluation instrument
was used to collect data on the academic services and activ¬
ities utilized by the Special Services students. The in¬
strument was also used to determine the economic status of
the subjects after participating in the Special Services
Program.
Data Analysis
The analysis of all data for this study was performed
manually by the researcher except for the data used to de¬
termine the economic impact of this program on its partici¬
pants. The researcher analyzed the data so as to answer
research questions 2, 3, 4, 5, 1, and 6, in that order,
respectively.
By manually analyzing the subjects' transcripts, the
researcher was able to observe trends and patterns more

60
readily while recording the grade point average of each
subject and mean grade point averages of all the subjects.
The data were analyzed to determine what the grade point
averages were individually and collectively for each term
over a six-to-eight-year period (Research Question #2).
In the process of analyzing the data to answer research
question #2, the researcher also ascertained the enrollment
status of each subject for each term of their enrollment to
determine the collective retention rates (Research Question
#3) .
The transcripts were also analyzed to determine the
number of terms that were required for the subjects to
graduate from the University of Florida (Research Question
#4) .
Data from items 17-19, 21 and 26 of the instrument were
analyzed for information about the influence of peer coun¬
selors on the academic performances of the subjects. The
relationship between peer counselor effectiveness as per¬
ceived by the subjects and the amount of contact with the
peer counselors was also investigated (Research Question
#5) .
Data from the evaluation instrument, specifically Items
20-41, were checked closely for subjects' responses regard¬
ing academic services and activities that they perceived as
most effective (Research Question #1).

61
Data provided by Items 8 and 9 of the evaluation in¬
strument yielded information regarding the economic value of
the Special Services Program to the subjects. These data
were analyzed by a computer program called the Program
Impact Assessment System, developed by Dr. John Nickens and
prepared by the Office of Instructional Research at the
University of Florida. The computer program determined the
economic value of the Special Services Program for each sub¬
ject by adjusting the subject's yearly earnings to produce a
present value of earnings. In determining the economic
value of the Special Services students, the computer program
considered the factors of inflation, age, and earnings
(Research Question #6).
Data from Items 1-7 and 10-16 of the evaluation instru¬
ment were analyzed to provide a profile of the subjects and
to identify any patterns and factors which might suggest the
effectiveness of the Special Services Program.
The information obtained was recorded and summarized to
provide answers to the appropriate research questions. Mea¬
sures of central tendency and variability, simple correla¬
tions and relationships and graphic representations of data
were used to report the results.

CHAPTER IV
RESULTS
This study was designed to determine the effectiveness
of the Special Services Program at the University of Florida
in the retention and graduation of its participants. The
population for this study consisted of those students who
participated in the Special Services Program during the
1974-1978 school years. A total of 150 randomly selected
student transcripts was used to answer the research ques¬
tions pertaining to grade point averages, graduation and
retention rates. Sixty students were randomly selected and
administered the Questionnaire Evaluating Special Services
Programs (QESSP) to answer the research questions pertaining
to the effectiveness of the program, peer counseling influ¬
ence and economic status of former participants. This
chapter reports the researcher's findings, which includes
information regarding each of the six research questions.
Research Question #1
How effective are the academic services and activ¬
ities of the Special Services Program as perceived
by Black students at the University of Florida?
62

63
In order to answer the first research question, the
researcher analyzed Items 1-7 and 10-16 of the Questionnaire
Evaluating Special Services Programs (QESSP) that solicited
responses from 60 randomly selected students who initially
enrolled during the summer terms between 1974 and 1978. The
sample of 60 students contained 30 graduates of the
University of Florida and 30 nongraduates.
The analysis of the items on the QESSP and the find¬
ings of the researcher are presented in the same numerical
order as they appear on the QESSP. The responses of the
graduates and nongraduates are presented, illustrated and
discussed separately, beginning with the graduates.
An Analysis of Responses of Randomly
Selected Special Services Graduates
to Items 1-7 and 10-16 on the QESSP
The first item on the QESSP inquired about the sex and
marital status of the Special Services graduates. The data
show that 9 of the 30 graduates (30 percent) are married;
the remaining 21 (70 percent) are single.
Item 2 asked the students to describe themselves. The
researcher found that all of the students in this study were
Black, of United States origin. Blacks of Hispanic and
Caribbean origins have participated in the Special Services
Program, but none were included in the random selection.

64
In Item 3, the students were asked to indicate the
highest degree that they now hold. The researcher confirmed
that 30 students had received bachelor's degrees; 2 students
had completed requirements for the master's degree; 1 stu¬
dent was graduated from law school; and 1 student is in the
last year of medical school, expecting to graduate in June
of 1984.
Information concerning institutions that the students
had attended was solicited by Item 4. The researcher found
that the students listed seven institutions that they had
attended or planned to attend after graduating from the
University of Florida. The other institutions are as fol¬
lows: Florida International University; Howard University;
Jacksonville University; University of Arizona; University
of Central Florida; University of North Florida; and the
University of Oklahoma. These students indicated that they
had not received a degree from the above institutions.
Item 5 asked the students if they were currently en¬
rolled in any of the institutions listed in Item 4 and, if
not, whether they planned to re-enroll. Seven students
indicated that they are currently enrolled, with five of the
seven being enrolled at the University of Florida. Five
students who are not enrolled plan to re-enroll at the
University of Florida, but ten others plan to re-enroll at

65
other institutions. Additionally, seven students indicated
they do not plan to re-enroll at any institution.
Item 6 solicited data concerning the year in which the
student enrolled at the University of Florida. All 30 stu¬
dents entered the University of Florida between the years
1974 and 1978. Item 7 asked if they were former Upward
Bound or Talent Search participants. The respondents indi¬
cated that eight of them were former Upward Bound students
and two were former Talent Search students. The federally
funded Upward Bound and Talent Search Projects provided the
University of Florida's Special Services Program with 30
percent of its students during the years between 1974 and
1978.
The Higher Education Act of 1965 created the Upward
Bound and Talent Search Programs, which had as their pur¬
poses the development of academic skills, motivation for
academic success and the identification of low-income youth
with academic potential. The Talent Search Program identi¬
fies low-income youth who have academic potential and en¬
courages them to complete their secondary education and to
subsequently enroll in postsecondary institutions. The
Upward Bound Program is a pre-college preparatory activity
that develops academic skills and motivation for success in
students attending secondary school and eventually in a
postsecondary institution.

66
The University of Florida has an Upward Bound Program
but not a Talent Search Program. The Upward Bound Program
is to provide an opportunity for potentially capable low-
income students in Alachua County from academically and/or
environmentally deprived backgrounds to develop motiva¬
tional, personal and academic competencies necessary to
pursue and succeed in higher education.
When asked in Item 10 to rate their academic prepara¬
tion before coming to the University of Florida, 3 students
(10 percent) rated their preparation as being excellent; 19
students (63.3 percent) rated their preparation as being
good; and 8 students (26.7 percent) rated their academic
preparation as being fair.
When asked in Item 11 to rate their academic prepara¬
tion at the University of Florida, 20 students (66.7 per¬
cent) rated their preparation as good; 7 (23.3 percent)
rated their preparation as being excellent; and 3 (10
percent rated their preparation as being fair.
The three most important reasons that the respondents
listed in Item 12 for deciding to enroll at the University
of Florida were (1) the academic reputation of the
University, (2) it was close to home, and (3) the financial
aid awarded. These three reasons are listed in the order of
most number one responses. The Special Services Program
ranked fourth.

67
In the analysis of Item 13, which gathered data con¬
cerning feelings, the researcher found that 43.3 percent of
the graduates associated positive feelings with their parti¬
cipation in the Special Services Program. A majority of the
graduates (53.3 percent) associated both positive and nega¬
tive feelings with their participation in the Special
Services Program. One graduate did not respond to the
question.
The following comments were made by the graduates in
describing their feelings associated with their participa¬
tion in the Special Services Program:
1. Even though I was benefited from the coun¬
seling and educational assistance of the
Special Services staff, I've had to deal
with feeling like an admission exception.
2. Almost even-handed ambivalence, being
Black in an astronomical white climate,
feelings were somewhat negative. I was in
the "Special Services" Program very much
my first two quarters, and afterwards
rapidly moved from the "S.S." courses
(curriculum). Due to adversive and hos¬
tile categorizing as a 2nd-rate (class)
student, pride and self-esteem, morale was
cut.
3. Positive in the sense it gave me a chance
to go to the school of my choice. A bit
negative sometimes when people told you it
wouldn't be the same when you enter the
mainstream of regular classes.
4. Staff was interested in the student learn¬
ing and obtaining their degree.

68
5. Positive—Due to the support and encour¬
agement being given. Negative—Rein¬
forced the idea of not being able to
succeed in the highly competitive en¬
vironment under normal conditions (not
being able to retake tests).
6. Very helpful in adjusting.
7. Many of the White instructors exhibited
racist attitudes to the students. The
inferiority complex given students by
those professors help cause the with¬
drawal of many of these students.
8. Negative derived from the stigma placed
on S/S students. Positive from the dedi¬
cation from the faculty and staff.
9. Positive in the sense that Blacks were
able to see more Blacks. Negative in the
sense that the program supposedly catered
to less intelligent persons. The program
had a spill-over effect on me. That is,
from my doing well in the program, this
gave me confidence that I could do well
in professional school. The program is
definitely needed, at least for a year or
so for the incoming student.
10. Positive being admitted to the University;
given an opportunity. Negative image of
not being smart enough to get in under
"regular admission."
11. Definitely positive; only negative feel¬
ings associated with the Program were from
outsiders who didn't know what the Program
was all about.
12. There were some people whose influence and
concern brought about good results and yet
some people's attitude toward me was cold
and insensitive. Some made me feel dumb
and incompetent. The ones that did more
to help me were the instructors and tutors
at the Special Services Building (Learning
Center). They deserve gold ribbons.

69
13. Several educational experiences were pos¬
itive because of the Special Services
Program.
14. I felt like I was considered as a person
who could not compete with the majority.
15. Program provided excellent assistance in
academic counseling.
16. I noticed positive feelings from many of
my peers concerning the program. Only
once did I experience any negative feel¬
ings—from my 1st quarter English
professor.
17. Academic and personal advising were read¬
ily available. The program was extremely
informative of the academic and business
systems of the University of Florida.
18. Cared about. Concerned with you as a per¬
son and achieving the best possible goals.
19. Positive—you got to know people. Nega¬
tive—professors stereotyped classes.
20. Positive in that the Program really does
a lot for incoming freshmen. Negative in
the sense that the program can become a
crutch at times. Academics must be
stressed more. Make it clear that having
a good time is part of college but aca¬
demics are #1.
21. Positive—gave me an opportunity to ob¬
tain my education. Negative—some teach¬
ers treated me as if I were dumb. They
also talked to me as if they were apolo¬
gizing that I was Black.
22. I think the benefits of the program were
positive, but being at an all White uni¬
versity and being in an all Black class
initially did not mix with me.
23. I think the academic preparation received
through Upward Bound greatly enhanced my
academic success.

70
24. I was given motivation through the mem¬
bers of Special Services.
25. The feelings were positive because the
Special Services Program enables me to
gradually be broken into the academic
system at the University of Florida.
In summary, the graduates appear to have been appreci¬
ative of the Special Services Program, but not the
University as a whole. They expressed some negative effects
of being Black in a White environment. Half of the gradu¬
ates said that they experienced negative feelings as a re¬
sult of nonsupportive or noncaring attitudes of professors.
Five graduates explicitly said that the professors exhibited
racist attitudes, they stereotyped the class, treated the
students as if they were dumb and incompetent, and made them
feel inferior. Many of the graduates said that they had
experienced positive feelings as a result of the actions
taken by the Special Services staff to assist them.
Should the Special Services Program be continued was
the question asked in Item 14 on the QESSP. Twenty-eight
(93.2 percent) of the graduates said that the program should
be continued; two graduates (6.7 percent) were not sure. An
analysis of Item 15, which asked the students to describe
their experiences from participation in the Special Services
Program, revealed that the students experienced more posi¬
tive than negative feelings toward themselves and their
education. The students overwhelmingly felt that the

71
Special Services Program increased their motivation to study
and made them more determined to graduate.
The following comments generally reveal positive
experiences:
1. Made me more cognizant of the need of
Blacks to be better prepared for college
admission requirements.
2. Allowed me to enter college even though I
didn't achieve the required score on the
SAT for college entrance.
3. Gave me the start I needed to realize I
could later make it without the Program.
4. I was/am very grateful to the Special
Services administrative staff because it
was this staff which gave me the oppor¬
tunity to "prove" myself at a major uni¬
versity—after bombing out on the SAT (not
in the right frame of mind the day I took
it). The Special Services staff saw the
potential in me. I wanted to prove to
them and myself that I could survive at
the University of Florida.
5. Helped me adjust to the University of
Florida at a good pace.
The students were asked to describe the effectiveness
of the Special Services Program in Item 16. Their overall
reaction to the Special Services Program was positive. Ten
students (33.3 percent) described it as extremely effective;
7 students (23.3 percent) as very effective; and the remain¬
ing 13 (43.3 percent) as effective.

72
Summary of Responses by Special Services Graduates
From the analysis of Items 1-7 and 10-16, the re¬
searcher found that the Special Services graduates expressed
strong positive satisfaction with the Program. One of their
three major reasons for enrolling at the University of
Florida was that they were informed by friends of the help
provided by the Special Services Program.
It should be noted that the students were not com¬
pletely satisfied with everything associated with the
Program. The students reported both positive and negative
feelings concerning their participation in the Special
Services Program. However, when asked if they thought that
the Special Services Program should be continued, 93.3
percent indicated yes and 6.7 percent were not sure.
Following, in Table 1, is a summary of student re¬
sponses regarding services, activities, or staff actions
rendered or arranged for by the Special Services Program.
The students were asked to indicate whether or not they
received the service, participated in the activity or ex¬
perienced the staff action by marking yes or no in the
columns. If they marked yes, they were to indicate their
perceptions of the effectiveness of the service, activity or
staff action in helping them while at this institution. If

73
their response was no, no further evaluation was appropri¬
ate. Table 1 indicates the number and type of responses
given by the graduates of the Special Services Program.
Analysis of Graduates' Responses to Items 20-41 of the QESSP
The researcher's analysis of the participation columns,
Items 20-41, of the QESSP, revealed that 57.5 percent of the
graduates indicated use of the services or participation in
the activities of the Special Services Program. Since it is
not mandatory that students utilize program services or
activities, 42.5 percent chose not to do so.
Further analysis of the effectiveness columns, Items
20-41, shows that 42 percent evaluated the services, activi¬
ties, and staff as extremely effective; 23 percent evaluated
them as very effective; 31 percent evaluated them as effec¬
tive; 3 percent evaluated them as not effective; and 1
percent evaluated the services activities and staff as
extremely ineffective.

TABLE 1. GRADUATES' RESPONSES TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE EVALUATING
SPECIAL SERVICES PROGRAMS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
(N = 30)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
helpinq
you?
Extreme]y
Very
Not
Extremely
Yes No
Effee-
Effec-
Effee-
Effec-
Ineffec-
tive
tive
tive
tive
tive
Orientation
20. Orientation session
to campus, classes,
instructors, faci¬
lities and support
services available. 27 3 17 7 3 0
Peer Counselor
21. Peer counseling on:
a.
Personal con¬
cerns
17
5
7
3
6
1
b.
Academic con¬
cerns
26
0
13
5
7
1
c.
Social con¬
cerns
16
6
6
4
4
2
d.
Financial aid
24
4
12
8
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
-j

TABLE 1 (CONTINUED)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
helping you?
Yes
No
Extremely
Effec¬
tive
Very
Effec¬
tive
Effec¬
tive
Not
Effec¬
tive
Extremely
Ineffec¬
tive
Professional Counselor
22. Counseling by the
full-time profes¬
sional Special
Services Counselor
on:
a. Personal Con¬
cerns
10
12
2
2
5
1
0
b. Academic Con¬
cerns
21
4
10
3
6
2
0
c. Social Con¬
cerns
9
12
2
2
5
0
0
d. Financial aid
17
7
8
5
4
0
0

TABLE 1 (CONTINUED)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
helping you?
Yes
No
Extremely
Effec¬
tive
Very
Effec¬
tive
Effec¬
tive
Not
Effec¬
tive
Extremely
Ineffec¬
tive
Academic Advisor
23. Help from Special
Services Academic
Advisors:
a. Choosing
courses
25
3
8
7
8
1
1
b. Planning pro¬
gram of study
17
7
4
5
6
1
1
Instruction
24. Special Teaching
Procedures:
a. Small units of
instruction
20
3
8
6
6
0
0
b. Retaking tests
to improve
grades
28
1
14
5
7
1
1

TABLE 1 (CONTINUED)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
helpinq
you?
Extremely
Very
Not
Extremely
Yes No
Effee-
Effee-
Effee-
Effee-
Ineffee-
tive
tive
tive
tive
tive
Instruction (continued)
c. Taught by
Graduate
Assistants
21
5
5
5
8
3
0
d. Taught by full¬
time professors
29
0
8
8
13
0
0
Special Classes
25. Special academic
and support courses
designed for
Special Services
students:
a.
Reading
13
14
6
0
6
1
0
b.
Writing
23
7
10
2
8
3
0
c.
Behaviora1
Studies
23
4
11
5
7
0
0
d.
English
27
2
14
6
7
0
0

TABLE 1 (CONTINUED)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
helping you?
Yes No
Extremely
Effec¬
tive
Very
Effec¬
tive
Effec¬
tive
Not
Effec¬
tive
Extremely
Ineffec¬
tive
Special
e.
Classes (continued)
Mathematics
22
6
10
3
8
1
0
f.
Physical
Science
23
2
12
6
4
1
0
g.
Biological
Science
22
5
10
3
8
1
0
h.
Social Science
23
6
12
3
8
0
0
i.
Humanities
25
4
11
4
9
1
0
Tutors
26. Tutoring by:
a. Peer Coun¬
selor (s)
11
13
4
3
4
0
0
b.
Fraternities
2
21
1
0
1
0
0
c.
Sororities
0
22
0
0
0
0
0
d.
Clubs
0
22
0
0
0
0
0
-j
oo

TABLE 1 (CONTINUED)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
helping you?
Yes No
Extremely
Effec¬
tive
Very
Effec¬
tive
Effec¬
tive
Not
Effec¬
tive
Extremely
Ineffec¬
tive
Tutors (continued)
e. Learning Center
(Teaching
Center) 19 6
Special Activities
27. Group sessions on
coping with or
adjusting to this
institution 10 17
28. Special sessions
conducted by
Financial Aid
Personnel 23 6
13
4
10
4
1
6
2
5
7
0
0
0
vo
0
0
0

TABLE 1 (CONTINUED)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
helping
you ?
Yes
No
Extremely
Effec¬
tive
Very
Effec¬
tive
Effec¬
tive
Not
Effec¬
tive
Extremely
Ineffec¬
tive
29.
Special sessions
conducted by
Career Resource
(Placemen t
Personnel)
13
15
4
3
4
1
1
30.
Sessions on de¬
veloping good
study skills
14
13
7
2
5
0
0
31.
Sessions on re¬
duction of test
anxiety
5
21
1
3
0
1
0
32.
Awards ceremony
and academic
recognition
24
4
10
10
3
1
0

TABLE 1 (CONTINUED)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
helping you?
Yes No
Extremely
Effec¬
tive
Very
Effec¬
tive
Effec¬
tive
Not
Effec¬
tive
Extremely
Ineffec¬
tive
Referra Is
33. Referrals to other
support services
or agencies for
help in dealing
with problems:
a.
Counseling
Center
10
15
5
1
3
1
0
b.
Financial
Aid Office
22
5
7
6
9
0
0
c.
Housing
Office
15
11
3
5
7
0
0
d.
Pláceme nt
0
Center (at
Reitz Union)
15
12
3
3
8
0
1
e.
Student
Services (at
Tigert Hall)
19
7
5
4
10
0
0

TABLE 1 (CONTINUED)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
helping you?
Yes No
Extremely
Effec¬
tive
Very
Effec¬
tive
Effec¬
tive
Not
Effec¬
tive
Extremely
Ineffec¬
tive
Staff Qualities
34. Concerned,
courteous and
caring attitude
of the staff
(full-time
professional
staff)
35. Encouragement
by the staff for
you to do well
36. Genuine, warm
and friendly
attitude of
the staff
23 3
27 1
26 ]
8
11
13
7
8
5
8 0
8 0
8 • 0
00
N>
0
0
0

TABLE 1 (CONTINUED)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
helping you?
Yes
No
Extremely
Effec¬
tive
Very
Effec¬
tive
Effec¬
tive
Not
Effec¬
tive
Extremely
Ineffec¬
tive
Staff Qualities (continued)
37.
Dynamic nature
of staff in
being your
spokesman or
mediator
14
9
7
3
4
0
0
38.
Cold, insensi¬
tive attitude
of the staff
3
25
1
1
0
1
0
39.
Sta ff's disin¬
terest in your
concerns
2
20
0
0
0
2
0
40 .
Staff served as
a negative role
model
1
25
0
0
0
1
0

TABLE 1 (CONTINUED)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
helping
you?
Yes No
Extremely
Effec¬
tive
Very
Effec¬
tive
Effec¬
tive
Not
Effec¬
tive
Extremely
Ineffec¬
tive
Staff Qualities (continued)
41. Staff served as
a positive role
model 22 3
9
8
5
0
0

85
An Analysis of Responses of Randomly
Selected Special Services Non-graduates
to Item 1-7 and 10-16 on the QESSP
An analysis of Item 1 indicated that eight (26.7 per¬
cent) of these 30 students reported that they are married;
21 (70 percent) are single; and 1 (3.3 percent) is divorced.
All of the students responding to Item 2 described them¬
selves as being Black, of United States origin.
"Indicate the highest degree you now hold," was asked
in Item 3. The high school diploma is the highest degree
held by 13 (43.3 percent) of these students. Fifteen (50
percent) indicated that their highest degree is the Associ¬
ate of Arts. However, 2 students (6.7 percent) have ob¬
tained bachelor's degrees from Florida A & M University and
Savannah State College, respectively.
The institutions listed as requested in Item 4, includ¬
ing the University of Florida, are
1. Bethune-Cookman College
2. Cameron University (Oklahoma)
3. Daytona Beach Community College
4. Florida A & M University
5. Hillsborough Community College
6. Santa Fe Community College
7. Savannah State College
8. University of Maryland
9. University of North Florida
10. University of South Florida
11. University of Texas at El Paso

86
When asked in Item 5 if they were currently enrolled,
out of the 24 respondents, 12 (50 percent) indicated that
they were still enrolled at an institution other than the
University of Florida. However, 12 others (50 percent)
indicated that they were not enrolled. Eight of the 2 4
students plan to re-enroll at the University of Florida,
while 6 others plan to enroll at another institution. Three
students indicated that they do not plan to enroll at any
institution. Seven students did not indicate their plans
for enrollment. In Item 6, the students indicated the year
that they enrolled at the University of Florida. All stu¬
dents entered the University of Florida between 1974 and
1978.
"Are you a former Upward Bound or Talent Search stu¬
dent?" was the question asked in Item 7. The analysis shows
that 10 former Upward Bound students and one Talent Search
student were nongraduates. Specifically, 36.7 percent of
the students in the study who did not graduate from the
University of Florida were former Upward Bound and Talent
Search students. The two students who received their bache¬
lor's degrees from other institutions were former Upward
Bound students.
Item 10 on the QESSP concerning academic preparation
before coming to the University of Florida reveals that 19

87
(63.3 percent) of the nongraduates rated their academic
preparation before coming to the University of Florida as
good, while 6 students (20 percent) rated their academic
preparation as fair. There were 3 students (10 percent) who
reported their academic preparation as excellent; 1 (3.3
percent) rated it as poor; and 1 (3.3 percent) did not rate
it. In Item 11, when asked about their academic preparation
at the University of Florida, 6.7 percent rated it as excel¬
lent; 53.3 percent rated it as good; 30 percent rated.it as
fair; and 10 percent rated it as poor.
The three most important reasons indicated in Item 12
for deciding to enroll at the University of Florida were
(1) it was close to home, (2) the financial aid awarded, and
(3) the Special Services Program. The researcher arrived at
this finding by locating the three reasons with the most
number one responses.
The researcher's analysis of Item 13 concerning the
students' feelings regarding their association with the
Special Services Program reveals that 20 of the 30 students
(70 percent) felt that there were positive feelings associ¬
ated with their participation in the Special Services
Program. However, 10 students (30 percent) reported both
positive and negative feelings.

88
The following comments were made by 24 of the 30 stu¬
dents describing their feelings regarding participation in
the Special Services Program:
1. Very motivational and academically
stimulating.
2. The Program gave me the added confidence
I needed to attend the University of
Florida.
3. In the beginning, there seemed to be a
lot of concern and good advice was found
easily. Later, it became harder to do
the scheduling of classes and my need
for employment.
4. I felt as though I was wanted and needed
in this Program.
5. It was all positive, because if it were
not for the Program, I would not have
had the opportunity to attend the
University.
6. Without the Program, I would not have
been able to attend a college of the
U of F standard.
7. Some teachers were unfair in their deal¬
ing with me.
8. My feelings are positive towards the
Special Services Program because it ac¬
quainted me with a life style that might
have passed me by. This Program also
made it easy to enter other universities.
9. All workers were very helpful, assisted
in tutoring of classes, selection of
classes, etc.
10. It was there when I needed help.
11. I think that the counselors could have
been more helpful and available.

89
12. I feel like there was help if I needed
help. You get out what you put into the
Program. There is quality help avail¬
able for those who want it.
13. I knew that all the academic help that I
needed would be given to me if I were to
run into any problems.
14. Developed confidence in my ability to
make it in college.
15. Positive—because there was someone
there to help me during the hard times.
16. Positive in that it helped me get
started.
17. Positive—I felt that it helped me to
adjust to the college academic and so¬
cial life and gave me a good foundation
to begin regular college courses. Nega¬
tive—I did not feel like a normal stu¬
dent until I began to take regular
college courses. It seemed as though we
were slow students taking remedial
courses. Some of the courses were too
easy and no challenge was given in order
for the student to develop one's mind.
One would get dependent on the chance to
retake exams, the constant babysitting
by some instructors and the thought that
you can always drop the course.
18. I felt that the Special Services Program
presented me with an opportunity to
adapt to the academic and social expec¬
tations of a big university setting.
19. There were positive feelings in that
there were tutors there for your use but
on the other hand we were referred to as
the "other" students.
20. Warm, kind, sincere and very amicable.
21. I felt that they were concerned about me
as an individual person, and one of the
family.

90
22. The classes gave me a sense of unity among
Blacks.
23. Positive—knowing that I could attend the
University of Florida. Negative—knowing
that the only way that I would ever get
in was through the Special Services
Program. Knowing that I was not up to
the basic standards of a college student.
24. There was some preparation and help but
not enough help when needed.
Most of the students acknowledged their appreciation
for the Special Services Program. They said that the
Program made it possible for them to attend the University
of Florida. Three students indicated that they were not
treated like the regular admission students. They felt that
they were treated unfairly by some instructors, looked down
upon by many of the students, or were made to feel as though
they were slow students taking remedial courses.
The researcher found that 96.7 percent of the students
thought that the Special Services Program should be contin¬
ued. However, there was one student (3.3 percent) who was
not sure about continuing the Special Services Program.
An analysis of Item 15 revealed that the Special
Services Program caused the students to experience more
positive than negative feelings toward themselves and their
education. According to students' responses, the Special
Services Program increased their motivation to study, made
them more determined to graduate, made them feel better

91
about themselves, and facilitated their developing feelings
of confidence and independence.
However, there were a few students who felt that the
Program made them dependent, decreased their motivation to
study, and reduced their sense of confidence in themselves.
Three pertinent student comments noted are
1. It did increase my motivation to study;
however, not enough, because of me and
things affecting my life at that time.
2. A better feeling of working with people.
3. The Program does not allow a Black stu¬
dent to be in the mainstream of the
University. Less stress, and when you
get there, it's a real surprise.
The students' responses to Item 16 indicated that their
overall reaction to the Special Services Program was posi¬
tive. Seven students described the Program as extremely
effective. Eight students said it was very effective.
Fifteen of the students, half of the group, reacted to the
Special Services Program as effective. These results are
tabulated in Table 2.
Analysis of Nongraduates1 Responses to Items 20-41 of
the QESSP
Analysis of Items 20-41 of the QESSP revealed that 51.6
percent of the nongraduates indicated that they utilized the
services or participated in the activities of the Special

92
Services Program. It is not mandatory that students utilize
the services or participate in the activities, so 48.4
percent decided not to do so.
Further analysis of the nongraduates' responses shews
that 27.5 percent of them evaluated the services, activities
and staff of the Special Services Program as extremely
effective; 33.9 percent, very effective, 33.5 percent,
effective; 4.2 percent not effective; and 1 percent, ex¬
tremely ineffective.
After finding that the students were generally appreci¬
ative and satisfied with the services and activities of the
Special Services Program, the researcher's next task was to
measure the academic progress of the students while enrolled
at the University of Florida. Statistical data extracted
from the students' transcripts were used to compute grade
point averages and measure academic progress.

TABLE 2. NONGRADUATES1 RESPONSES TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE EVALUATING SPECIAL
SERVICES PROGRAMS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA (N = 30)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
he]pinq
you?
Extremely
Very
Not
Extremely
Yes No
Effee-
Effee-
Effee-
Effee-
Ineffee-
tive
tive
tive
tive
tive
Orientation
20. Orientation session
to campus, classes,
instructors, faci¬
lities and support
services available.
26
3
5
13
7
1
0
Peer
21.
Counselor
Peer counseling on:
a. Personal con¬
cerns
10
17
3
5
2
0
0
b. Academic con¬
cerns
22
7
3
10
7
2
0
c. Social con¬
cerns
13
12
4
5
3
1
0
d. Financial aid
20
7
9
6
4
1
0
»sD
U>

TABLE 2 (CONTINUED)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
helpinq you?
Yes No
Extremely
Effec¬
tive
Very
Effec¬
tive
Effec¬
tive
Not
Effec¬
tive
Extremely
Ineffec¬
tive
Professional Counselor
n o
Counseling by the
full-time profes¬
sional Special
Services Counselor
on:
a. Personal Con¬
cerns
8
19
1
4
3
•
0
0
b. Academic Con¬
cerns
19
7
4
6
8
0
1
c. Social Con¬
cerns
6
3 8
1
2
3
0
0
d. Financial aid
17
7
8
b
4
0
0
VO

TABLE 2 (CONTINUED)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
helping you?
Yes
No
Extremely
Effec¬
tive
Very
Effec¬
tive
Effec¬
tive
Not
Effec¬
tive
Extremely
Ineffec¬
tive
Academic Advisor
23. Help from Special
Services Academic
Advisors:
a. Choosing
courses
25
4
2
10
11
2
0
b. Planning pro¬
gram of study
17
7
3
4
7
3
0
Instruction
24. Special Teaching
Procedures:
a. Small units of
instruction
19
5
8
9
2
0
0
b. Retaking tests
to improve
grades
24
4
9
9
4
2
0

TABLE 2 (CONTINUED)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
helping
you ?
Extremely
Very
Not
Extremely
Yes No
Effee-
Effee-
Effee-
Effee-
Ineffee-
tive
tive
tive
tive
tive
Instruction (continued)
c. Taught by
Graduate
Assistants 18 7 2
d. Taught by full¬
time professors 24 1 6
6 7
7 10
1
0
2
1
Special Classes
25. Special academic
and support courses
designed for
Special Services
students:
a.
Reading
14
10
3
5
6
0
0
b.
Writing
18
5
4
7
6
1
0
c.
Behaviora1
Studies
20
4
4
8
7
1
0
d.
English
25
1
6
11
7
1
0
CTi

TABLE 2 (CONTINUED)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
helpinq
you?
Extremely
Very
Not
Extremely
Yes No
Effee-
Effec-
Effee-
Effee-
Ineffee-
tive
tive
tive
tive
tive
Special
e.
Classes (continued)
Mathematics
20
5
5
8
5
2
0
f.
Physical
Science
19
7
4
5
8
2
0
g-
Biological
Science
14
12
5
5
3
0
1
h.
Social Science
23
2
7
8
8
0
0
i.
Humanities
19
7
7
5
6
1
0
Tutors
26. Tutoring by:
a. Peer Coun¬
selor (s)
11
12
1
7
3
0
0
b.
Fraternities
4
16
1
2
1
0
0
c.
Sororities
1
18
0
1
0
0
0
d.
Clubs
0
18
0
0
0
0
0
VD

TABLE 2 (CONTINUED)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?How effective was it in helping you?
Extremely
Very
Not
Extremely
Yes No
Effee-
Effec-
Effee-
Effee-
Ineffee-
tive
tive
tive
tive
tive
Tutors (continued)
e. Learning Center
(Teaching
Center) 23 2
Special Activities
27. Group sessions on
coping with or
adjusting to this
institution 8 18
28. Special sessions
conducted by
Financial Aid
Personnel 12 15
11
2
4
5 6 1
4 2 0
4 4 0
UO
00
0
0
0

TABLE 2 (CONTINUED)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
helpinq
you ?
Yes
No
Extremely
Effec¬
tive
Very
Effec¬
tive
Effec¬
tive
Not
Effec¬
tive
Extremely
Ineffec¬
tive
29.
Special sessions
conducted by
Career Resource
(Placement
Personnel)
14
] 4
4
4
4
2
0
30.
Sessions on de¬
veloping good
study skills
14
12
5
4
3
2
0
31.
Sessions on re¬
duction of test
anxiety
2
24
0
0
2
0
0
32.
Awards ceremony
and academic
recognition
15
11
4
4
7
0
0

TABLE 2 (CONTINUED)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
helping you?
Yes No
Extremely
Effec¬
tive
Very
Effec¬
tive
Effec¬
tive
Not
Effec¬
tive
Extremely
Ineffec¬
tive
ReferraIs
33. Referrals to other
support services
or agencies for
help in dealing
with problems:
a.
Counseling
Center
12
12
1
4
7
0
0
b.
Financial
Aid Office
23
4
5
4
13
1
0
c.
Housing
Office
17
10
4
5
7
1
0
d.
Pláceme nt
Center (at
Reitz Union)
11
16
1
1
9
0
0
e.
S tude nt
Services (at
Tigert Hall)
20
7
8
2
9
1
0
100

TABLE 2 (CONTINUED)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
helpinq
you?
Extremely
Very
Not
Extremely
Yes No
Effee-
Effee-
Effee-
Effee-
Ineffee-
tive
tive
tive
tive
tive
Staff Qualities
34. Concerned,
courteous and
caring attitude
of the staff
(full-time
professional
staff)
35. Encouragement
by the staff for
you to do well
36. Genuine, warm
and friendly
attitude of
the staff
24 3
24 4
25 2
11
10
8
7
8
11
6 0
5 1
6 0
0
0
0
101

TABLE 2 (CONTINUED)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
helping you?
Yes No
Extremely
Effec¬
tive
Very
Effec¬
tive
Effec¬
tive
Not
Effec¬
tive
Extremely
Ineffec¬
tive
Staff Qualities (continued)
37. Dynamic nature
of staff in
being your
spokesman or
mediator 17
38. Cold, insensi¬
tive attitude
of the staff 0
39. Staff's disin¬
terest in your
concerns 2
40. Staff served as
a negative role
model 1
10
28
25
24
4
0
0
0
5 7 0
0 0 0
1 10
0 0 1
1
0
0
0
102

TABLE 2 (CONTINUED)
Did you receive the service
or participate in the
activity?
How effective
was it in
helping you?
Yes No
Extremely
Effec¬
tive
Very
Effec¬
tive
Effec¬
tive
Not
Effec¬
tive
Extremely
Ineffec¬
tive
Staff Qualities (continued)
41. Staff served as
a positive role
model 25 3
9
7
9
0
0

104
Research Question #2
What are the grade point averages of Black
students in the Special Services Program
at the University of Florida?
In obtaining the answer to this question, the research¬
er computed the grade point averages for each of the 150
students in the sample. This was accomplished by extracting
from the transcripts the grade points and hours carried each
term by each of the 150 students and dividing the grade
points by the hours carried to obtain the grade point
average. A work sheet was used to record the students'
grade point averages in columns.
The extreme right column of the work sheet designated
the term and was numbered 1 through 31. Each student was
identified by code at the top of each column of the work
sheet. The 1983 Summer B Term was the last term for which
the transcripts were obtained from the Registrar's Office.
By transcribing all data from the transcripts to the
work sheets, the researcher could readily observe the terms
in which the students were enrolled, not enrolled, withdrew
or graduated. The work sheet was also used to record the
number of courses that the students attempted and completed
while enrolled.
After the grade point averages were computed and re¬
corded on the work sheets, the researcher calculated the

105
mean grade point average for each term and a mean cumulative
grade point average for each year. Tables 3 through 7
reflect the grade point averages of the study participants
selected on a random basis. Mean grade point averages for
all University of Florida students, which include the
Special Services students, are presented in Table 8 for
comparison between the two groups.
Analysis of 1974 Transcripts of Randomly
Selected Special Services Students to
Obtain Their Grade Point Averages
An analysis of the term grade point averages presented
in Table 3 for the study population shows that mean grade
point averages for terms 7, 9, 11, 17, 24 and 25 were below
2.0 grade points. In all other terms, the students' mean
grade point averages were 2.00 or higher. However, the mean
grade point average for all seven years did not drop below
2.00 grade points.
Analysis of 1975 Transcripts of Randomly
Selected Special Services Students to
Obtain Their Grade Point Averages
An inspection of the grade point averages in Table 4
reveals that the Special Services students in this group
maintained above average grade point averages for all terms
except terms 4, 5, 10, 11, 20, 21, 28 and 30. This group of
students experienced two years of below average grade point

106
averages. They occurred during the third and eighth years
of their enrollment.
Analysis of 1976 Transcripts of Randomly
Selected Special Services Students to
Obtain Their Grade Point Averages
An analysis of the grade point averages in Table 5
indicates that the Special Services students in this group
were better academically than the previous two groups. This
group performed poorly during terms 22 and 26, with a poor
overall performance during the seventh year. The students
in this group maintained a higher grade point average in
their first term than any Special Services group in this
study. They also had a higher grade point average during
their first term than that of the total student body, which
was 2.90 grade points to 2.59 for the total student body.
Analysis of 1977 Transcripts of Randomly
Selected Special Services Students to
obtain Their Grade Point Averages
An inspection of Table 6 to report on the grade point
averages for this group of students indicates that they
maintained grade point averages of 2.00 or higher for 16
consecutive terms. During terms 17 and 22, their grade
point averages declined to 1.69 and 1.76, respectively.
Their mean grade point average for the fifth year was also
below 2.00 grade points. Overall, this group of students

107
maintained a yearly mean grade point average above 2.00
grade points for four consecutive years. During the fifth
year, their yearly mean grade points dropped to 1.96, but in
the sixth and sevenths years, it rose above 2.00 grade
points.
Analysis of 1978 Transcripts of Randomly
Selected Special Services Students to
Obtain Their Grade Point Averages
An inspection of Table 7 indicates that this group of
Special Services students maintained yearly mean grade point
averages ranging from 2.16 to 2.47. Only during terms 16
and 19 did they earn less than a 2.00 grade point average.

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
108
TABLE 3. MEAN GRADE POINT AVERAGES PER TERM AND
PER YEAR FOR SELECTED SPECIAL SERVICES
STUDENTS WHO INITIALLY ENROLLED DUPING
THE SUMMER OF 1974
Term Grade Number of
Term/Year Point Average Participants
Summer 1974
2.64
29
Fall 1974
2.65
29
Winter 1975
2.46
28
Spring 1975
2.29
26
First Year Mean
Grade
Point
Average = 2.51
Summer 1975
2.00
15
Fall 1975
2.04
27
Winter 1976
1.99
25
Spring 1976
2.28
22
Second Year Mean
i Grade Point Average = 2.08
Summer 1976
1.85
13
Fall 1976
2.32
19
Winter 1977
1.97
21
Spring 1977
2.38
16
Third Year Mean
Grade
Point
Average = 2.13
Summer 1977
2.34
8
Fall 1977
2.09
22
Winter 1978
2.18
15
Spring 1978
2.28
14
Fourth Year Mean
Grade
! Point
: Average = 2.22
Summer 1978
1.49
9
Fall 1978
2.18
10
Winter 1979
2.20
11
Spring 1979
2.61
8
Fifth Year Mean
Grade
Point
Average = 2.12

109
TABLE 3 (CONTINUED)
Term
Term Grade Number of
Term/Year Point Average Participants
21
Summer 1979
2.24
4
22
Fall 1979
2.05
7
23
Winter 1980
2.60
5
24
Spring 1980
1.77
5
Sixth Year Mean
Grade Point Average =
2.17
25
Summer 1980
1.45
3
26
Fall 1980
2.83
3
27
Winter 1981
2.46
2
8
Spring 1976
2.28
22
Seventh Year Mean Grade Point Average = 2.25

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
110
TABLE 4. MEAN GRADE POINT AVERAGES PER TERM AND
PER YEAR FOR SELECTED SPECIAL SERVICES
STUDENTS WHO INITIALLY ENROLLED DURING
THE SUMMER OF 1975
Term Grade Number of
Term/Year Point Average Participants
Summer 1975 2.61 24
Fall 1975 2.04 24
Winter 1976 2.21 22
Spring 1976 1.93 23
First Year Mean Grade Point Average = 2.20
Summer 1976 1.94 11
Fall 1976 2.22 16
Winter 1977 2.08 16
Spring 1977 2.23 14
Second Year Mean Grade Point Average = 2.12
Summer 1977 2.24 7
Fall 1977 1.80 14
Winter 1978 1.83 15
Spring 1978 2.02 13
Third Year Mean Grade Point Average = 1.97
Summer 1978 2.45 7
Fall 1978 2.43 13
Winter 1979 2.42 16
Spring 1979 2.24 14
Fourth Year Mean Grade Point Average = 2.39
Summer 1979 2.15 7
Fall 1979 2.19 9
Winter 1980 2.58 7
Spring 1980 1.95 7
Fifth Year Mean Grade Point Average = 2.22

Ill
TABLE 4 (CONTINUED)
Term
Term/Year
Term Grade
Point Average
Number of
Participants
21
Summer 1980
1.98
6
22
Fall 1980
3.34
2
23
Winter 1981
2.58
4
24
Spring 1981
0
Sixth Year Mean Grade Point Average =
2.63
25
Summer 1981
2.00
T_
26
Fall 1981
2.25
2
27
Spring 1982
2.27
3
Seventh Year Mean
Grade Point Average
= 2.17a
28
Summer A 1982
1.71
3
29
Summer B 1982
2.00
1
30
Fall 1982
1.12
1
31
Spring 1983
2.00
1
Eighth Year Mean
Grade Point Average
= 1.71
aUniversity of Florida converted to semester system
beginning Fall, 1981, with a two-term Summer Semester.

112
TABLE 5. MEAN GRADE POINT AVERAGES PER TERM AND PER
YEAR FOR RANDOMLY SELECTED SPECIAL SERVICES
STUDENTS WHO INITIALLY ENROLLED DURING THE
SUMMER OF 1976
Term
Term/Year
Term Grade
Point Average
Number of
Participant
1
Summer 1976
2.90
34
2
Fall 1976
2.36
34
3
Winter 1977
2.52
34
4
Spring 1977
2.43
34
First Year Mean
Grade Point Average =
2.55
5
Summer 1977
2.17
13
6
Fall 1977
2.30
33
7
Winter 1978
2.31
31
8
Spring 1978
2.53
28
Second Year Mean
Grade Point Average
= 2.33
9
Summer 1978
2.32
13
10
Fall 1978
2.37
28
11
Winter 1979
2.56
31
12
Spring 1979
2.73
28
Third Year Mean
Grade Point Average =
2.50
13
Summer 1979
3.17
13
14
Fall 1979
2.61
29
15
Winter 1980
2.57
26
16
Spring 1980
2.50
24
Fourth Year Mean
Grade Point Average
= 2.71
17
Summer 1980
2.58
12
18
Fall 1980
2.10
12
19
Winter 1981
2.77
11
20
Spring 1981
2.59
9
Fifth Year Mean Grade Point Average = 2.51

TABLE 5 (CONTINUED)
Term
Term/Year
Term Grade
Point Average
Number of
Participants
21
Summer 1981
2.29
7
22
Fall 1981
1.96
7
23
Spring 1982
Sixth Year Mean
Grade Point Average =
0
2.13a
24
Summer 1982
2.68
3
25
Fall 1982
2.00
1
26
Spring 1983
Seventh Year Mean
0.98
Grade Point Average
3
= 1.89
University of Florida converted to semester system
beginning Fall, 1981, with a two-term Summer Semester.

114
TABLE 6. WEAN GRADE POINT AVERAGES PER TERM AND PER
YEAR FOR RANDOMLY SELECTED SPECIAL SERVICES
STUDENTS WHO INITIALLY ENROLLED DURING THE
SUMMER OF 1977
Term
Term/Year
Term Grade
Point Average
Number of
Participa]
1
Summer 1977
2.36
24
2
Fall 1977
2.18
23
3
Winter 1978
2.05
23
4
Spring 1978
2.00
21
First Year Mean
Grade Point Average =
2.15
5
Summer 1978
2.02
16
6
Fall 1978
2.44
22
7
Winter 1979
2.79
20
8
Spring 1979
2.62
21
Second Year Mean Grade Point Average
= 2.47
9
Summer 1979
2.09
13
10
Fall 1979
2.31
21
11
Winter 1980
2.53
20
12
Spring 1980
2.53
21
Third Year Mean
Grade Point Average =
2.37
13
Summer 1980
2.37
13
14
Fall 1980
2.15
21
15
Winter 1981
2.27
19
16
Spring 1981
2.50
18
Fourth Year Mean Grade Point Average
= 2.32
17
Summer 1981
1.69
8
18
Fall 1981
2.07
14
19
Spring 1982
2.12
12
Fifth Year Mean
Grade Point Average =
1.9 6a

TABLE 6 (CONTINUED)
Term
Term/Year
Term Grade
Point Average
Number of
Participants
20
Summer A 1982
2.08
5
20
Summer B 1982
2.13
5
20
Summer C 1982
2.50
2
21
Fall 1982
2.17
5
22
Spring 1983
1.76
5
Sixth Year Mean Grade Point Average =
2.13
23
Summer A 1983
2.50
1
24
Summer B 1983
2.00
1
25
Summer C 1983
2.00
1
Seventh Year Mean
Grade Point Average
= 2.17
aUniversity of Florida converted to the semester system
beginning with Fall, 1981, with a two-term Summer Semester.

116
TABLE 7. MEAN GRADE POINT AVERAGES PER TERM AND PER
YEAR FOR RANDOMLY SELECTED SPECIAL SERVICES
STUDENTS WHO INITIALLY ENROLLED DURING THE
SUMMER OF 1978
Term
Term Grade Number of
Term/Year Point Average Participants
1
Summer 1978
2.42
39
2
Fall 1978
2.65
39
3
Winter 1979
2.22
38
4
Spring 1979
2.16
36
First Year Mean Grade
Point
Average = 2
. 36
5
Summer 1979
2.16
17
6
Fall 1979
2.53
38
7
Winter 1980
2.49
34
8
Spring 1980
2.35
34
Second Year Mean Grade Point Average =
2.38
9
Summer 1980
2.38
19
10
Fall 1980
2.34
33
11
Winter 1981
2.21
32
12
Spring 1981
2.49
29
Third Year Mean Grade
Point
Average = 2
.36
13
Summer 1981
2.52
21
14
Fall 1981
2.27
30
15
Spring 1982
2.25
27
Fourth Year Mean Grade
Point
Average = 2
. 3 5a
16
Summer A 1982
2.49
15
16
Summer B 1982
1.70
12
16
Summer C 1982
2.44
3
17
Fall 1982
2.31
19
18
Spring 1983
3.39
10
Fifth Year Mean Grade
Point
Average = 2
.47

117
TABLE 7 (CONTINUED)
Term Grade Number of
Term Term/Year Point Average Participants
T
19
Summer
A
1983
2.89
6
19
Summer
B
1983
1.83
4
19
Summer
C
1983
1.75
4
Sixth Year Mean Grade Point Average = 2.16
University of Florida converted to the semester system
beginning with Fall, 1981, with a two-term Summer Semester.

118
TABLE 8. MEAN GRADE POINT AVERAGES OF ALL
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA STUDENTS
1974 - 1983
Term Grade
Term/Year Point Average Number of Students
Summer 1974
2.85
6,235
Fall 1974
2.67
21,132
Winter 1975
2.74
20,752
Spring 1975
2.71
19,629
Grand
Mean
for
Academic
Year
1974-1975
= 2.74
Summer 1975
2.67
8,111
Fall 1975
2.64
21,342
Winter 1976
2.67
20,801
Spring 1976
2.69
19,501
Grand
Mean
for
Academic
Year
1975-1976
= 2.67
Summer 1976
2.59
8,600
Fall 1976
2.61
20,530
Winter 1977
2.66
19,322
Spring 1977
2.69
17,565
Grand
Mean
for
Academic
Year
1976-1977
= 2.64
Summer 1977
2.64
8,978
Fall 1977
2.64
21,789
Winter 1978
2.64
20,877
Spring 1978
2.69
19,164
Grand
Mean
for
Academic
Year
1977-1978
= 2.65
Summer 1978
Fall 1978
Winter 1979
Spring 1979
Grand Mean
2.69
2.68
2.72
2.74
for Academic Year
6,641
23,418
22,375
20,9 86
1978-1979 = 2.71

119
TABLE 8 (CONTINUED)
Term Grade
Term/Year Point Average
Number of Students
Summer 1979
2.70
11,007
Fall 1979
2.64
24,759
Winter 1980
2.66
23,7 50
Spring 1980
2.71
22,170
Grand Mean for
Academic
Year
1979-1980
= 2.68
Summer 1980
2.65
12,177
Fall 1980
2.64
25,5 06
Winter 1981
2.64
24,672
Spring 1981
2.71
23,032
Grand Mean for
Academic
Year
1980-1981
= 2.66
Summer 1981
2.70
12,4 99
Fall 1981
2.62
25,498
Spring 1982
2.67
24,296
Grand Mean for
Academic
Year
1981-1982
= 2.0 0a
Summer A 1982
2.70
11,211
Summer B and C 1982
2.74
9,6 35
Fall 1982
2.64
26,237
Spring 1983
2.67
24,3 44
Grand Mean for
Academic
Year
1982-1983
= 2.69
Summer A 1983
2.77
11,381
Summer B and C 1983
2.68
5,793
Grand Mean for Summer 1983 = 2.73
aUniversity of Florida converted to semester system
beginning Fall, 1981, with a two-term Summer Semester.

12 0
Table 9 describes yearly grade point averages earned by
the Special Services students. During the year of their
initial enrollment, the grade point averages for all groups
ranged from 2.15 to 2.55. The class of 1976 achieved the
highest grade point average of all the groups in their
initial year. This same class also achieved the highest
grade point average for all groups during any of the years
of the study, 2.71 during the fourth year.
The researcher found that the grade point averages for
all groups during their first and second years were in the
range of 2.09 to 2.55. This is a significant finding in
that the students are provided the supportive services of
the Program primarily during their first and second years of
enrollment at the University of Florida.
TABLE 9. GRADE POINT AVERAGES FOR RANDOMLY
SELECTED SPECIAL STUDENTS DURING
THE PERIOD 1974-1983
Year Entered
University
of Florida
Year of
Study
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
5th
6th
7th
8th
1974
2.53
2.09
2.13
2.25
2.12
2.17
2.25
1975
2.20
2.12
1.97
2.39
2.22
2.63
2.17
1.71
1976
2.55
2.33
2.50
2.71
2.51
2.13
1.89
1977
2.15
2.47
2.37
2.32
1.96
2.13
2.17
1978
2.36
2.38
2.36
2.35
2.47
2.16

121
In the process of analyzing the data from the tran¬
scripts to answer the second research question, the re¬
searcher observed differences in the variety and number of
courses in which the students were enrolled. Table 10
illustrates the kind of courses in which the Special
•Services students were enrolled during their first terms at
the University of Florida. Each student carried an average
of 11 credits from the courses listed.
The classes in which the students were enrolled for
credit during their first term in 1974 did not significantly
differ during the 1975, 1976, 1977, or 1978 school years.
However, the number of courses taken increased and, in 1977,
reading and writing courses for credit were included in the
courses taken by Special Services students during their
first terms of enrollment.

122
TABLE 10. COURSES TAKEN BY SPECIAL SERVICES STUDENTS
DURING THEIR FIRST TERMS OF ENROLLMENT AT
THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA BETWEEN 1974 AND
1978
Course Credit
Course Prefix Course Title (Quarter Hours)
Summer 1974
BES
Creative and Critical Thinking
4
CMS
Fundamental Math
4
EH
Freshman English
4
CPS
The Physical Sciences
3
SSC
American Institutions
4
Summer
1975
EES
Special Topics
4
CMS
Fundamental Math
4
EH
Freshman English
4
CPS
The Physical Sciences
4
SSC
American Institutions
4
MS
Algebra and Trigonometry
5
Summer
1976
BES
Creative and Critical Thinking
3
CMS
Fundamental Math
4
EH
Freshman English
4
CPS
The Physical Sciences
4
SSC
American Institutions
4
MS Algebra and Trigonometry
5

123
TABLE 10 (CONTINUED)
Course
Prefix
Course Title
Course Credit
(Quarter Hours)
Summer
19 77
BES
Special Topics
4
CPS
The Physical Sciences
4
EH
Writing Laboratory
1
EH
Expository Writing
3
ssc
American Institutions
4
MS
Precalculus - Algebra
4
Summer
197 8
BES
Special Topics
4
CPS
The Physical Sciences
4
EH
Reading Content Area
1
EH
Writing Laboratory
1
EH
Expository Writing
3
SSC
American Institutions
4
MS
Basic Algebra
2
PL
Basic Concepts
2

124
Research Question #3
What are the retention rates of the Black
students in the Special Services Program
at the University of Florida?
Retention rates were determined by analyzing the
transcripts of the 150 randomly selected students in this
study to ascertain whether or not they were enrolled during
any term after their initial enrollment. Retention data
were obtained from the work sheets used to record grade
point averages. If no grade point average was recorded in a
particular term, it was assumed that the student was not
enrolled for that term.
The work sheet provided a graphic representation of
retention rates of the students under study for any term anc
year of possible enrollment. These retention rates were
expressed as percentages enrolled or not enrolled. They
were calculated by dividing the total number of Special
Services students enrolled during each term by the number
initially in their beginning group.
Retention rates are listed in Tables 11 through 18.
These tables include the number of students enrolled cr not
enrolled during each term of the five years studied. For
the Fall terms, the attrition rate for the total University
students was significantly greater than that for the ran¬
domly selected Special Services students of this study (see

125
Tables 11 and 12). These tables indicate that none of the
Special Services students was suspended or did not register,
but there was one who withdrew.
Analysis of Class Enrolling in 1974
Table 13 shows that after eight terms (2 years), 79
percent of the Special Services students were still en¬
rolled. After 16 terms (4 years), 53 percent of the stu¬
dents remained enrolled. The number and percentage of
students not enrolled after 16 terms was affected by the
fact that some of these students graduated.
During the Winter Term of 1977, 3 student (11 percent)
from the class of Special Services students who enrolled in
the 1974 Summer Term graduated. Also, during the 1977
Winter Term, 10 students (36 percent) were not enrolled for
personal, academic, financial, or other unknown reasons.
Analysis of Class Enrolling in 1975
Table 14 indicates that after 8 terms (2 years) , 58
percent of the randomly selected Special Services students
who entered the University of Florida during the 1975 Summer
Term were enrolled. After 16 terms (4 years), the percent¬
age of students still enrolled remained at 58 percent.
During the 1979 Summer Term, 3 students (13 percent)
graduated; 14 students (58 percent) were also not enrolled

126
for personal, academic, or financial reasons. It is also
possible that 58 percent of the students were not enrolled
because it was the summer term. The table reflects a high
percentage of students not enrolled during the summer terms.
Analysis of Class Enrolling 1976
An inspection of Table 15 shows that in the eighth term
(2 years), 82 percent of the Special Services students were
still enrolled. In the sixteenth term (4 years), 70 percent
of the students remained enrolled. The first student to
graduate from this group did so in 12 terms (3 years). Also
during this twelfth term, 18 percent of the students who
initially enrolled during the 1976 Summer Term were not
enrolled for reasons other than graduation.
Analysis of Class Enrolling in 1977
Table 16 reports that in 8 terms (2 years), 87 percent
of the Special Services students were still enrolled after
their initial enrollment during the 1977 Summer Term. Dur¬
ing the sixteenth term (4 years), 75 percent of the students
remained enrolled, with 8 percent having graduated and 17
percent not enrolled for reasons other than graduation.

127
Analysis of Class Enrolling in 1978
An inspection of Table 17 shows that in 8 terms (2
years), 87 percent of the Special Services students who
enrolled at the University of Florida during the 1978 Summer
Term were still enrolled. By the sixteenth term (4 years),
38 percent of the students were enrolled for the "A" term;
30.7 percent were enrolled for the "B" term; and 7.6 percent
were enrolled for the "C" term. The combined enrollment for
the sixteenth term was 76.3 percent.
Summarv
■■ tá,
During the years between 1974 and 1978, the retention
rates for the randomly selected Special Services students
ranged from 58 percent to 87 percent during the first two
years of their initial enrollment. Over the five-year
period of this study, the Special Services Program retained
78.5 percent of these students during their first two years.
The retention rates for four years after these students'
initial enrollment ranged from 53 percent to 76.3 percent,
with an average retention rate of 66.5 percent for the five
groups of randomly selected students who enrolled during the
1974, 1975, 1976, 1977 and 1978 Summer Terms.

TABLE 11
FRESHMAI] ATTRITION OF TOTAL UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA STUDENTS,
FALL TERMS, 1974 THROUGH 1978
Enrollment
Status
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
Num¬
ber
Per¬
cent
Num¬
ber
Per¬
cent
Num¬
ber
Per¬
cent
Num¬
ber
Per¬
cent
Num¬
ber
Per¬
cent
Enrolled
3,554
—
2,879
—
2,547
—
2,947
—
2,884
—
Withdrew
22
0.6
13
0.4
11
0.4
18
0.6
25
0.9
Suspended
51
1.5
36
1.2
24
0.9
29
1.0
18
0.6
Did not
register
177
5.0
104
3.6
94
3.6
161
5.5
105
3.6
Source: Registrar, University of Florida
128

)
TABLE
12. FRESHMAN ATTRITION OF RANDOMLY SELECTED SPECIAL SERVICES
STUDENTS, UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA, FALL TERMS, 1974 THROUGH
19 78
Enrollment
Status
1974 1975 1976 1977 1978
Num- Per- Num- Per- Num- Per- Num- Per- Nura- Per-
ber cent ber cent ber cent ber cent ber cent
Enrolled
28 24 34 23 39
Withdrew
0 o 0 1 0.04 0
Suspended
0 o 0 0 0
Did not
register
0 o o 0 0
129

TABLE 13.
RETENTION RECORDS
STUDENTS FROM THE
OF RANDOMLY SELECTED SPECIAL
CLASS WHICH ENROLLED IN 1974
SERVICES
Not
Enrolled
Enrolled
Reason
Unknown
Graduated
Number
Percent
Term
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
28
100.0
Ia
0
0.0
28
100.0
2
0
0.0
—
27
96.0
3
1
4.0
—
25
89.0
4
3
11.0
—
15
54.0
5a
13
46.0
—
26
93.0
6
2
7.0
—
25
89.0
7
3
11.0
—
22
79.0
8
6
21.0
—
13
46.0
9 a
15
54.0
—
19
68.0
10
9
32.0
—
21
75.0
11
7
25.0
—
16
57.0
12
12
43.0
—
8
29.0
13a
20
71.0
—
21
75.0
14
7
25.0
—
18
64.0
15
10
36.0
—
15
53.0
16
10
36.0
3
11.0
12
43.0
17 3
12
43.0
4
14.0
31
39.3
18
11
39.3
6
21.4
13
46.0
19
8
29.0
7
25.0
11
39.0
20
9
32.0
8
29.0
7
25.0
2 Ia
10
36.0
11
39.0
130

TABLE 13 (CONTINUED)
Not Enrolled
Enrolled Reason Unknown Graduated
Number
Percent
Term
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
8
29.0
22
6
21.0
14
50.0
5
18.0
23
8
29.0
15
53.0
6
21.4
24
7
25.0
15
53.0
3
11.0
25°
9
32.0
16
57.0
4
14.0
26
8
29.0
16
57.0
2
7.0
27
9
32.0
17
61.0
2
7.0
28
9
32.0
17
61.0
2
7.0
29 a
9
32.0
17
61.0
aSummer Term
131

TABLE 14.
RETENTION RECORDS
STUDENTS FROM THE
OF RANDOMLY SELECTED SPECIAL
CLASS WHICH ENROLLED IN 1975
SERVICES
Enrolled
Number Percent
Term
Reason
Number
Not
Unknown
Percent
Enrolled
. Graduated
Number Percent
24
100.0
Ia
0
0.0
24
100.0
2
0
0.0
—
22
92.0
3
2
8.0
—
23
96.0
4
1
4.0
—
11
46.0
5a
13
54.0
—
16
67.0
6
8
33.0
—
16
67.0
7
8
33.0
—
14
58.0
8
10
42.0
—
7
29.0
9 a
17
71.0
—
14
58.0
10
10
42.0
—
15
63.0
11
9
37.0
—
13
54.0
12
11
46.0
—
7
29.0
13a
17
71.0
—
13
54.0
14
11
46.0
—
16
67.0
15
8
33.0
—
14
58.0
16
10
42.0
—
7
29.0
17 a
14
58.0
3
13.0
9
37.0
18
10
42.0
5
21.0
7
29.0
19
10
42.0
7
29.0
8
33.0
20
9
38.0
—
6
25.0
21a
11
46.0
—
132

TABLE 14 (CONTINUED)
Enrolled
Number Percent
Term
Reason
Number
Not
Unknown
Percent
Enrolled
Graduated
Number Percent
3
13.0
22
14
58.0
4
17.0
23
13
54.0
—
0
—
24
15
63.0
9
37.5
1
4.0
25a
14
58.0
—
2
8.0
26
13
54.0
'—
3
13.0
27
12
50.0
—
3
13.0
28
12
50.0
—
2
8.0
29a
12
50.0
10
42.0
2
8.0
30
12
50.0
—
1
4.0
31
12
50.0
11
46.0
aSummer Term
133

TABLE 15.
RETENTION RECORDS
STUDENTS FROM THE
OF RANDOMLY SELECTED SPECIAL
CLASS WHICH ENROLLED IN 1976
SERVICES
-
Not
Enrolled
Enrolled
Reason
Unknown
Graduated
Number
Percent
Term
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
34
100.0
Ia
0
0.0
„
34
100.0
2
0
0.0
—
34
100.0
3
0
0.0
—
34
100.0
4
0
0.0
—
13
38.0
53
21
62.0
—
33
97.0
6
1
3.0
—
31
91.0
7
3
9.0
—
28
82.0
8
6
18.0
—
13
38.0
9 a
21
62.0
—
29
85.0
10
5
15.0
—
31
91.0
11
3
9.0
—
28
82.0
12
6
18.0
—
17
50.0
13a
16
47.0
1
3.0
29
85.0
14
4
12.0
—
26
76.0
15
5
15.0
3
9.0
24
70.0
16
6
18.0
—
12
35.3
17 a
12
35.3
10
29.4
13
38.0
18
7
21.0
14
41.0
11
32.0
19
6
18.0
17
50.0
9
26.0
20
7
21.0
18
53.0
7
20.0
2 Ia
8
24.0
19
56.0
134

TABLE 15 (CONTINUED)
Not Enrolled
Enrolled
Number Percent
Term
Reason
Number
Unknown
Percent
Graduated
Number Percent
7
20.0
22
6
18.0
21
62.0
0
—
23
10
29.0
24
71.0
3
9.0
24
7
20.0
—
1
3.0
25a
8
24.0
25
73.0
3
9.0
26
6
18.0
—
0
—
27
8
24.0
26
76.0
a
Summer Term
135

TABLE 16
RETENTION RECORDS OF RANDOMLY SELECTED SPECIAL SERVICES
STUDENTS FROM THE CLASS WHICH ENROLLED IN 1977
Not Enrolled
Enrolled
Number Percent
Term
Reason
Number
Unknown
Percent
Graduated
Number Percent
24
100.0
Ia
0
0.0
23
96.0
2
1
4.0
—
23
96.0
3
1
4.0
—
21
88.0
4
3
12.0
—
16
67.0
5a
8
33.0
—
22
92.0
6
2
8.0
—
20
83.0
7
4
17.0
—
21
87.0
8
3
13.0
—
13
54.0
9 a
11
46.0
—
21
87.0
10
3
13.0
—
20
83.0
11
4
17.0
—
21
87.0
12
3
13.0
—
13
54.0
13a
11
46.0
—
21
87.0
14
3
13.0
—
19
79.0
15
4
17.0
1
4.0
18
75.0
16
4
17.0
3
8.0
8
33.0
17 3
10
42.0
6
25.0
14
58.0
18
4
17.0
—
12
50.0
19
5
21.0
7
29.0
136

TABLE 16 (CONTINUED)
Not Enrolled
Enrolled
Reason
Unknown
Graduated
Number
Percent
Term
Number
Percent
Number
Percen
7
29.0
20b
8
33.0
9
38.0
7
29.0
20*:
20°
8
33.0
—
2
8.0
13
54.0
—
5
21.0
21
9
38.0
10
42.0
5
21.0
22b
8
33.0
11
46.0
1
4.0
23b
10
42.0
13
54.0
1
4.0
23d
10
42.0
—
1
4.0
23d
10
42.0
—
^Summer Term
^Summer Term A
Q
^Summer Term B
uSummer Term C
137

TABLE 17
RETENTION RECORDS OF RANDOMLY SELECTED SPECIAL SERVICES
STUDENTS FROM THE CLASS WHICH ENROLLED IN 1978
Not Enrolled
Enrolled
Number Percent
Term
Reason Unknown Graduated
Number Percent Number Percent
39
100.0
Ia
0 .
0.0
— —
39
100.0
2
0
0.0
—
38
97.0
3
1
3.0
—
36
92.0
4
3
8.0
—
17
44.0
5a
22
56.0
—
38
97.0
6
1
3.0
—
34
87.0
7
5
13.0
—
34
87.0
8
5
13.0
—
19
49.0
9 a
20
51.0
—
33
85.0
10
6
15.0
—
32
82.0
11
7
18.0
—
29
74.0
12
10
26.0
—
21
54.0
13a
18
46.0
—
30
77.0
14
9
23.0
—
27
69.0
15b
9
23.0
3
15
38.0
16b
16
41.0
8
12
30.7
16d
19
48.7
—
3
7.6
16d
28
71.7
—
19
49.0
17
9
23.0
11
8.0
21.0
28.0
138

TABLE 17 (CONTINUED)
Not Enrolled
Enrolled
Number Percent
Term
Reason
Number
Unknown
Percent
Graduated
Number Percent
13
33.3
18b
11
28.2
15
38.4
6
15.0
19b
14
36.0
19
49.0
4
10.0
19d
12
30.0
23
60.0
4
10.0
19°
12
30.0
—
^Summer Terra
Summer A
^Summer B
Summer C
139

140
TABLE 18. SPECIAL SERVICES RETENTION RATES FOR
THE PERIOD BETWEEN 1974 AND 1978
Year of Initial
Enrollment
After
Two Years
(Percent)
After
Four Years
(Percent)
1974
79.0
53.0
1975
58.0
58.0
1976
82.0
70.0
1977
87.0
75.0
1978
87.0
76.3
Grand Mean Retention
Rates for Period
Between 1974 and 1978
78.5
66.5

141
Research Question #4
What are the graduation rates of Black
students in the Special Services Pro¬
gram at the University of Florida?
Analysis of the 150 randomly selected transcripts
provided the graduation rates of Black students in the
Special Services Program who initially enrolled at the
University of Florida during the years 1974, 1975, 1976,
1977 and 1978. Tables 19 through 30 indicate the number of
terms enrolled before graduation, the number of years since
the student's initial enrollment, the number of graduates,
the percent of the original class that graduated, the
average number of courses completed out of the number of
courses attempted, and the type of degrees earned. United
States Armed Services commissions were included in the
tables when this information was provided by the students.
Transcript Analysis of Randomly Selected
Special Services Students Who Enrolled
m 1974 to Determine Their Graduation Rates
The first three graduates from the 1974 group of
Special Services students completed requirements for their
undergraduate degrees in 3.5 years. All three students were
enrolled continuously without the usual summer break taken
by most of their peers. One other student graduated in 3.75

142
years without a break in enrollment. The additional time
was required by an internship. Ail together, 19 (66 per¬
cent) of the students from this group graduated. The length
of time to graduate ranged from 3.5 years to 7.^0 years from
their initial enrollment date (Table 24).
Degrees Earned
The types of degrees earned by this group of graduates
were as follows: Eight received Bachelor of Science de¬
grees; ten received Bachelor of Arts degrees; and one
received a Bachelor of Music Education degree. The majors
of these graduates were in the areas of Marketing (2) ,
Criminal Justice (3), Banking and Finance (1), Psychology
(2) , Recreation (1) , Finance (1) , Pharmacy (1), Broadcasting
(2), Sociology (3), Music Education (1), History (1), and
Political Science (1).
Two of these graduates continued their education and
were awarded Specialist in Education degrees in Counselor
Education. One of the graduates, the Pharmacy major, is
presently in Medical School and is expected to receive the
Doctor of Medicine degree in June of 1984 frcm the
University of Florida's College of Medicine.

Courses Attempted and Completed
The graduates of the randomly selected group of Special
Services students who enrolled in 1974 completed 93.2 per¬
cent of the courses they attempted while pursuing their
undergraduate degrees; the nongraduates completed 78.1 per¬
cent of their courses. However, one graduate was found who
completed only 79 percent of the courses attempted.
TABLE 19. COURSES COMPLETED OUT OF THE NUMBER
OF COURSES ATTEMPTED BY A RANDOMLY
SELECTED GROUP OF SPECIAL SERVICES
STUDENTS WHO ENROLLED IN 1974
Student
Status
Average Number
of Courses
Completed
Average Number
of Courses
Attempted
Percent of
of Courses
Completed
Graduates
55
59
93.2
(n = 19)
Nongraduates
25
32
78.1
(n = 9)

144
Transcript Analysis of Randomly Selected
Special Services Students Who Enrolled
in 1975 to Determine Their Graduation Rates
This analysis revealed that 11 students (46 percent)
graduated out of the 24 students studied who enrolled during
the 1975 Summer Term. The time required for these graduates
to complete their undergraduate degree requirements ranged
from 16 terms (4 years) to 31 terms (8 years). One student
remained continuously enrolled until graduation by carrying
11 credit hours per term for four years.
One student from this group lacks one course for gradu¬
ation. This student is a professional athlete who has been
unable to enroll at the University when a particular re¬
quired course is offered. One of the eleven students has
been admitted to the Graduate School at the University of
Florida; a second is currently enrolled in graduate school
at the University of Wisconsin.
Five of the 11 students received Bachelor of Arts
degrees and 6 received Bachelor of Science degrees. Their
majors were in the following areas: Political Science (2),
Advertising (2), Economics (1), Marketing (1), Broadcasting
(2), Sociology (2), and Public Relations (1) (Table 25).

145
Courses Attempted and Completed
The graduates of the randomly selected group of Special
Services students who enrolled in 1975 completed 92.9 per¬
cent of the courses that they attempted. The nongraduates
completed 84.4 percent of their courses. Three of the
nongraduates completed 92.2 percent, 92.9 percent, and 94.4
percent of their courses, respectively. Only one of the
graduates completed less than 90 percent of the courses
attempted. The other graduates completed 90.6 percent to
100.0 percent of their courses.
TABLE 20. COURSES COMPLETED OUT OF THE NUMBER
OF COURSES ATTEMPTED BY A RANDOMLY
SELECTED GROUP OF SPECIAL SERVICES
STUDENTS WHO ENROLLED IN 1975
Average Number Average Number Percent of
Student of Courses of Courses of Courses
Status Completed Attempted Completed
Graduates
(n = 11)
52
56
Nongraduates
(n = 13)
27
32
84.4

146
Transcript Analysis of Randomly Selected
Special Services Students Who Enrolled
in 1976 to Determine Their Graduation Rates
An analysis of the transcripts of the students who
enrolled in the Summer of 1976 reveals that 26 of the 34
students (76 percent) graduated from the University of
Florida. The period of time taken to obtain their under¬
graduate degrees ranged from 12 terms (3 years) to 26 terms
(7 years). A total of 10 students from this group graduated
in four years or less.
One student who obtained the bachelor's degree in three
years enrolled in the Graduate School at the University of
Florida and was awarded a master's degree 1.5 years later.
Within a period of 4.5 years, this student had completed the
undergraduate requirements with a 3.26 cumulative grade
point average and the graduate degree requirements with a
3.53 cumulative grade point average.
Two other students from this group completed their
graduate and professional degree requirements within a
seven-year period from their initial enrollment at the
University of Florida. One of these students was awarded a
master's degree and the other a Juris Doctor degree (Table
26) .

147
Degrees Received
Of the students in this group, 15 received Bachelor of
Arts degrees, and 11 received Bachelor of Science degrees.
The major fields of study for these degree recipients in¬
cluded Special Education (3), English (1), Breadcasting (2),
Political Science (2), Speech (2), Sociology (2), Marketing
(4), Psychology (3), Management (1), History (1), Criminal
Justice (1), Physical Education (1), Health Education (1),
Chemical Engineering (1) , and Industrial and Systems
Engineering (1).
The number and types of majors in this group of stu¬
dents vary greatly from the previous two groups of Special
Services students. More students from the 1976 group gradu¬
ated in four years or less than was the case for the two
earlier groups in this study.
Courses Attempted and Completed
The graduates of the randomly selected group of Special
Services students who enrolled in 1976 completed 96.6 per¬
cent of the courses that they attempted while pursuing their
degrees; the nongraduates completed 82.4 percent of their
courses. Nine of the graduates each completed 100 percent
of the courses that they attempted. Two of the nongraduates
completed 90.6 percent and 97 percent of their courses,
respectively.

148
TAELE 21. COURSES COMPLETED OUT OF THE NUMBER
OF COURSES ATTEMPTED BY A RANDOMLY
SELECTED GROUP OF SPECIAL SERVICES
STUDENTS WHO ENROLLED IN 1976
Student
Status
Average Number
of Courses
Completed
Average Number
of Courses
Attempted
Percent
of Courses
Completed
Graduates
56
58
96.6
(n = 26)
Nongraduates
28
34
82.4
(n = 8)
•
Transcript Analysis of Randomly Selected
Special Services Students Who Enrolled
in 1977 to Determine Their Graduation Rates
An analysis of the transcripts of this randomly selec¬
ted group of students who began their enrollment during the
Summer of 1977 revealed that 13 out of the 24 students (54
percent) graduated. The number of years from their initial
enrollment to graduation ranged from 3.5 years to 6.0 years.
Three of the graduates from this group (17 percent) ,
graduated in less than four years. The first of these
graduates completed all requirements for the bachelor's
degree in 3.5 years (Table 27).
Degrees Earned
The types of degrees earned by this group of Special
Services students included 7 Bachelor of Arts and 6 Eachelor

149
of Science degrees. Two of the degree recipients were com¬
missioned in the United States Army as Second Lieutenants,
one of whom is a female.
The major fields of study of these 13 graduates were
Special Education (2) , Public Relations (1) , Health
Education (2), Advertising (1), Psychology (2), Criminal
Justice (2), Nursing (1), Recreation (1), and Speech (1).
Courses Attempted and Completed
The graduates of the randomly selected group of Special
Services students who enrolled in 1977 completed 93.2 per¬
cent of their courses; the nongraduates completed 86.5
percent of their courses. Two of the graduates each com¬
pleted 100 percent of their courses. Three of the non¬
graduates completed over 90 percent of their courses.

150
TABLE 22. COURSES COMPLETED OUT OF THE NUMBER
OF COURSES ATTEMPTED BY A RANDOMLY
SELECTED GROUP OF SPECIAL SERVICES
STUDENTS WHO ENROLLED IN 1977
Student
Status
Average Number
of Courses
Completed
Average Number
of Courses
Attempted
Percent
of Courses
Completed
Graduates
55
59
93.2
(n = 13)
Nongraduates
45
52
86.5
(n = 11)
Transcript Analysis of Randomly Selected
Special Services Students Who Enrolled
in 1978 to Determine Their Graduation Rates
From the transcripts of this randomly selected group of
students who initially enrolled during the 1978 Summer Term,
the researcher found that 8 (34 percent) of the 23 who
graduated completed their degree requirements in four years
or less. The other 15 students completed their degree re¬
quirements in 4.33 to 5.33 years. These 23 graduates repre¬
sent 59 percent of the total number of students in this
group.
Three of these students graduated in 3.5 years, one of
whom received high honors. These three students did not
take a break in their enrollment and were continuously en¬
rolled for 14 terms. One of the three early graduates is

151
presently enrolled in the Graduate School at the University
of Florida. Two other graduates are also enrolled at the
University of Florida, one with postbaccalaureate status,
and the other in the College of Law (Table 28).
Degrees Earned
The Bachelor of Science degree was awarded to 14 of the
23 graduates. The remaining 9 graduates received the
Bachelor of Arts degree. The Bachelor of Science degree
recipients majored in Management (2), Recreation (3),
Marketing (3), Microbiology and Cell Science (1) , Health
Education (2), Electrical Engineering (2), and Finance (1).
The Bachelor of Arts degree recipients majored in the areas
of Sociology (1) , Political Science (2) , Criminal Justice
(1), Speech (2), Special Education (2), and Psychology (1).
Courses Attempted and Completed
The graduates of the randomly selected group of Special
Services students who enrolled in 1978 completed 94.9 per¬
cent of the courses that they attempted while pursuing their
undergraduate degrees at the University of Florida. The
nongraduates completed 87.8 percent of their courses. How¬
ever, one nongraduate was found to have completed 100 per¬
cent of the courses attempted. There were two graduates who
also completed 100 percent of their courses.

152
TABLE 23. COURSES COMPLETED OUT OF THE NUMBER
OF COURSES ATTEMPTED BY A RANDOMLY
SELECTED GROUP OF SPECIAL SERVICES
STUDENTS WHO ENROLLED IN 1978
Student
Status
Average Number
of Courses
Completed
Average Number
of Courses
Attempted
Percent
of Courses
Completed
Graduates
56
59
94.9
(n = 23)
Nongraduates
36
41
87.8
(n = 16)
Analysis of Major Fields of Study
The randomly selected Special Services students who
first enrolled during the summers between 1974 and 1978
earned their undergraduate degrees from only 10 of the 14
schools and colleges at the University of Florida. Table 31
shows the types of degrees, majors, the number of degree
recipients from each of the entering groups and the school
or college that awarded the degree.
Of the total number of graduates, 42.4 percent received
their degrees from the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences;
17.4 percent from the College of Business Administration; 12
percent from the College of Journalism and Communications;
12 percent from the College of Physical Education, Health
and Recreation; 7.6 percent from the College of Education;

153
4.3 percent from the College of Engineering; and 1.1 percent
from the Colleges of Agriculture, Fine Arts, Nursing, and
Pharmacy, respectively. The data show that students from
this group did not receive degrees in Accounting,
Architecture, Building Construction or Forestry.
Summary
The fourth research question was answered after a
detailed analysis of the transcripts of each of the 150
randomly selected students who first enrolled between the
years 1974 and 1978. Briefly, the answer is that 92 of
these 150 Special Services students (61 percent) graduated
from the University of Florida.
Nine percent of the students in this study graduated in
less than 4 years. The greatest number of these Special
Services students, 46 percent, graduated in 3 to 5 years.
Within a period of 6 years following their initial entry
into the University of Florida, 55 percent of the students
in this study had graduated. However, there were 5.8
percent of the students in this study who took 6 to 8 years
to graduate.

TABLE 24. ANALYSIS OF THE NUMBER OF TERMS FROM INITIAL ENROLLMENT TO GRADUATION
FOR RANDOMLY SELECTED BLACK STUDENTS IN THE SPECIAL SERVICES PROGRAM
AND THE TYPE OF DEGREE BY THE CLASS WHICH ENROLLED IN 1974
Number of Terms
Years Since
Percent of
Enrolled Prior
Initial En-
Number of
Class
to Graduation
rollment
Graduates
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
-
1.
Bachelor of Science in
Business Administra¬
tion (Major: Market¬
ing; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.76)
14
3.50
3b
10
2.
Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Criminal Jus¬
tice; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.94)
3.
Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Criminal Jus¬
tice; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.73)
15
3.75
lb
14
1.
Bachelor of Science in
Business Administra¬
tion (Major: Banking
and Finance; Cumula¬
tive Grade Point Aver¬
age = 2.05)
154

TABLE 24 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms9
Enrolled Prior
to Graduation
Years Since
Initial En¬
rollment
Number of
Graduates
Percent of
Class
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
1. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Criminal Jus¬
tice; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 3.18)
16
4.00
2C
21
2. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Psychology;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.78); also
awarded a Specialist
in Education degree
(Major: Student Per¬
sonnel in Higher Edu¬
cation; Cumulative
Grade Point Average =
3.59)
17
4.25
1
24
1. Bachelor of Science in
Recreation (Major:
Recreation; Cumulative
Grade Point Average =
2.54)
155

TABLE 24 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms3
Enrolled Prior
to Graduation
Years Since
Initial En¬
rollment
Number of
Graduates
Percent of
Class
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
18
4.50
1
28
1. Bachelor of Science in
Business Administra¬
tion (Major: Finance;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.35)
1. Bachelor of Science in
Pharmacy (Major:
Pharmacy; Cumulative
Grade Point Average =
2.68); Currently in
last year of Medical
School at the Univers¬
ity of Florida; Anti¬
cipated Date of
Graduation is June,
1984
Bachelor of Science in
Broadcasting (Major:
Broadcasting; Cumula¬
tive Grade Point Aver¬
age = 2.43);
19
4.75
3
40
2
156

TABLE 24 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms3
Years Since
Percent of
Enrolled Prior
Initial En-
Number of
Class
to Graduation
rollment
Graduates
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
Commissioned a Second
Lieutenant in the
United States Army
3. Bachelor of Science in
Broadcasting (Major:
Broadcasting; Cumula¬
tive Grade Point Aver¬
age = 2.11)
20
5.00 3 48
1. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Sociology;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.05)
2. Bachelor of Music Edu¬
cation (Major: Music
Education; Cumulative
Grade Point Average =
2.14)
157

TABLE 24 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms
Enrolled Prior
to Graduation
Years Since
Initial En- Number of
rollment Graduates
Percent of
Class
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
3. Bachelor of Science in
Business Administra¬
tion (Major: Market¬
ing; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.05)
1. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Sociology;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.40); also
21 5.25 1 52 awarded Specialist in
Education (Major:
Student Personnel in
Higher Education; Cum¬
ulative Grade Point
Average = 3.38)
23
1. Bachelor of Arts
5.75 1 55 (Major: History; Cum¬
ulative Grade Point
Average = 2.00)
158

TABLE 24 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms
Enrolled Prior
to Graduation
Years Since
Initial En¬
rollment
Number of
Graduates
Percent of
Class
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
25
6.25
1
57
1. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Psychology;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.21)
28
7.00
2
66
1. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Sociology;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.21)
2. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Political
Science; Cumulative
Grade Point Average =
2.10)
aTerm refers to the quarter system, which represents 11 weeks of lecture and 2
or more hours per week of laboratory.
^Subjects graduated in less than four years without a break in their enrollment,
c .
Subjects graduated in four years.
159

TABLE 25. ANALYSIS OF THE NUMBER OF TERMS FROM INITIAL ENROLLMENT TO GRADUATION
FOR RANDOMLY SELECTED BLACK STUDENTS IN THE SPECIAL SERVICES PROGRAM
AND THE TYPE OF DEGREE BY THE CLASS WHICH ENROLLED IN 1975
Number of Terms3
Enrolled Prior
to Graduation
Years Since
Initial En- Number of
rollment Graduates
Percent of
Class
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
16
4.00
3
13
1. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Political
Science; Cumulative
Grade Point Average =
2.47)
2. Bachelor of Science in
Advertising (Major:
Advertising; Cumula¬
tive Grade Point
Average = 2.36)
3. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Economics;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.54)
1. Bachelor of Science in
Business Administra¬
tion (Major: Market¬
ing; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.61)
160

TABLE 25 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms3
Enrolled Prior
to Graduation
Years Since
Initial En¬
rollment
Percent of
Number of Class
Graduates Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
17 4.25 2 21 2. Bachelor of Science in
Broadcasting (Major:
Broadcasting; Cumula¬
tive Grade Point
Average = 2.88)
18
1. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Sociology;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.21)
4.50 2 29 2. Bachelor of Science in
Advertising (Major:
Advertising; Cumula¬
tive Grade Point Aver¬
age = 2.18)
1. Bachelor of Science in
Journalism (Major:
Public Relations; Cum¬
ulative Grade Point
Average = 2.28)
161

TABLE 25 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms
Enrolled Prior
to Graduation
Years Since
Initial En¬
rollment
Number of
Graduates
Percent of
Class
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
23
5.75
2
38
2. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Political
Science; Cumulative
Grade Point Average =
2.40)
28
7.33
1
42
1. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Sociology;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.07)
31
8.00
1
46
1. Bachelor of Science in
Broadcasting (Major:
Broadcasting; Cumula¬
tive Grade Point Aver¬
age - 2.11)
Term refers to the quarter system; as of August, 1981, the University of
Florida changed its calendar to the semester system, which represents 16 weeks of
instruction. The Summer Semester has two six-week sessions. The 26th term is the
beginning of the semester system for this group of students.
162

TABLE 26. ANALYSIS OF THE NUMBER OF TERMS FROM INITIAL ENROLLMENT TO GRADUATION
FOR RANDOMLY SELECTED BLACK STUDENTS IN THE SPECIAL SERVICES PROGRAM
AND THE TYPE OF DEGREE BY THE CLASS WHICH ENROLLED IN 1976
Number of Terms3 Years Since Percent of
Enrolled Prior Initial En- Number of Class
to Graduation rollment
Graduates Graduating Type of Degree Earned
12 3.00
1. Bachelor of Arts in
Education, with Honors
(Major: Special Edu¬
cation; Cumulative
Grade Point Average =
1 3 3.26); also received
Master of Education
(Major: Specific
Learning Disabilities;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 3.53)
14 3.50
1. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: English; Cum¬
ulative Grade Point
Average = 2.98)
2 9 2. Bachelor of Science in
Broadcasting (Major:
Broadcasting; Cumula¬
tive Grade Point Aver¬
age = 2.65)
163

TABLE 26 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms9
Enrolled Prior
to Graduation
Years Since
Initial En¬
rollment
Number of
Graduates
Percent o f
Class
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
15
3.75
1
12
1. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Political
Science; Cumulative
Grade Point Average =
3.42)
1. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Speech; Cumu¬
lative Grade Point
Average = 2.43)
2. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Sociology;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.33)
Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Speech; Cumu¬
lative Grade Point
Average = 2.60)
3
164

TABLE 26 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms3
Enrolled Prior
to Graduation
Years Since
Initial En¬
rollment
Number of
Graduates
Percent of
Class
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
16
4.00
6
29
4. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Sociology;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.24)
5. Bachelor of Science in
Business Administra¬
tion (Major: Market¬
ing; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.14)
6. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Psychology;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.88)
1. Bachelor of Science in
Business Administra¬
tion (Major: Market¬
ing; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.85)
165

TABLE 26 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms3
Years Since
Percent of
Enrolled Prior
Initial En-
Number of
Class
to Graduation
rollment
Graduates
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
2.
Bachelor of Science in
Business Administra¬
tion (Major: Manage¬
ment; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.42)
17
4.25
4
41
3 .
Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Political
Science; Cumulative
Grade Point Average =
3.32); also received
Juris Doctor degree
May 7, 1983
4.
Bachelor of Arts
(Major: History;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.45)
166

TABLE 26 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms3
Years Since
Percent of
Enrolled Prior
Initial En-
Number of
Class
to Graduation
rollment
Graduates
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
1.
Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Criminal Jus¬
tice; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.43);
also received Master
of Arts (Major:
Political Science;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 3.27)
18
4.50
3
50
2.
Bachelor of Arts in
Education (Major:
Special Education;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 3.04)
3.
Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Psychology;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.65)
167

TABLE 26 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms3
Enrolled Prior
to Graduation
Years Since
Initial En¬
rollment
Number of
Graduates
Percent of
Class
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
19
4.75
1
56
1. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Psychology;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.76)
20
5.00
1
56
1. Bachelor of Science in
Physical Education
(Major: Physical Edu¬
cation; Cumulative
Grade Point Average =
2.94)
1. Bachelor of Science in
Health Education
(Major: Health Educa¬
tion; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.53)
168

TABLE 26 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms3
Enrolled Prior
to Graduation
Years Since
Initial En¬
rollment
Number of
Graduates
Percent of
Class
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
•
21
5.33
2
62
2. Bachelor of Science in
Business Administra¬
tion (Major: Market¬
ing; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.00)
1. Bachelor of Science in
Broadcasting (Major:
Broadcasting; Cumula¬
tive Grade Point Aver¬
age = 2.38)
22
5.66
3
71
2. Bachelor of Science in
Business Administra¬
tion (Major: Market¬
ing; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.15)
3. Bachelor of Science in
Chemical Engineering
(Major: Chemical
Engineering; Cumula¬
tive Grade Point Aver¬
age = 2.51)

TABLE 26 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms3
Enrolled Prior
to Graduation
Years Since
Initial En¬
rollment
Number of
Graduates
Percent of
Cla ss
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
24
6.33
1
74
1. Bachelor of Arts in
Education (Major:
Special Education;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.70)
26
7.00
1
76
1. Bachelor of Science in
Industrial and Systems
Engineering (Major:
Industrial and Systems
Engineering; Cumula¬
tive Grade Point Aver¬
age = 2.38)
Term refers to the quarter system for terms 1 through 21, which represents 11
weeks of lecture and 2 or more hours per week of laboratory. Beginning with term 22,
the University of Florida converted to the semester system. A semester consists of
sixteen weeks of instruction, with a summer session consisting of two six-week
sessions and one overall twelve-week summer session (known as Summer A, Summer B, and
Summer C terms).
170

TA BLE 27. ANALYSIS OF THE NUMBER OF TERMS FROM INITIAL ENROLLMENT TO GRADUATION
FOR RANDOMLY SELECTED BLACK STUDENTS IN THE SPECIAL SERVICES PROGRAM
AND THE TYPE OF DEGREE BY TIIE CLASS WHICH ENROLLED IN 1977.
Number of Terms'1
Enrolled Prior
to Graduation
Years Since
Initial En¬
rollment
Number of
Graduates
Percent of
Class
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
14
3.50
1
4
1. Bachelor of Arts in
Education (Major:
Special Education;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.89)
1. Bachelor of Science in
Journalism (Major:
Public Relations; Cum¬
ulative Grade Point
Average = 2.63)
15
3.75
2
13
2. Bachelor Arts in
Education (Major:
Special Education;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.77)
1. Bachelor of Science in
Health Education
(Major: Health Educa¬
tion; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.82)
171

TABLE 27 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms3
Enrolled Prior
to Graduation
Years Since
Initial En¬
rollment
Number of
Graduates
Percent of
Class
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
16
4.00
3
25
2. Bachelor of Science in
Advertising (Major:
Advertising; Cumula¬
tive Grade Point Aver¬
age = 2.94; also
commissioned into the
United States Army as
as a Second Lieutenant
3. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Psychology;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.86)
1. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Criminal Jus¬
tice; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 3.15)
18
4.66
1
29

TABLE 27 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms9
Enrolled Prior
to Graduation
Years Since
Initial En¬
rollment
Number of
Graduates
Percent of
Class
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
1. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Psychology;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.05)
19
5.00
2
38
2. Bachelor of Science in
Nursing (Major: Nurs¬
ing; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.92)
1. Bachelor of Science in
Health Education
20 5.33 1 42 (Majors Health Educa¬
tion; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.65)
1. Bachelor of Science in
Recreation (Major:
21 5.66 1 46 Recreation; Cumulative
Grade Point Average =
2.10)
173

TABLE 27 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms3
Enrolled Prior
to Graduation
Years Since
Initial En¬
rollment
Number of
Graduates
Percent of
Class
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
1. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Speech; Cumu¬
lative Grade Point
Average = 2.35)
22
6.00
2
54
2. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Criminal Jus¬
tice; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.09) ;
also commissioned into
the United States Army
as a Second Lieutenant
g
Term refers to the quarter system; as of August, 1981, the University of
Florida changed its calendar to the semester system, which represents 16 weeks of
instruction. The Summer Semester has two six-week sessions. The 18th term is the
beginning of the semester system for this group of students.
174

TABLE 28. ANALYSIS OF THE NUMBER OF TERMS FROM INITIAL ENROLLMENT TO GRADUATION
FOR RANDOMLY SELECTED BLACK STUDENTS IN THE SPECIAL SERVICES PROGRAM
AND THE TYPE OF DEGREE BY THE CLASS WHICH ENROLLED IN 1978
Number of Terms3
Years Since
Percent of
Enrolled Prior
Initial En-
Number of
Class
to Graduation
rollment
Graduates
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
1
. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Psychology;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.47)
2
. Bachelor of Arts in
Education, with High
Honors (Major: Spe-
14
3.50
3
8
cial Education; Cumu¬
lative Grade Point
Average = 3.58)
3
. Bachelor of Science in
Recreation (Major:
Recreation; Cumulative
Grade Point Average =
2.40)
175

TABLE 28 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms3
Enrolled Prior
to Graduation
Years Since
Initial En¬
rollment
15
4.00
Number of
Graduates
Percent of
Class
Graduating Type of Degree Earned
21
1. Bachelor of Science in
Business Administra¬
tion (Major: Market¬
ing; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.74)
2. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Political
Science; Cumulative
Grade Point Average =
2.67)
3. Bachelor of Science in
Business Administra¬
tion (Major: Finance;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.73)
Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Speech; Cumu¬
lative Grade Point
Average = 2.74)
4
176

TABLE 28 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms3
Years Since
Percent of
Enrolled Prior
Initial En-
Number of
Cla ss
to Graduation
rollment
Graduates
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
5. Bachelor of Arts in
Education (Major:
Special Education;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 3.06)
16
4.33
3
28
1. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Speech; Cumu¬
lative Grade Point
Average = 2.53)
2. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Criminal Jus¬
tice; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.01)
3. Bachelor of Science in
Business Administra¬
tion (Major: Manage¬
ment; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.49)
177

TABLE 28 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms3
Years Since
Percent of
Enrolled Prior
Initial En-
Number of
Class
to Graduation
rol Intent
Graduates
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
17
4.66 4 38
1. Bachelor of Science in
Health Education
(Major: Health Educa¬
tion; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.55)
2. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Political
Science; Cumulative
Grade Point Average =
2.27)
3. Bachelor of Science in
Electrical Engineering
(Major: Electrical
Engineering; Cumula¬
tive Grade Point Aver¬
age = 2.63)
4. Bachelor of Arts
(Major: Sociology;
Cumulative Grade Point
Average = 2.26)
178

TABLE 28 (CONTINUED)
Q
Number of Terms
Enrolled Prior
to Graduation
Years Since
Initial En¬
rollment
Number of
Graduates
18
5.00
4
Percent of
Class
Graduating Type of Degree Earned
49
1. Bachelor of Science in
Business Administra¬
tion (Major: Market¬
ing; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.62)
2. Bachelor of Science in
Electrical Engineering
(Major: Electrical
Engineering; Cumula¬
tive Grade Point Aver¬
age = 3.24)
3. Bachelor of Science in
Health Education
(Major: Health Educa¬
tion; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.24)
179

TABLE 28 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms3
Years Since
Percent of
Enrolled Prior
Initial En-
Number of
Cla ss
to Graduation
roIlment
Graduates
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
4. Bachelor of Science in
Agriculture (Major:
Microbiology and Cell
Science; Cumulative
Grade Point Average =
2.43)
1. Bachelor of Science in
Recreation (Major:
Recreation; Cumulative
Grade Point Average =
2.33)
2. Bachelor of Science in
Business Administra¬
tion (Major: Market¬
ing; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.01)
180

TABLE 28 (CONTINUED)
Number of Terms3
Enrolled Prior
to Graduation
Years Since
Initial En¬
rollment
Number of
Graduates
Percent of
Class
Graduating
Type of Degree Earned
19
5.33
4
59
3. Bachelor of Science in
Recreation (Major:
Recreation; Cumulative
Grade Point Average =
2.16 )
4. Bachelor of Science in
Business Administra¬
tion (Major: Manage¬
ment; Cumulative Grade
Point Average = 2.01)
Term refers to the quarter system; as of August, 1981, the University of
Florida changed its calendar to the semester system, which represents 16 weeks of
instruction. The Summer Semester has two six-week sessions. The 14th term is the
beginning of the semester system for this group of students.
181

TABLE 29
TYPES OF DEGREES, MAJORS, AND NUMBER OF RECIPIENTS FROM
EACH ENTERING GROUP FOR THE YEARS 1974 THROUGH 1978
Degree/Major
1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 School/College
Bachelor of Science/
Advertising
Bachelor of Science/
Banking and Finance
Bachelor of Science/
Broadcasting
Bachelor of Arts/
Criminal Justice
Bachelor of Arts/
Economics
Bachelor of Science/
Chemical Engineering
Bachelor of Science/
Electrical Engineering
Bachelor of Science/
Industrial and Systems
Engineering
Bachelor of Arts/
English
Bachelor of Science/
Finance
Bachelor of Science/
Health Education
Bachelor of Arts/
History
Bachelor of Science/
Management
2 1
1
2 2 2
3 12 1
1
1
1
1 1
12 2
1 1
1 2
Journalism
Business Administration
Journalism
Liberal Arts & Sciences
Liberal Arts & Sciences
Engineering
Engineering
Engineering
Liberal Arts & Sciences
Business Administration
Physical Education,
Health and Recreation
Liberal Arts & Sciences
Business Administration
182

TABLE 29 (CONTINUED)
Degree/Major
1974 1975 1976
Bachelor of Science/
Marketing
Bachelor of Science/
Microbiology and
Cell Science
Bachelor of Music Edu¬
cation/Music Education
Bachelor of Science/
Nursing
Bachelor of Science/
Pharmacy
Bachelor of Science/
Physical Education
2 14
1
1
1
Bachelor of Arts/
Political Science
Bachelor of Arts/
Psychology
Bachelor of Science/
Public Relations
Bachelor of Science/
Recreation
12 2
2 3
1
1
1977 1978
School/College
3
Business Administration
1
Agriculture
Fine Arts
1
Nursing
Pharmacy
Physical Education,
Health and Recreation
2
Liberal Arts & Sciences
2 1
Liberal Arts & Sciences
1
Journalism
1 3
Physical Education,
Health and Recreation
183

TABLE 29 (CONTINUED)
Degree/Major
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
School/College
Bachelor of Arts/
Sociology
3
2
2
1
Liberal Arts
& Sciences
Bachelor of Arts in
Education/Specia1
Education
3
2
2
Education
Bachelor of Arts/
Speech
2
1
2
Liberal Arts
& Sciences
Total Degrees
19
11
26
13
23
184

TABLE 30
NUMBER OF RANDOMLY SELECTED SPECIAL SERVICES STUDENTS
WHO GRADUATED, BY YEAR OF INITIAL ENROLLMENT
Year of
Initial
Enrollment
Number of Randomly
Selected Students
From Each Year
Number of Graduates
Since Initial
Enrollment
Percent Graduated
(Through August,
1983)
1974
29
19
66
1975
24
11
46
1976
34
26
76
1977
24
13
54
1978
39
23
59
FIVE-YEAR TOTALS
150
92
61
185

TABLE 31
NUMBER OF RANDOMLY SELECTED SPECIAL SERVICES STUDENTS,
BY LENGTH OF TIME REQUIRED TO GRADUATE
Length of Time
to Graduate
(in Years)
Total Number
of Students
in the Study
Number of
Graduates
Graduation Rate
(Percent)
3.00-3.75
150
14
9.3
4.00-4.75
150
44
29.3
5.00-5.75
150
25
16.6
6.00-6.75
150
4
2.6
7.00-7.75
150
4
2.6
8.00-
150
1
0.6
TOTALS
150
92
61.0
186

187
Research Question #5
What influence does the peer counselor component
have on the academic performance of Black stu¬
dents in the Special Services Program at the
University of Florida?
In the Special Services Program, peer counselors
function as extensions of the full-time counseling staff.
For the staff, they provide feedback from the students who
are assigned to them. Peer counselors are expected to make
weekly contacts with their assigned case load of 10 to 15
students, and to report their findings to the staff
counselor.
Items 17, 18, 19, 21, and 26a of the Questionnaire
Evaluating Special Services Programs (QESSP) were analyzed
for data pertaining to the influences of the peer counselors
on the academic performances of randomly selected Special
Services students. An analysis of the data from the QESSP
pertaining to peer counselors is presented both for the
graduates and nongraduates of the Special Services Program.
The researcher presents an analysis of the responses to
questions about peer counselor effectiveness for the gradu¬
ates first, followed by the analysis of the nongraduates'
responses.

188
Analysis of the Peer Counselors' Effective¬
ness as Perceived by Randomly Selected
Graduates of the Special Services Program
"How would you describe the effect of your peer coun¬
selor in contributing to your academic performance?" was the
question asked in Item 17 on the QESSP. Twenty-five (83
percent) of the graduates responded that the contributions
of their peer counselors to their academic performance were
effective to extremely effective. However, 4 (14 percent)
of the graduates responded negatively and rated their peer
counselors' contributions to their academic performance as
not effective. One graduate (3 percent) described the peer
counselor as extremely ineffective. Overall, 83 percent of
the students described their peer counselor as effective,
while 17 percent reported that they were ineffective in
contributing to their academic performance.
The frequency of the peer counselors' contact with the
students was solicited by Item 18. The data indicated that
26.7 percent of the graduates were contacted weekly by their
peer counselors; 40 percent, twice a week; 13.3 percent,
monthly; and 20 percent reported that they were seldom con¬
tacted by their peer counselors. Overall, 67 percent of the
students were in communication with their peer counselors
once or twice a week.

189
"How would you describe the overall effectiveness of
the peer counselor?" was asked on Item 19. The graduates
described the overall effectiveness of their peer counselors
in providing them with helpful experiences to make the tran¬
sition from high school as: extremely effective, 16.7 per-
f
cent; very effective, 20 percent; effective, 43.3 percent;
not effective, 16.7 percent; and 3.3 percent described the
peer counselor as extremely ineffective.
The students rated the peer counselors in Item 21 on
the effectiveness of their counseling on personal, academic
and social concerns. They were also rated on financial aid
counseling.
Personal Concerns
Item 21 of the QESSP indicates that 56.6 percent of the
graduates received counseling from peer counselors on their
personal concerns. Seven graduates (41.2 percent) rated
their peer counselor as extremely effective in this area; 3
graduates (17.6 percent) rated them very effective; 6 gradu¬
ates (35.3 percent) thought that they were effective; and 1
graduate (5.9 percent) rated them as not effective.
Academic Concerns
Twenty-six of 30 graduates indicated that they had re¬
ceived counseling from peer counselors about academic con¬
cerns. Of these 26, 13 (50 percent) reported that the peer
counselors were extremely effective in this area; 5 (19.2

190
percent), very effective; and 7 (26.9 percent), effective.
One graduate (3.8 percent) felt that the peer counselor was
not effective in counseling on academic concerns.
Social Concerns
Sixteen of 30 graduates reported that they had received
help from peer counselors in social concerns. Specifically,
6 graduates (37.5 percent) thought that this counseling was
extremely effective; 4 (25 percent), very effective; 4 (25
percent), effective; and 2 (12.5 percent), not effective.
Financial Aid
Twenty-four of 30 graduates reported that they had re¬
ceived counseling from the peer counselors on financial aid
matters. Only positive comments were made. An extremely
effective rating was given by 12 (50 percent) of the gradu¬
ates; a very effective rating was given by 8 (33.3 percent)
of the graduates; and 4 (16.7 percent) rated this area as
effective. Only 4 negative responses were made about the
peer counselors' effectiveness in counseling concerning
personal, academic, social and financial aid matters. Item
21 on the QESSP indicates that, in general, the graduates
felt that their peer counselors performed effectively in
providing them personal, academic, social and financial aid
counseling.

191
Tutoring
According to Item 26a, 11 of 30 graduates received
tutoring assistance from the peer counselors. Four of the
11 students (36.4 percent) rated the peer counselors in this
area as extremely effective; 3 (27.2 percent), very effec¬
tive; and 4 (36.4 percent) as effective.
Summary
The majority of the graduates indicated that they per¬
ceived the peer counselors as effective providers of coun¬
seling services. Peer counselors, as tutors, were rated
extremely effective to effective, even though they were only
used by less than one-half of the students.
Analysis of Peer Counselors' Effective¬
ness as Perceived by Randomly Selected
Nongraduates of the Special Services
Program
Item 17 asked the students to describe the effects of
their peer counselor on their academic performance. In
describing the peer counselors' contributions to their
academic performance, 23 of the 30 nongraduates were posi¬
tive in their comments. Specifically, 7 students (23.3
percent) said that the peer counselors were extremely
effective; 7 (23.3 percent) indicated very effective; and 9
(30 percent) reported them as effective. On the other hand,
7 (23.3 percent) of the nongraduates were negative in rating

192
their peer counselors in this area. Three (10 percent) in¬
dicated that their peer counselors were not effective, while
4 (13.3 percent) rated their, as extremely ineffective. Over¬
all, 77 percent of these students saw their peer counselors
as having contributed effectively to their academic perform¬
ance. However, 23 percent held a contrary point of view.
In the analysis of Item 18, which solicited data on
peer counselor contacts, the data show that most nongradu¬
ates were contacted weekly by their peer counselors. One
student (3 percent) indicated that the peer counselor made
daily contacts; 14 (47 percent) weekly; 6 (20 percent) twice
a week; 3 (10 percent) monthly; and 6 (20 percent) very
seldom. Overall, 70 percent of these students were con¬
tacted by their peer counselors once a week, twice a week,
or daily.
The students were asked in Item 19 to describe the
overall effectiveness of their peer counselors. The data
analysed from Item 19 reveal that the peer counselors were
considered effective by the large majority of these stu¬
dents. However, some described their peer counselors as
ineffective. Specifically, 5 students (17 percent) de¬
scribed their peer counselors as extremely effective in this
area; 9 (30 percent) as very effective; and 9 (30 percent)
as effective. Six nongraduates (20 percent) indicated that

193
their peer counselors were not effective and 1 (3 percent)
rated the peer counselor as extremely ineffective.
When these students were asked in Item 21 to rate their
peer counselor's effectiveness in dealing with personal,
academic and social concerns, along with financial aid
counseling, the data reveal the following:
Personal Concerns
The data indicate that 10 of the nongraduating students
received personal counseling from the peer counselors and 17
did not. Those students who received counseling related to
uheir personal concerns, 30 percent, said that it was ex¬
tremely effective; 50 percent said it was very effective,
and 20 percent said it was effective.
Academic Concerns
Peer counseling on academic concerns was reported on by
22 of the nongraduating students. Three (14 percent) stated
that assistance in this area was extremely effective; 10 (45
percent) very effective; 7 (32 percent) effective; and 2 (9
percent) not effective.
Social Concerns
A total of 13 students received help in the area of
social concerns by peer counselors. Four (31 percent)
reported that their peer counselors were extremely effec¬
tive; 5 (38 percent) very effective; 3 (23 percent) effec¬
tive; 1 (8 percent) not effective.

194
Financial Aid
It appears from Item 21 that peer counselors provided
20 nongraduates with assistance regarding financial aid
matters. Nineteen of these students thought that their peer
counselors were effective, while 1 thought that they were
not effective.
Only 4 nongraduating students indicated that their peer
counselors were not effective in helping them on academic,
social or financial aid matters. Overall, those students
who utilized the services of the peer counselors clearly
indicated positive reactions to the peer counselors who
assisted them in personal, academic, social and financial
matters.
Tutoring
The analysis of Item 26a on the QESSP indicates that
the peer counselors are effective tutors. One student (9
percent) rated the peer counselor as an extremely effective
tutor; 7 (64 percent) rated them as very effective; and 3
(27 percent) said that the peer counselors were effective.
Summary
The analysis of Items 17, 18, 19, 21, and 26a reveals
that the nongraduating students also perceived the peer
counselors as effective providers of counseling and tutoring
services. Their ratings of the peer counselors were not as

195
high as those reported by the graduates and they did not
utilize the services of the peer counselors as often as the
graduates.

196
Research Question #6
What is the economic status of Black stu¬
dents who participated in the Special
Services Program at the University of
Florida?
In analyzing the transcripts of randomly selected Black
students who participated in the Special Services Program
from 1974 to 1978, the researcher found that approximately
18 (19 percent) graduated each year. A question which needs
to be raised and answered is whether or not the Special
Services Program is worth what it is costing the Federal
Government and the University of Florida.
The analysis of responses to Item 8 on the QESSP
concerning the type of work and title of the job held
revealed that 83.3 percent of the graduates are employed
full-time, 3.3 percent are employed part-time, and 13.3
percent are not employed. The 13.3 percent (4 students) who
are unemployed are students at the University of Florida.
The type of work and title of the job identified by the
graduates who are working are listed in Table 32.
The nongraduates' responses to Item 8 indicated that 60
percent of the students are employed full-time, 10 percent
are employed part-time and 30 percent are not employed. The
type of work and title of the jobs identified by the non¬
graduates are shown in Table 33. The data solicited by Item

197
9 of the QESSP were used in the analysis to determine the
potential earning power of the students and the economic
value of the Special Services Program.
To assess the economic value of the Program to the
Federal Government and the University of Florida, and to
determine the economic status of the randomly selected
students who participated in it, a computer analysis was
conducted. This analysis was accomplished by using a
computer program called the Program Impact Assessment System
that was designed and developed by Dr. John Nickens at the
University of Florida.
The analysis shows that the present value of each
graduate in the first year of employment following
graduation in the first year of employment following
graduation was $13,546.00, while the average nongraduate's
income during the first year after leaving the University of
Florida was $10,383.00. The present value indicates the
potential earnings of former Special Services students.
Assessment of the economic value of the Special Services
Program shows that the present yearly value of the Program
is $406,380.00, if the students graduated, and $311,490.00,
if they did not graduate. These present values of the
Special Services Program were obtained by multiplying the
first-year present value of each group, graduates and
nongraduates, by the number in the groups.

198
TABLE 32. THE TYPE OF WORK AND JOB TITLES OF POSITIONS
HELD BY GRADUATES OF THE SPECIAL SERVICES PRO¬
GRAM AFTER GRADUATION
Type of Work
Job Title
1.
Postal Clerk
U.S. Postal Service Clerk
2.
Counseling (3)
Behavioral Specialist;
Treatment and Rehabilita-
tive Specialist; Unit
Treatment Specialist
3.
U.S. Ariry Officer (2)
Lieutena nt
4.
Auditing
Staff Auditor
5.
College Admissions
Administrative Assistant
6.
Insurance (2)
Agency Manager; Salesman
7.
Layout Artist
Proofreader
8.
Therapy
Rehabilitation Therapist
9.
Law
Lawyer
10.
Law Enforcement
Police Officer
11.
Marketing
Systems Design Consultant
12.
Teaching (6)
Full-time Teacher (5);
Part-time Teacher (1)
13.
Retailing
Sales Manager
14.
Human Services
Residential Service
Worker
15.
Health Services
Health Service Represen¬
tative II
16.
Engineering (2)
Engineer

199
TABLE 33. THE TYPE OF WORK AND JOB TITLES OF POSITIONS
HELD BY NONGRADUATES OF THE SPECIAL SERVICES
PROGRAM.
Type of Work
Job Title
1. Electrical Drafting (2)
Drafter
2. Fast Food Restaurant (2)
Manager; Assistant
Manager
3. Parcel Delivery (U.P.S.)
Driver
4. Sales
Retail Sales Clerk;
Area Supervisor; Clerk
5. Engineering
Engineer Assistant
6. Postman
U.S. Post Office Carrier
7. U.S. Army
Helicopter Pilot/OH 58
8. Internal Revenue
Internal Revenue Officer
9. Corrections (2)
Correctional Officer I;
Rehabilitation and Treat¬
ment Supervisor
10. Teaching
Substitute Teacher
11. Child Care
Child Care Worker I
12. Janitorial
Janitor
13. Data Processing (2)
Computer Programmer;
Clerk
14. Food and Beverages
Supervisor
15. Business
Financial Business
Consultant
16. Restaurant
Waitress
16

The analysis also shows that the graduates and non¬
graduates have the potential of spending $15,190.00 and
$9,732.00, respectively, during the first year of their
employment. The potential spending power of these two
groups was determined by an impact multiplier in the com¬
puter program and other considerations, such as inflation,
age, earnings and interest rates.
The researcher found that the Special Services
Program's impact on society is valued at $455,700.00 during
the first year of the graduated students' employment. The
Program is valued at $291,960.00 for the nongraduated stu¬
dents during the first year of their employment. The
Program's impact was determined by multiplying the potential
spending power of the groups by the number in each group.
Procedure for Making Analysis of
Special Services Program's Value
The present value of the randomly selected Special
Services graduates and nongraduates was computed by adjust¬
ing each year's earnings to the present value. For example,
the average yearly salary for the graduates was $15,308.00
in 1982. Using a discount rate of .13, the present value of
the $15,308.00 was determined to be $13,546.00. The dis¬
count rate was multiplied by the current value and the pro¬
duct was then subtracted from the current value to arrive at

201
the present value of the salary. The present value for the
nongraduates' salary was computed in the same manner, using
the same discount rate. Present value indicates potential
earnings and current values indicates actual earnings.
The 1982 yearly incomes reported by the graduates
reveals that 3 (11.5 percent) were earning less than
$6,000.00; 3 (11.5 percent), $9,000.00-$11,999.00? 10 (38.4
percent), $12,000.00-$14,000.00; 2 (7.4 percent),
$15,000.00-$17,999.00; 2 (7.4 percent), $18,000.00-
$20,999.00; 3 (11.5 percent), earning $21,000.00-$23,999.00;
1 (3.8 percent), $24,000.00-$26,000.00; and 2 (7.4 percent),
earning more than $27,000.00 per year.
TABLE 33. THE 1982 YEARLY INCOMES REPORTED
BY RANDOMLY SELECTED GRADUATES
Income Range
Number of Graduates in Range
Less than
$6,000
3
$6,000 -
$8,999
0
$9,000 -
$11,999
3
$12,000 -
$14,999
10
$15,000 -
$17,999
2
$18,000 -
$20,999
2
$21,000 -
$23,999
3
$24,000 -
$26,999
1
More than
$27,000
2
TOTAL
26

20 2
The average yearly salary was used in the analysis.
This was determined by computing the mid-range salary and
multiplying it by the number of salaries reported in that
range, which resulted in the weighted salary for that range.
The weighted salaries were added and divided by the total
reported salaries, which resulted in the average yearly
salary for the graduates. The same procedure was used to
determine the average yearly salary for the nongraduates.
TABLE 34. THE WEIGHTED AVERAGE YEARLY SALARIES
FOR RANDOMLY SELECTED GRADUATES
Salary
Mid-Range
Multiplied by Number
in Range
=
Weighted
Salary
$ 4,500
X
3
_
$ 13,500
7,500
X
0
—
10,500
X
3
=
31,500
13,500
X
10
=
135,000
16,500
X
2
=
33,000
19,500
X
2
=
39,000
22,500
X
3
=
67,500
25,500
X
1
=
25,500
26,500
X
2
=
53,000
TOTALS
26a
$398,000
aFour students who were enrolled at the University of
Florida did not report their yearly incomes.

The following formula was used to obtain the average yearly
salary of the randomly selected graduates:
or
Total Weighted Salaries
N
= Average Yearly Salary
$398,000
26
$15,308.
The 1982 yearly incomes reported by the nongraduates
revealed that 11 (36.6 percent) were earning less than
$6,000.00; 3 (10 percent), $6,000.00-$8,999.00; 4 (13.3
percent), $9,000.00-$ll,999.00; 1 (3.3 percent), $12,000.00-
$14,999.00; 5 (16.6 percent), $15,000.00-$17,999.00; 4 (13.3
percent), $21,000.00-$23,999.00 ; 1 (3.3 percent),
$24,000.00-$26,999.00; and 1 (3.3 percent), more than
$27,000.00. These earnings are shown in Table 35. Weighted
average yearly salaries are described in Table 36.

TABLE 35
THE 1982 YEARLY INCOMES REPORTED BY
RANDOMLY SELECTED NONGRADUATES
Income Range
Number of Graduates in Range
Less than $6,000
11
$6,000 - $8,999
3
$9,000 - $11,999
4
$12,000 - $14,999
1
$15,000 - $17,999
5
$18,000 - $20,999
0
$21,000 - $23,999
4
$24,000 - $26,999
1
More than $27,000
1
TOTAL
30
TABLE
36. THE WEIGHTED AVERAGE YEARLY SALARIES
FOR RANDOMLY SELECTED NONGRADUATES
Salary
Mid-Range
Multiplied by Number in Range
Weighted
= Salary
$ 4,500
X
11
-
$ 49,500
7,500
X
3
=
22,500
10,500
X
4
=
42,000
13,500
X
1
=
13,500
16,500
X
5
=
82,500
19,500
X
0
=
22,500
X
4
=
90,0 00
25,500
X
1
=
25,500
26,500
X
1
=
26,500
TOTALS
20
$352,000

The following formula was used to obtain the average
yearly salary of the randomly selected nongraduates:
Total Weighted Salaries
N
Average Yearly Salary
or
$352,000
30
= $11,733.
The students' potential earnings are the sum of the
adjusted earnings for each year. The sum of the adjusted
earnings was determined using a computer with input data,
such as the impact multiplier, the inflation rate and the
present rate of interest.
Student data needed for the computer analysis were the
number of graduates per year, their average beginning sal¬
ary, their average salary before entering the University of
Florida, the average maximum salary of the students and the
average age of the students at graduation. Other data
needed that were obtained from the literature or resource
agencies included the average age of retirement, the impact
multiplier, the inflation rate, the survivor rate to retire¬
ment age, the productivity factor, and the present value of
discount (interest). These data are presented in Table 37.

2C6
TABLE 37. STUDENT DATA FOR COMPUTER ANALYSIS.
Special Services
Graduates
Nongraduates
Completers per year
Average beginning yearly
17
30
salary (in dollars)
Average salary before
training (in dollars)
(estimated based on minimum
15,307
11,733
wages)
Average maximum salary
for occupation (in
5,360
5,360
dollars)
26,500
23,666
Average age of completers
Average age of retirement
23
23
for occupation
65
65
Impact multiplier
1.95
1.95
Inflation rate
Survivor rate to retire-
.04
.04
ment age
.80
.80
Age productivity factor
Rate of present value
.02
. 02
discount
.13
.13
Summary
The analysis of the data shows that the randomly
selected graduates earned more than the randomly selected
nongraduates. However, there were 6 (20 percent) of the
nongraduates who reported salaries ranging from $21,000.00
to more than $27,000.00 yearly; 6 (23 percent) of the gradu¬
ates also reported salaries in that range. Of the nongradu¬
ates, 11 (37 percent) reported their earnings as less than
$6,000.00 yearly, while only 3 (11 percent) of the graduates
placed themselves in that range.

The economic value of the Program was determined to be
$682,660.00. This figure represents the potential spending
power of the two groups during their first year of employ¬
ment, $747,660.00, minus $65,000.00 per year, the average
cost of operating the Program. The Program's students
represent a positive effect to the economy whereby these
students are contributing to it by being employed and paying
taxes rather than taking from it as recipients of State and
Federal aid.

CHAPTER V
DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The purpose of this study was to determine the rela¬
tionship between a Special Services Program and Black stu¬
dents' retention, grade point averages, graduation and
economic success. Relevant data were obtained by two
methods: first a detailed review of the academic records of
150 of the students selected on a random basis who were en¬
rolled in the Special Services Program at the University of
Florida during the five-year period between 1974 and 1978.
The second method was a study of student reactions to
major elements of the Program, gathered by means of the
Questionnaire Evaluating Special Services Programs (QESSP)
developed by the researcher. Sixty students were selected
on a random basis from 750 students who were enrolled during
the five years between the Summer of 1974 and the Summer of
1978 at the University of Florida. Thus, subjects of this
study included a total of 210 students. Data were analyzed
on a manual basis by the researcher.
This chapter consists of four sections. The first
section includes a discussion of the data used to obtain

answers to the research questions listed in Chapter I. The
second section presents the conclusions reached on the
basis of the data reported in Chapter IV. The third re¬
views the implications suggested by the data; and the fourth
makes recommendations for improvements of Special Services
Programs and for further research.
Discussion
The findings of this study are discussed according to
the six research questions upon which it was based.
Academic Services and Activities
The basic philosophical assumption for the creation of
Special Services Programs is that Black students and other
minorities with educational deficiencies can benefit from
special academic assistance. The results of this study
indicate that Special Services students do profit from such
educational aids as counseling, tutoring and specialized
instruction. This result supports the findings of Davis,
Burkheimer, and Borders-Patterson (1975) who also studied
Special Services Programs.
However, this researcher found that a large number of
students did not utilize the services and activities of the
Program; further, that Special Services graduates used these
services and activities at a higher rate than did the non¬
graduates. Both graduates and nongraduates perceived these

210
services and activities as effective. At the same time,
graduates tended to be more positive in their evaluations.
Several points of special interest may be drawn from
the graduates' reactions to the services and activities
available to them.
1. Ninety percent attended the campus orientation
sessions and their ratings were positive.
2. These students were more likely to discuss per¬
sonal and social concerns with their peer
counselors than with the professional
counselors at the Special Services Office.
Even though the number of students discussing
rheir academic and financial aid concerns
with the professional counselor increased,
the peer counselors were still consulted
more than the professional counselor on
these matters.
3. The academic advisors did not receive as
many extremely effective ratings as did
the peer counselors or the professional
counselor for helping with the students'
academic concerns. The academic advisors
were not seen as effective as the peer
counselors.
4. The special teaching procedures of pre¬
senting special courses in small units
of instruction were helpful and rated
as effective by the students. Retaking
tests to improve their grades was rated
extremely effective by most of the
students. Courses taught by full-time
professors were preferred by the stu¬
dents and were rated higher than those
courses taught by graduate students.
5. The basic skills reading class was the
least attended of the nine special
classes designed for Special Services
students. It was also not rated as
high as the others.

211
6. Most of the tutoring received by the students was
obtained through the Learning Center (Teaching Cen¬
ter) . The peer counselors were active and effec¬
tive providers of tutorial services; about
one-half of the students utilized them in this
role.
7. Special activities such as the Financial Aid
workshop conducted by Financial Aid personnel, the
awards ceremony, and academic recognition assem¬
blies were attended by larger numbers of students
than was the case for sessions dealing with reduc¬
tion of test anxiety or coping with or adjusting
to the University of Florida.
8. When the students were referred to other support
services or helping agencies for help in dealing
with problems, they were more likely to go to the
Financial Aid Office or Student Services than to
the Counseling Center. There was a noticeable lack
of participation in the activities of the Counsel¬
ing Center.
9. The students expressed a favorable reaction to the
Special Services staff for their concerned, courte¬
ous, caring, genuine, warm and friendly attitudes.
The staff were regarded as positive role models,
helpful to the students.
The nongraduates' reactions to the services and activi¬
ties of the Program produced these special points:
1. Eighty-seven percent of the nongraduates attended
the campus orientation. They did not rate it
as high as did the graduates.
2. About half of these students utilized the ser¬
vices of the peer counselors and the profes¬
sional counselor for help with personal and
social concerns. These students utilized
counseling services more for help with aca¬
demic and financial aid concerns.

212
3. Academic advisors were seen by most of these
students, who rated advisor effectiveness
about the same as that of the peer and pro¬
fessional counselors.
4. Special teaching procedures, wherein instruc¬
tion was presented in small units, appeared
to be helpful. Retaking of tests to improve
grades was viewed as effective by most of
these students. However, they preferred to
be taught by full-time professors rather
than graduate assistants.
5. More students attended the English and Social
Sciences classes than any of the other seven
Special Services classes.
6. Most of these students received their tutor¬
ing through the Learning Center (Teaching
Center). The peer counselors were active
providers of tutoring for these students.
7. Special activities were not utilized by
almost half of these students. They did
not fully participate in sessions on coping
with and adjusting to the University of
Florida or the reduction of test anxiety.
8. When these students were referred to other
support services or agencies for help in
dealing with problems, they were more likely
to go to the Financial Aid Office or Student
Services than go to the Placement Center or
the Counseling Center. There was a notice¬
able lack of participation at the Placement
Center (Career Resources) and the Counseling
Center.

213
9. These students expressed a favorable reaction
towards the staff for having concerned,
courteous, caring, genuine, warm and friendly
attitudes. Many of these students did not view
the staff as being dynamic spokesmen for them
but they did view them as positive role models.
According to the data, 57.5 percent of the graduates
and 51.6 percent of the nongraduates reported that they made
use of academic services and activities provided through the
Special Services Program. Those who participated rated
these services and activities as effective. Factors which
influenced participation may well have been individual
student motivation to seek help and the perceived relevance
of such help to academic progress.
Grade Point Averages
The grade point averages earned by the students in this
study indicate that many Black students who do not meet the
minimum admission criteria can achieve grade point averages
which not only satisfy but exceed graduation requirements.
The students in this study gained their best grade point
averages during their first and second years of enrollment,
while directly involved in the Special Services Program.
Their mean grade point averages for those two years ranged
from 2.00 to 2.55, which compared favorably with all stu¬
dents' averages.
The Special Services class which enrolled in 1976
achieved the highest grade point average of all the Special

214
Services groups in this study. This class had a higher mean
grade point average than did the entire student body during
the first term of enrollment; specifically, 2.90 for Special
Services students and 2.59 for all students. The mean grade
point average for the class of 1976 during their first year
was 2.55; and this average compared with 2.64 for the entire
student body.
Why these students who enrolled in the Special Services
Program in the Summer of 197 6 produced such a record is
unknown. Several factors might have contributed to these
results: the recruiting efforts of the minority recruiter
in rhe Admissions Office; the scrutiny and evaluation of the
students' high school transcripts by the Special Admissions
Subcommittee in attempting to select those special admission
students with the highest potential; and the supporting
services and motivational activities provided by the Special
Services Program.
Retention Rates
The high retention rates of Black students enrolled in
the Special Services Program, coupled with their grade point
averages, provide additional evidence of their ability to
succeed in college. Results of this research refute argu¬
ments of Evans and Dubois (1972) and other educators who
have suggested that Black students lack the capacity for

215
learning and, therefore, should not be enrolled in higher
education institutions.
The researcher agrees with Hunt (1969a, 1969b) that
Black students who are given the opportunity to participate
in an enriched environment can develop their intellectual
skills. Special Services Programs are intended to help
provide such an enriched environment. Also, they assist
students in their social and cultural development which can
encourage them to remain at a university or college. Over
the five-year period covered by this research, the Special
Services Program retained 78.5 percent of its students
through two years of enrollment of those who were admitted
to the Program during the 1974-1978 years, 66.5 percent
remained enrolled through their fourth year of attendance.
Graduation Rates
The data analyzed by this researcher indicate that
Black Special Services students who enrolled during 1974-
1978 graduated from the University in impressive numbers.
Several factors appear to be involved: providing these
students with assistance to counteract the effects of
cultural differences; arranging for courses taught by
concerned, sensitive and understanding teachers; giving the
students sufficient time to master a subject; and emphasiz¬
ing facilitative teaching .

216
Over the five-year period of this research, 92 (61
percent) of the Black Special Services students graduated
from among the 150 randomly selected for this study. The
length of time taken by the students to graduate varied from
three to eight years. These graduates completed approxi¬
mately 94 percent of the courses that they attempted while
pursuing their undergraduate degrees.
The degrees of these graduates were obtained from the
College of Liberal Arts and Sciences in a greater concen¬
tration than from any of the other schools and colleges at
the University of Florida. None of the students, for
example, was awarded a degree in Accounting, Architecture,
Building Construction or Forestry. Several of these stu¬
dents continued their education by enrolling in graduate and
professional schools; some have received advanced degrees.
For example, one student was awarded a master's degree
in Special Education, two have obtained Specialist in
Education degrees in Counselor Education, one will receive
the Doctor of Medicine degree in June of 1984, one now has a
Juris Doctor degree, with one other student presently
enrolled in Law School. The data also show that four more
students are presently pursuing graduate degrees.

217
Peer Counselors
Data from this research support points of viev; that
peer counselors are effective in influencing favorably the
academic performance of Black students. These data are
especially useful because little information is available in
the literature regarding the impact of peer counselors on
the academic performance of Black students. Favorable
reports regarding peer counselors in general have been made
by Zunker and Brown (1966) , Carkhuff (1969) , and Durlak
(1970) .
About 50 percent of the graduates and nongraduates
stated that they availed themselves of the services of the
peer counselors as tutors. Of this number, 96.1 percent of
the graduates and 91.0 percent of the nongraduates described
the peer counselor as having an effective to extremely
effective influence on their academic performance.
Economic Status
The data collected from the OESSP indicate that the
graduates included in this study earned $3,574.00 more per
year than the nongraduates. The average maximum yearly
salary was $26,500.00 for the graduates and $23,666.00 for
the nongraduates. Analysis of these data reveal that 11 (37
percent) of the nongraduates were earning less than
$6,000.00 yearly, while only 3 (11 percent) of the graduates
reported yearly salaries in that low range.

218
The salary differential during the first year after
college between Black students who graduated and those who
did not supports the assertion that a college degree in¬
creases the potential for greater income for graduates.
This differential also underscores the belief that education
represents the best hope for Black youth to break through
the bonds of poverty and make progress economically, soci¬
ally, and culturally. Data from this study indicate that
such a Special Services Program can influence in positive
ways the economic progress of Black participants.
Since substantial numbers of Black students are still
graduating from high schools with inadequate records and
skills to satisfy the entrance requirements of many colleges
and universities, this researcher sees a continued need for
organized academic support, such as provided by Special
Services Programs. The philosophical and moral justifica¬
tion for the initiation of such programs in the 1970's is
equally relevant for the 1980's and possibly beyond.
The economic value of the Special Services Program vas
determined to be $682,660.00 per year. This dollar figure
represents the potential spending power of the former
Special Services students included in this study during
their first year of employment. On this basis, the economic
value of the Program is much greater than the annual

219
$50,000.00 grant that has been awarded by the Federal
government to operate the Program. Therefore, the Program
is indeed cost effective.
Conclusion s
The following conclusions may be drawn from this study:
1. The academic services and activities provided by
the Special Services Program were considered effective by
both the graduates and nongraduates of the Program. At the
same time, only 57.5 percent of the graduates reported
making use of these services and activities, as compared
with 51.6 percent of the nongraduates.
2. The services and activities which attracted the
highest levels of participation included orientation to the
campus, financial aid workshops, awards ceremonies, and
academic recognition assemblies.
3. Certain services and activities were used minimally
by Black students. Such services and activities included
the Counseling Center, the Placement Center (Career
Resources), and those special courses or workshops concerned
with reading skills, test anxiety and adaptation to
University life.
4. The mean grade point averages earned by the Special
Services students in this study during their first and
second years at the University demonstrated that these

students are capable of succeeding in their academic work
and competing with regularly admitted students. Special
Services students' grade point averages were not as high as
those for the total student body, except for the Special
Services students admitted in the Summer of 1976. In this
instance, their grade point averages exceeded the student
body average during the first term of enrollment.
5. The retention rates for the randomly selected Black
students enrolled in the Special Services Program during the
period from 1974 to 1978 indicated their ability to survive
in a higher education setting. During this period, 78.5
percent continued through their first two years of enroll¬
ment; 66.5 percent, through their fourth year of enrollment.
6. The graduation rates of the Black students in this
study further demonstrated that they are capable of succeed¬
ing and surviving in higher education institutions. Over¬
all, 61 percent of the 150 students in this study graduated
and some continued their education in graduate and profes¬
sional schools.
7. Peer counselors had positive influences on the
academic performance of these Special Services students. As
tutors, peer counselors were effective and the data suggest
that they could function in a dual role as peer tutor-
counselors .

221
8. The evidence was that the Program is cost effec¬
tive. Based on the potential earning power of the students,
$682,660,090 per year, the economic value of the Special
Services Program is greater than the amount of money pro¬
vided for its operation.
9. As reported by the Special Services students in
this study, graduates earned more money than nongraduates
during their initial year of employment.
10.There is a continued need for the Special Services
Program. The responses from almost all of the students in
this study, except three who were not sure, revealed that
the Special Services Program should be continued.
The following implications are suggested by this study:
1. The fact that 42.5 percent of the graduates and
48.4 percent of the nongraduates did not use the services
and activities of the Special Services Program might suggest
the need to change the procedures, services or activities to
improve student participation.
2. Many of these students, who did not meet the
University of Florida's entrance requirements, were enabled
by the Special Services Program to graduate. Some of the
students graduated at an accelerated rate. This program

appears to have specific value in helping Black students to
attend the University of Florida and to graduate.
3. As evidenced by the accelerated graduation of some
of the Special Services students, it appears they might not
need as many of the services and activities currently pro¬
vided by the Program. Such students could be monitored much
less than others who are not progressing academically as
fast and as successfully.
4. With an improved training program for the peer
counselors, they can become better and more proficient pro¬
viders of counseling services. Peer counselors appear to be
perceived as more effective tutors than part-time coun¬
selors. Therefore, the Special Services Program should
consider utilizing the peer counselors as both tutors and
counselors.
5. The fact that 20 percent of the graduates and also
20 percent of the nongraduates were seldom contacted by
their peer counselors suggests: 1) modifications of their
roles; 2) more supervision of their activities by the
professional counselor; 3) a better system of making the
peer counselors more accountable for contacting their
students; 4) the need for the professional counselor to
actively verify the contacts reported by the peer coun¬
selors; and 5) the assignment of a graduate student to

2 23
assist the professional counselor in following up on re¬
ported student contacts made by the peer counselors.
6. The special activities, services and courses
offered or arranged for by the Special Services Program
appeared to have a positive effect on the retention of the
Special Services students. Specifically, the five-day
orientation, the academic advisement and counseling during
the Summer terms appeared to provide the encouragement and
motivation for the students' initial success in their
courses. These activities and services also contributed to
the 78.5 percent retention rate after two years of enroll¬
ment. These features of the program should be continued.
7. The Questionnaire Evaluating Special Services
Programs (QESSP) can be of significant value to providers of
Special Services Programs. The QESSP has general applic¬
ability and is capable of evaluating any Special Services
Program, when modified to describe the services and activi¬
ties of the Program administering the instrument. The
generalizability of the QESSP now provides Special Services
Directors with an evaluation instrument that is easy to
administer.
8. This study may suggest to Special Services direc¬
tors and their staff additional means to stimulate increased
retention and graduation rates of their Special Services
students.

9.In view of the student statements made regarding
classroom instructors and instructions, this study suggests
that faculty provide classroom procedures that will en¬
courage Black students. Dissemination of this study to
faculty might be helpful for those who are uncertain about
the academic capability of Black students.
10. The positive responses of the students towards the
staff suggests that concerned, courteous, caring, genuine,
warm and friendly staff improve the conditions for student
receptivity toward services and activities provided by the
Program.
11. The Special Services Program is one of the three
most important reasons given by Black students deciding to
enroll at the University of Florida. The Program seemed to
encourage Black students to enroll at this institution.
12. Some of the former students were reluctant to
participate in this study, suggesting negative feelings
about the University of Florida. Such feelings might ad¬
versely affect the University's ability to encourage former
Black students to participate in alumni activities, includ¬
ing minority recruitment. Accordingly, efforts should be
made to find ways to alter this situation.

Recommendations for Improving the Special
Services Program at the University of~Florida
The following recommendations for improving Special
Services Programs are offered:
1. Require Special Services students to enroll in the
institution during the Summer term when fewer students are
on campus and also when few distractive activities are
planned.
2. Mandatory attendance in the activities and services
provided by the Special Services Program should be required
of all participants. Attendance records should be kept to
determine which students are utilizing the Program's
services and activities. Those students not utilizing the
services and activities should be counseled immediately.
3. The Special Services staff should maintain respons¬
ibility for planning and implementing the delivery system
that will provide supportive services to the students.
Included in planning should be other campus support agencies
since these students are the responsibility of the institu¬
tion and not exclusively that of the Special Services
Program.
4. Peer counselors should be trained and supervised by
the professional staff to insure that they have the skills
needed for effectively serving the students. The training
of peer counselors should occur at least three weeks before

226
they are assigned their case load of students. Their
training should also be continuous throughout each academic
term. Weekly staff meetings can be used as in-service
training sessions for the peer counselors. No peer coun¬
selors should be hired until they have been trained in the
techniques of providing counseling services. Continued
supervision of the peer counselors is essential, including
direct full-time staff with the peer counselors and with the
students being served.
5. Peer counselors should be utilized more as tutors
rather than exclusively as counselors and their title should
be changed to peer tutor-counselors.
6. Staff training and supervision of the full-time
staff should be on a regular basis. Daily contacts with the
staff and weekly staff meetings should be used by the
Director for conducting training sessions and workshops.
The staff should be encouraged to attend related training
conducted by campus groups or professional organizations.
7. Only those instructors and support staff, such as
key administrators, counselors, and academic advisors should
be assigned to work with the Special Services Program. Such
persons should have demonstrated that they are capable and/
or desirous of helping this special group of students.

8. The students in the Special Services Program should
be helped to feel a part of the total institution and en¬
couraged to participate in its activities. In this impor¬
tant area, the assistance of institutional faculty, staff,
and advisors of student organizations should be solicited.
9. The commitment of the Office of Financial Affairs
to provide adequate financial aid awards and financial
assistance to the students should be commended and
continued.
10. In order to provide adequate role models for Black
students in all of the schools and colleges of a university,
the number of Black students, faculty and staff should
represent the percentage of Blacks in the state.
11. The institution as a whole should work as a team to
facilitate the successful matriculation, maximum retention
and eventual graduation of the students in the Special
Services Program.
Recommendations for Further Research
As a result of this study, the following recommenda¬
tions for further research are offered:
1. This study should be replicated by Special Services
Programs at other institutions to determine whether or not

similar conclusions are reached about the Program's effec¬
tiveness and whether location, type of institution, ser¬
vices, activities, facilities, staff and other factors
contribute to the Program's effectiveness.
2. This study should also be replicated by the Special
Services Program at the University of Florida for the period
covering the 1979-1983 school years to obtain more extensive
data about the students' progress and the Program's
effectiveness.
This research has provided an abundance of statistical
data, directions and ideas for improving the Special
Services Program at the University of Florida. This study
will also demonstrate to other Special Services Directors
the need for research data from their Programs. The re¬
search methods and procedures provided by this study can be
easily replicated.
The timeliness of this study should make an impact on
the views and attitudes of educators and politicians con¬
cerning the value of such programs for Black students
attending higher education institutions. The economic and
implied social impact of Special Services Programs should
encourage greater attention to further improving and
strengthening them.

APPENDIX A
LETTER TO SPECIAL SERVICES DIRECTORS

G. W. Mingo
P. 0. Box 13119
University Station
Gainesville, FL 32604
Dear Colleague:
I am presently in the process of completing my requirements
for the doctoral degree and I need your assistance in help¬
ing me to design a questionnaire to gather statistical data
for the purpose of evaluating our Special Services Program
and its effect on students.
Our Program has been in existence since 1971 and there has
not been a longitudinal or comprehensive study of it or its
effect on students.
Specifically, I would like to request that you provide me
with a copy of your evaluation instrument or a list of ques¬
tions that I can use to construct an evaluation question¬
naire for this program.
Since our objectives are the same, even though we may accom¬
plish them in a slightly different manner, I feel that your
evaluation questions will be relevant to our Special
Services Program.
I would appreciate-a response as soon as possible. You may
also call me collect at (904) 466-3320, if you would like to
provide the questions to me over the telephone.
Sincerely yours,
G. W. Mingo, Director
Special Services
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611
230

APPENDIX B
LETTER TO SUBJECTS AND INFORMED CONSENT FORM

G. W. Mingo
Box 13119
University Station
Gainesville, FL 32604
Dear
I am conducting an evaluation of the Special Services
Program at the University of Florida and the services that
it has provided to students. Your assistance is needed in
helping me to evaluate the effect this program has had on
students during the period 1974 to 1978.
Our files indicate that you were once a participant in
this program and you can make a great contribution to its
evaluation by consenting to participate in this study by
completing the attached questionnaire. Your cooperation
will help make Special Services a better program for future
students at the University of Florida.
The information in the questionnaire will be used for
statistical purposes only. The results of the study will be
used to improve the effectiveness of the program for future
students. Your academic averages, graduation status, and
information pertaining to your past academic performance
will be needed to evaluate the program's effectiveness. In
no way will you be identified.
Please answer all items to the best of your knowledge.
Thank you for your help and prompt response.
Sincerely yours,
G. W. Mingo, Director
Special Services
University of Florida
INFORMED CONSENT FORM
Please sign this form to indicate that you agree to
participate in this study.
1, / agree to participate in
(print your name)
in this study and to the review of my academic records for
the purpose of this study only.
(Signature)
(Date)

APPENDIX C
QUESTIONNAIRE EVALUATING SPECIAL SERVICES
PROGRAMS (QESSP)

QUESTIONNAIRE EVALUATING SPECIAL SERVICES PROGRAMS
Please complete this evaluation by answering all items.
There are no right or wrong answers. We are interested in
your perceptions of the quantity and quality of the services
and activities rendered by the Special Services Program
while you were a participant. Your evaluation of those
services and activities will help us in our evaluation of
the total Special Services Program and in rendering better
service to future participants.
The information that you will be providing will be used
for statistical purposes only. You will not be identified
by any of the responses that you make. To insure privacy of
your responses, do not put your name on this evaluation.
RETURN THE EVALUATION IN THE ENCLOSED ADDRESSED AND STAMPED
ENVELOPE.

235
QUESTIONNAIRE EVALUATING SPECIAL SERVICES PROGRAMS
PLEASE COMPLETE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE
1.Are you?
Male... .E3 married.. .C^ single.. .Cadivorced... C3
Female.. S married. .. CD single...C3divorced... Q
2.How do you describe yourself?
(Check only
one box)
Black, of United States origin
Black, of Hispanic origin
Black, of Caribbean origin
Other (Specify)
3. Indicate the highest degree you now hold:
H.S. ASSOCIATE BACHELOR'S PROFESSIONAL
DI^OMA jXj |X| A r^i
4. List institutions attended, including this one.
SPECIALIST
or
MASTERS
DOCTOR’S
dn
NAME OF INSTITUTION
DATES OF ATTENDANCE
' DEGREE EARNED AND YEAR
F. Are you currently enrolled in any of the above institutions? Yes No
If no, do you plan to re-enroll? Yes, this institution 1 1 »
Yes, another institution 1 I No CD
6. Circle the year that you entered the University of Florida.
1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980
1981 1982
7. Are you a former Upward Bound or Talent Search student?
u.b.ch t.s.ch NONE â–¡
8. Are you currently working? (other than work study)
Yes, full time â–¡ Yes, part time l 1 No 1=3 Homemaker
Please identify the type of work and the title of the job in which you
are now working
‘Type of work
Tit! e

236
9. What is your present yearly income? (Check One)
Less than $6,000.
$6,000....$8,999.
$9,000....$11,999
$12,000...$14,999
$15,000...$17,999
$18,000...$20,999
$21 ,000...$23,999
$24,000...$26,999
More than $27,000
10. How would you rate your academic preparation before coming to the
University of Florida
a. Excellent 1—i
b. Good I—t
c. Fair 1—i
d. Poor i—I
11. How would you rate your academic preparation at the University of
Florida
a.
b.
c.
d.
Excel 1ent.
Good
Fair
Poor
12.
In order of importance number the 3 reasons (1,2,3) for deciding to
enroll at the University of Florida
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
l.
m.
n.
Close to home
Scholarship
Financial Aid
Academic reputation
Low cost
Size of the school
Informed by friends of the help provided by the
Special Services Program
Specific Academic Programs
Knew someone at the University of Florida
Family influence '.
Social Life
Athletic teams
Alumni influence
Other
13. Do you feel that there were positive or negative feel i ngj associated
with your participation in the Special Services Program?
Positive C3 Both CH Negative t l
Describe the feeling_<£i

237
14. Do you think the Special Services Program should be continued?
Yes 1 I No I I Not Sure 1 I
15. Did your participation in the Special Services Program cause you to
experience any of the things described below?
Check as many as you wish
a. Increased motivation to study...
b. Determination to graduate
c. Less confident about myself
d. More confident about myself
e. Dependency on Program
f. Independence to work on own
g. Decreased motivation to study...
h. Decreased interest in graduating
i. Assisted my maturational process
j. Did not feel good about myself..
k. Felt better about myself
l. Other
â–¡
16.
17.
How would you describe your overall reaction to the Special Services
Program?
a. Extremely effective...
b. Very effective
c. Effective
d. Not effective
e. Extremely Ineffective
how would you describe the effect of your peer counselor in contributing
to your academic performances?
18.
19.
a. Extremely effective..
b. Very effective
c. Effective
d. Not effective
e. Extremely, ineffective
How often did your peer counselor contact you?
a.
Daily
b.
Weekly
c.
Twice a week..
d.
Monthly
.e.
Very seldom...
f.
Never
How would you describe the overall effectiveness of your peer counselor
in providing you with helpful experiences to make the transition from
High School to college?
a. Extremely effective..
b. Very effective
c. Effective
d. Not effective
e. Extremely ineffective

238
QUESTIONNAIRE EVALUATING SPECIAL SERVICES
PROGRAMS
Listed below are services, activities, or staff actions rendered or
arranged for by the Special Services Program. Indicate whether or not you
received the service, participated in the activity or experienced the action
by marking yes or no in the columns. If you mark yes, then indicate your
evaluation of the effectiveness of the service, activity or staff action in
helping you while at this institution. If your response is no, do not
evaluate the effectiveness since you did not receive the service, activity,
or staff action.
Did you receive the service or
oarticipate in the activity?
How effective was it in
helping you?
Yes
No
Extremely
Effective
Very
Effective
Effective
Not
Effective
Extremely
Ineffective
| 20. Orientation Session
p to campus, classes,
£ instructors, faci.-
5 lities & support
E services available
o
tr 21. Peer Counseling on:
°, a. Personal Concerns
¡Ü b. Academic Concerns
c. Social Concerns
d. Financial Aid
22. Counseling by the
_j full time profess-
< ional Special
oo Services Counselor
jgüj On:
iÃœz a. Personal Concerns
«o b. Academic Concerns
c. Social Concerns
d. Financial Aid
23. He!p from Special
Services Academic
Advisors:
2> a. Choosinq courses
<< b. Planning program
of study
24. Special Teaching
Procedures:
a. Small units of
n instruction
h b. Retaking tests
o to improve qrades
Í— c. Taught by Grad-
z uate Assistants
d. Taught hy Full
time professors

239
Did you receive the service or
participate in the activity?
How effective was it in
helping you?
Yes
No
Extremely
Effective
Very
Effective
Effective
Not
Effective
Extremely
Ineffective
25. Special academic
& support courses
designed for
Special Services
students:
S a. Readinq
< b. Writinq
5 c. Behavorial
Studies
8 d. Enqlish
S e. Mathematics
f. Physical Science
g. Biological
Science
h. Social Science
i. Humanities
26. Tutoring by:
a. Peer counselor (s)
w b. Fraternities
o c. Sororities
t d. Clubs
K e. Learning Center
(Teaching Center)
27. Group Sessions on
coping with or ad¬
justing to this
institution
28. Special Sessions
conducted by
¡2 Financial Aid
t Personnel
p 29. Special Sessions
u conducted by Career
_i Resource (placement
- personnel)
w 30. Sessions on develop-
^ ing good study
skills
31. Sessions on reduct¬
ion of test anxiety
32. Awards ceremony &
academic recognit¬
ion

240
Did you receive the service or
participate in the activity?
How effective was it in
helping you?
Yes
No
Extremely
Effective
Very
Effective
Effective
Not
Effective
Extremely
Ineffective
33. Referrals to other
support services or
agencies for help in
J dealing with problems
tr a. Counseling Center
£ b. Financial Aid
£ Office
c. Housinq Office
37 Placement Center
(at Reitz Union)
e. Student Services
(at Tigert Hall)
34. Concerned, courteous
and caring attitude
of the staff (full
time Drofessional
staff)
35. Encouragement by the
staff for you to do
wel 1
¡2 36. Genuine, warm and
P * friendly attitude of
â– jj the staff
g 37. Dynamic nature of
^ staff in being your
£ spokesman or mediator
S; 38. Cold, insensitive
attitude of the staff
39. Staff's disinterest
in your concerns
40. Staff served as a
negative role model
41. Staff served as a
positive role model

APPENDIX D
FOLLOW-UP LETTER

G. W. Mingo
P. 0. Box 13119
Gainesville, FL 32604
Dear
1 am writing to ask if you have received my letter
regarding your participation in the evaluation of our
Special Services Program. Your participation in this study
is essential and very much needed. By completing and
returning the Informed Consent Form and the Questionnaire
you will be contributing greatly to the improvement of
services and activities of the Special Services Program.
If you have already submitted your consent form and
questionnaire, please disregard this letter. If you have
not done so, please complete them and send them to me before
, 1983.
Sincerely,
GWM/
G. W. Mingo, Director
Special Services
University of Florida

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abert, James G. (Ed.). (1979). Program evaluation at HEW.
New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc.
Ausubel, David P. (1964). How reversible are the cognitive
and motivational effects of cultural deprivation?
Implications for teaching the culturally deprived
child. Urban Education JL, 16-38.
Ausubel, David P. (1965). The effects of cultural depriva¬
tion on learning patterns. Audiovisual Instruction, 1,
10-12.
Baratz, S. S., & Baratz, J. C. (1970). Early childhood
intervention: The social base of institutional racism.
Harvard Educational Review, 4 0, 29-50.
Barclay, James R. (1982). The need for more longitudinal
studies. The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 61 (1),
p. 5.
Best, John W. (1970). Research in education. Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey"! Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Bloom, Benjamin. (1971) . Learning for mastery: Handbook on
formative and summative evaluation of student learning.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Boyd, William M. (1974). Desegregating America's colleges—
A national survey of Black students 1972-1973. New
York: Praeger Publishers.
Boyd, William M. (1977) . Black undergraduates succeed in
white colleges. Educational Record, 3., 309-315.
Carkhuff, R. R. (1969). Helping and human relations: A
primer for lay and professional helpers. New York:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Centra, John A. (1970). Black students at predominantly
white colleges: A research description. Sociology of
Education, 43, 325-339.
244

2 45
Coulson, J. E., Bradford, C. , & Kaye, J. (1981). Evalua¬
tion of the Special Services for disadvantaged stu¬
dents (SSDS) program: 1979-80 academic year (Ü. sT
Department of Education Contract Number 300-78-0356).
Santa Monica, California: System Development
Corporation.
Cranney, A., & Larsen, J. (1972). Compensatory programs
for specially admitted freshmen to the University of
Florida 1968-1971. In the Twenty-five yearbook of the
National Reading Conference, college reading: problems
and programs of junior and senior colleges. Boone,
North Carolina, The National Reading Conference, Inc.
Cross, K. P. (1976). Accent on learning. San Francisco,
California: Jossey-Bass, Inc.
Davis, J., & Borders-Patterson, A. (1973). Black stu¬
dents in predominantly white North Carolina colleges
and universities. New York: College Entrance
Examination Board.
Davis, J., Burkeheimer, G., & Borders-Patterson, A.
(1975). The impact of Special Services Programs in
higher education for "disadvantaged" students. (U. S.
Department of Education Contract Number OEC-0-72-0116).
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina: Research
Triangle Institute.
Elkind, D. (1969). Piagetian and psychometric conception of
intelligence. Harvard Educational Review, 39, 319-337.
Etzioni, A. (1971). The policy of open admission. In G. K.
Smith (ed.), New teaching, new gaining; 1971 current
issues in higher education, pp. 110-120. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.
Evans, H. M., & Dubois, E. E. (1972). Community/junior
college remedial programs: reflections. Journal of
Reading, 16, 38-45.
Flemming, J., Gill, G., & Swinton, D. (1978). The case
for affirmative action for blacks in higher education.
Washington, DC: Howard University Press.

Franklin, Paul (1980). Beyond student financial aid;
issues and options Tor strengthening support services
programs under Title IV of tne Higher Education Act.
New York: College Entrance Examination Board.
Frost, J. L., & Rowland, G. T. (1971). Compensatory Pro¬
gramming. Dubuque, Iowa: William C. Brown Company,
Publishers.
Gordon, E. G. (1977). Collegiate programs for the disad¬
vantaged: perspective on the current state of the art,
recommendations for future action. In C. L. Battaglia,
F. Shahrokhi, W. M. West, and J. M. Whitlock (eds.),
Educational perspective: non-traditional students
(pp. 3-14). Tullahoma, Tennessee: The University of
Tennessee Space Institute Press.
Gordon, E., & Green, D. (1976). An affluent society's ex¬
cuses for inequality: developmental, economic and
educational. In E. Flaxman (ed.), Educating the disad¬
vantaged (pp. 3-22). New York, New York: AMS Press,
Inc.
Ruck, S. W., Cormier, W. H., and Bounds, W. G. (1974).
Reading statistics and research. New York: Harper and
Row.
Hunt, J. (1969a). Has compensatory education failed: has
it been attempted? Harvard Educational Review, 39,
278-300.
Hunt, J. (1969b). Black genes—white environment. Trans¬
action, _6, 12-22.
Isaac, S., & Michaels, W. (1975). Handbook in research
and evaluation. San Diego, California: Edits
Publishers.
Jensen, A. R. (1969). How much can we boost IQ and scholas¬
tic achievement? Harvard Educational Review, 39,
1-123.
Klausmeier, Herbert J. (1980). Learning and teaching con¬
cepts : A strategy for testing applications of theory.
New York, New York: Academic Press.
McGrath, Ellie. (1982, January). Toughening up on admis¬
sions. Time, p. 72.

247
National Advisory Committee on Black Higher Education and
Black Colleges and Universities. (1980, December).
Admission and retention problems of Black students at
seven predominantly white universities. Washington,
D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office.
Perkins, Huel D. (1981, October 28). The education of
young Blacks: Quality cannot be compromised. The
Chronicle of Higher Education, p. 29.
Pettigrew, T. F. (1964). Negro American intelligence: A
new look at an old controversy. The Journal of Negro
Education, 33, 6-25.
Rothney, John W. M. (1982). Longitudinal studies. The
Personnel and Guidance Journal, 61 (1), p. 6.
Shuey, Audrey M. (1958). The testing of Negro intelligence
Lynchburg, Virginia: J. D. Bell Company, Inc.
Sowell, Thomas. (1972). Black education: Myths and trad-
gedies. New York, New York: David McKay Company, Inc
Sussman, L. (1977). Tales out of school. Philadelphia:
Temple University Press.
Turner, R. (1980). Factors influencing the retention of
minority students in the 1980's: opinion and impres¬
sions. Journal of Non-White Concerns in Personnel and
Guidance, 8 (4) , 204-214.
Valentine, C. A. (1972). Models and muddles concerning cul
ture and inequality: A reply to critics. Harvard
Educational Review, 4 2, 97-108.
Van Dalen, Donald B. (1973). Understanding Educational
Research. New York, New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Van Gelder, E. (1973). Academic performance of Black fresh
men admitted to compensatory and regular programs at
the University of Florida. (Doctoral dissertation,
University of Florida, 1973.)
Vernetson, Theresa B. (1981). Guidelines for implementa¬
tions and administering programs for disadvantaged
freshmen students in public four year universities.
(Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida, 1981.)

2 48
West, C., Jones, C., & Simpson, J. (1975). Minority re¬
tention in a community college program for the dis¬
advantaged. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
Number ED151660.)
Williams, D. W. (1978) . An appraisal of special and de¬
velopmental education programs in Ohio institutions
of higher education. Journal of College Student
Personnel, _19 (1) , 65-72.
Williams, R. L. (1969). What are we learning from current
programs for disadvantaged students? Journal of
Higher Education, 2 0 (4), 274-285.
Wittmer, J., & Myrick, R. D. (1974). Facilitative teach¬
ing: Theory and practice. Pacific Palisades,
California: Goodyear Publishing Co., Inc.
Zunker, V. G., & Brown, W. F. (1966). Comparative effec¬
tiveness of student and professional counselors.
Personnel and Guidance Journal, 44, 738-743.

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
The author of this dissertation, Gwenuel Wilfred Mingo,
was born in Key West, Florida, to the parents of Reynold
Mingo and Mary Sawyer Mingo Roberts. He began his formal
schooling at Douglass High School in Key West, Florida, from
first grade to eighth grade. In 1955, he moved to Tampa,
Florida, attended and graduated from Booker T. Washington
Junior High School. In 1956, his tenth-grade year, he
attended Middleton Senior High School in Tampa, but he
returned to Key West in 1957 and attended Douglass High
School in the eleventh grade. Another move was made back to
Tampa in 1958 where he returned to Middleton Senior High
School to complete high school.
The author was encouraged by Mr. J. B. Green, his
agriculture teacher, to apply for admission to Florida A and
M University. In 1963, he was awarded a Bachelor of Science
degree in agriculture science and was commissioned into the
United States Army as a second lieutenant in the Field
Artillery.
While in the Army, the author had a wide variety of
military and civilian experiences. He was a military

250
science instructor at Lincoln University in Missouri and
while at that institution, he was awarded the Master of
Education degree in counselor education.
After seven years of military service, the author
resigned his commission and left the Army with the rank of
Captain. His travel experience includes visits to Austria,
Switzerland, Italy, Monaco, France, Spain, Morocco, Luxem¬
bourg, Canada, Mexico, Vietnam, Thailand, Japan, Cuba,
Hawaii, Nassau, and Berlin. The author and his wife resided
in Bad Kissingen, Germany, for three years while he was
assigned to a field artillery unit in that resort town.
The author has been working at the University of
Florida since September, 1971. His first position was in
the Division of Housing where he worked as a Residence Life
Coordinator. He left the Housing organization in April of
1974 to assume his present position as Director of the
Division of Student Support and Special Programs.
The author is married to the former Cynthia E. Killings
of Tallahassee, Florida. They have two children, Anne Marie
and Gerald.

I certify that I have read this study and that in my
opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly
presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as
a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
c_
Harold C. Riker, Chairman
Professor of Counselor Education
I certify that I have read this study and that in my
opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly
presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as
a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
ILL
—
-Roderick McDavis'
Professor of Counselor Education
1 certify that I have read this study and that in my
opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly
presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as
a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
J
r , c' i/i/1'1
John
77.
/?
'/} J
M. Nickens
Professor of Educational
Administration and Supervision
This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of
the Department of Counselor Education in the College of
Education and to the Graduate School, and was accepted as
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy.
April 1984
Dean for Graduate Studies
and Research




xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID EAPZ16EPB_V8JDEU INGEST_TIME 2014-07-25T21:46:53Z PACKAGE AA00023604_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES